Discussion:
The end of the oil tank saga
Add Reply
Bobster
2017-07-29 03:41:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found nothing

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687

"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil tank is not being used to add performance-boosting components, either to the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via the sump breather into the air intake."
geoff
2017-07-29 05:35:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found nothing
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687
"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil tank is not being used to add performance-boosting components, either to the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via the sump breather into the air intake."
Cover-up conspiracy. Eh Edfonzo.

geoff
~misfit~
2017-07-29 08:00:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found
nothing http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687
"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil tank
is not being used to add performance-boosting components, either to
the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via the sump
breather into the air intake."
Here's a newer article;
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/272459-mercedesferrari-pouring-oil-fire.html

"According to Motor Sport Magazine's Mark Hughes, and Auto Motor und Sport's
Michael Schmidt, samples collected after this year's Canadian Grand Prix
revealed anomalies on cars fitted with the same power unit. This would have
resulted in Budkowski sending the new directive on the Tuesday before the
Azerbaijan Grand Prix."
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
~misfit~
2017-07-30 04:23:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bobster
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found
nothing http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687
"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil tank
is not being used to add performance-boosting components, either to
the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via the sump
breather into the air intake."
Here's a newer article;
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/272459-mercedesferrari-pouring-oil-fire.html
"According to Motor Sport Magazine's Mark Hughes, and Auto Motor und
Sport's Michael Schmidt, samples collected after this year's Canadian
Grand Prix revealed anomalies on cars fitted with the same power
unit. This would have resulted in Budkowski sending the new directive
on the Tuesday before the Azerbaijan Grand Prix."
That article also says that the FIA have banned the solenoid-controlled
breather pipe between the sump and intake plenum starting in 2018.

".... Secondly, active control valves between any element of the power plant
and the air intake will be outlawed."
(Page 3 of the above-mentioned article.)
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Bobster
2017-07-30 05:33:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bobster
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found
nothing http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687
"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil tank
is not being used to add performance-boosting components, either to
the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via the sump
breather into the air intake."
Here's a newer article;
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/272459-mercedesferrari-pouring-oil-fire.html
"According to Motor Sport Magazine's Mark Hughes, and Auto Motor und
Sport's Michael Schmidt, samples collected after this year's Canadian
Grand Prix revealed anomalies on cars fitted with the same power
unit. This would have resulted in Budkowski sending the new directive
on the Tuesday before the Azerbaijan Grand Prix."
So, nothing extra from the FIA then, despite them reporting that there was nothing unusual found on Hamilton's or Vettel's car, nor that there was any use of auxiliary tanks to improve performance?

Somebody thinks that there WAS an anomaly, but FIA don't want to report it.

Either there's an implication that FIA are lying, or the anomaly was found on a car other than Hamilton's or Vettel's and for some reason that information was not put in the public domain.
Post by ~misfit~
That article also says that the FIA have banned the solenoid-controlled
breather pipe between the sump and intake plenum starting in 2018.
Which is old news. FIA had previously reported that certain potential loopholes would be closed for 2018.
Bigbird
2017-07-30 05:43:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bobster
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found
nothing http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687
"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil
tank >>> is not being used to add performance-boosting components,
either to >>> the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via
the sump >>> breather into the air intake."
Post by ~misfit~
Here's a newer article;
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/272459-mercedesferrari-pouring-oil-fire.html
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
"According to Motor Sport Magazine's Mark Hughes, and Auto Motor
und Sport's Michael Schmidt, samples collected after this year's
Canadian Grand Prix revealed anomalies on cars fitted with the
same power unit. This would have resulted in Budkowski sending
the new directive on the Tuesday before the Azerbaijan Grand
Prix."
So, nothing extra from the FIA then, despite them reporting that
there was nothing unusual found on Hamilton's or Vettel's car, nor
that there was any use of auxiliary tanks to improve performance?
Somebody thinks that there WAS an anomaly, but FIA don't want to report it.
Either there's an implication that FIA are lying, or the anomaly was
found on a car other than Hamilton's or Vettel's and for some reason
that information was not put in the public domain.
...or Occam's Razor; you are misinterpreting the data.
~misfit~
2017-07-30 11:16:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bobster
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found
nothing http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687
"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil
tank >>> is not being used to add performance-boosting components,
either to >>> the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via
the sump >>> breather into the air intake."
Post by ~misfit~
Here's a newer article;
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/272459-mercedesferrari-pouring-oil-fire.html
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
"According to Motor Sport Magazine's Mark Hughes, and Auto Motor
und Sport's Michael Schmidt, samples collected after this year's
Canadian Grand Prix revealed anomalies on cars fitted with the
same power unit. This would have resulted in Budkowski sending
the new directive on the Tuesday before the Azerbaijan Grand
Prix."
So, nothing extra from the FIA then, despite them reporting that
there was nothing unusual found on Hamilton's or Vettel's car, nor
that there was any use of auxiliary tanks to improve performance?
Somebody thinks that there WAS an anomaly, but FIA don't want to report it.
Either there's an implication that FIA are lying, or the anomaly was
found on a car other than Hamilton's or Vettel's and for some reason
that information was not put in the public domain.
...or Occam's Razor; you are misinterpreting the data.
Also the FIA only tested the Ferrari auxilliary tank's *contents* to see if
they were different from the oil in the main tank - they didn't state that
there wasn't any use of said tank to inmprove performance. I mean if it
isn't there to improve performance then why is it there? This is F1 where
every gram needs to improve performance or it's removed.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy
little classification in the DSM*."
David Melville (in r.a.s.f1)
(*Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders)
Bobster
2017-07-30 12:01:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
Post by Bobster
This one went away real quick, but FIA did investigate and found
nothing http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/119687
"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil
tank >>> is not being used to add performance-boosting components,
either to >>> the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via
the sump >>> breather into the air intake."
Post by ~misfit~
Here's a newer article;
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/272459-mercedesferrari-pouring-oil-fire.html
Post by Bobster
Post by ~misfit~
"According to Motor Sport Magazine's Mark Hughes, and Auto Motor
und Sport's Michael Schmidt, samples collected after this year's
Canadian Grand Prix revealed anomalies on cars fitted with the
same power unit. This would have resulted in Budkowski sending
the new directive on the Tuesday before the Azerbaijan Grand
Prix."
So, nothing extra from the FIA then, despite them reporting that
there was nothing unusual found on Hamilton's or Vettel's car, nor
that there was any use of auxiliary tanks to improve performance?
Somebody thinks that there WAS an anomaly, but FIA don't want to report it.
Either there's an implication that FIA are lying, or the anomaly was
found on a car other than Hamilton's or Vettel's and for some reason
that information was not put in the public domain.
...or Occam's Razor; you are misinterpreting the data.
Also the FIA only tested the Ferrari auxilliary tank's *contents* to see if
they were different from the oil in the main tank - they didn't state that
there wasn't any use of said tank to inmprove performance. I mean if it
isn't there to improve performance then why is it there? This is F1 where
every gram needs to improve performance or it's removed.
Why don't you just scrap the pretence instead of waiting for a helper to come along and quote stuff so that you can reply to things that you pretend you don't want to see.

Anyway, if you'd actually read the article, you'd know what I mean:

"From these results it can be concluded that the auxiliary oil tank is not being used to add performance-boosting components, either to the main oil tank or to the combustion chamber, via the sump breather into the air intake."

That's what FIA said.

Loading...