Discussion:
The Ferrari controversy
(too old to reply)
~misfit~
2018-05-29 01:11:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
This cut'n'pasted from https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/44274546 near the
bottom of the page.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Off track, Monaco was dominated by a row over Ferrari's battery, which its
leading rivals suspected of being illegal.

Governing body the FIA has been investigating it for a month. F1 director
Charlie Whiting says they were already on it when Mercedes technical
director James Allison brought it to their attention before the race in
Azerbaijan a month ago.

Mercedes knew about it because of a new employee, who had recently joined
from Ferrari after six months' gardening leave.

Batteries are important in F1 because they are part of the engine's hybrid
system. And if a team can find a way of supplying more energy from the
battery to the hybrid system, that is more power overall. It would also be
against the rules.

The issue was that Ferrari's battery design was different to that of the
other teams.

Whiting told BBC Sport: "The architecture does potentially allow some of the
current going to the MGU-K to bypass the meter - the FIA-approved sensor. It
doesn't mean it is by-passing it. We wanted to be absolutely sure it
wasn't."

The FIA says it is now satisfied that Ferrari had not been using the system
inappropriately and has put in place a fix to ensure it can now be monitored
more effectively than before.

But it is less than perfect because it requires, Whiting says, "some fairly
complex checks" and the FIA would rather Ferrari added a sensor that enabled
them just to see the answer straight away.

The governing body, Whiting says, has discussed with Ferrari how this might
be done via "a robust long-term solution" through "the implementation of
additional sensors to verify more quickly that the energy and power limits
are not being exceeded".

But as battery systems are complex, teams only have two for the season, and
a sensor would have to be custom-designed and made, it will take time.

Right now, though, with Mercedes and Red Bull both concerned about whether
Ferrari have been exceeding the limits on power produced by electrical
energy, there is a fundamental question: can the FIA assure people that the
integrity of the championship has not been undermined?

Whiting said: "Absolutely."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

That is about the most comprehensive report of the issue I've seen written
in one place but I have a few notes to add that I've picked up from reading
elsewhere:

Firstly; The ex-Ferrari Mercedes employee who bought the issue to their
attention did so because he had experience of it from last year.

Secondly (and this isn't clear above); Whiting as said that he's confident
Ferrari hasn't exceeded the allowed energy deployment based on data gathered
over the last two races - this statement can only apply to those races. That
leaves the first four races of this year (and who kinows how many previous
to that) as unknowns due to Ferraris crafty wiring.

Thirdly; When Whiting says that he can assure people that the integrity of
the championship hasn't been undermined he's saying that as an employee of
FOM with a vested interest and knowing that there isn't anyone who is in a
position to bring facts to disagree with him. There are no facts or data to
say otherwise as Ferrari deliberately designed their system so that energy
could be deployed without being monitored.

If Whiting was absolutely sure Ferrari were playing within the rules why
then is he talking about further sensors and future changes to more
accurately monitor the energy deployment?

This is what annoys me about Ferrari. They don't hesitate to... bend the
rules. This combined with their elevated position within F1 (the right to
veto propositions and taking the biggest bite of the profits) means that if
they get caught it's higly unlikely they'll be punished. I like fair play
and it bugs me that my favourite motorsport series is often *not* unbiased
and fair to all teams.
--
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)
M2T
2018-05-29 10:23:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
This cut'n'pasted from https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/44274546 near the
bottom of the page.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Off track, Monaco was dominated by a row over Ferrari's battery, which its
leading rivals suspected of being illegal.
Governing body the FIA has been investigating it for a month. F1 director
Charlie Whiting says they were already on it when Mercedes technical
director James Allison brought it to their attention before the race in
Azerbaijan a month ago.
Mercedes knew about it because of a new employee, who had recently joined
from Ferrari after six months' gardening leave.
Batteries are important in F1 because they are part of the engine's hybrid
system. And if a team can find a way of supplying more energy from the
battery to the hybrid system, that is more power overall. It would also be
against the rules.
The issue was that Ferrari's battery design was different to that of the
other teams.
Whiting told BBC Sport: "The architecture does potentially allow some of the
current going to the MGU-K to bypass the meter - the FIA-approved sensor. It
doesn't mean it is by-passing it. We wanted to be absolutely sure it
wasn't."
The FIA says it is now satisfied that Ferrari had not been using the system
inappropriately and has put in place a fix to ensure it can now be monitored
more effectively than before.
But it is less than perfect because it requires, Whiting says, "some fairly
complex checks" and the FIA would rather Ferrari added a sensor that enabled
them just to see the answer straight away.
The governing body, Whiting says, has discussed with Ferrari how this might
be done via "a robust long-term solution" through "the implementation of
additional sensors to verify more quickly that the energy and power limits
are not being exceeded".
But as battery systems are complex, teams only have two for the season, and
a sensor would have to be custom-designed and made, it will take time.
Right now, though, with Mercedes and Red Bull both concerned about whether
Ferrari have been exceeding the limits on power produced by electrical
energy, there is a fundamental question: can the FIA assure people that the
integrity of the championship has not been undermined?
Whiting said: "Absolutely."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is about the most comprehensive report of the issue I've seen written
in one place but I have a few notes to add that I've picked up from reading
Firstly; The ex-Ferrari Mercedes employee who bought the issue to their
attention did so because he had experience of it from last year.
Secondly (and this isn't clear above); Whiting as said that he's confident
Ferrari hasn't exceeded the allowed energy deployment based on data gathered
over the last two races - this statement can only apply to those races. That
leaves the first four races of this year (and who kinows how many previous
to that) as unknowns due to Ferraris crafty wiring.
Thirdly; When Whiting says that he can assure people that the integrity of
the championship hasn't been undermined he's saying that as an employee of
FOM with a vested interest and knowing that there isn't anyone who is in a
position to bring facts to disagree with him. There are no facts or data to
say otherwise as Ferrari deliberately designed their system so that energy
could be deployed without being monitored.
If Whiting was absolutely sure Ferrari were playing within the rules why
then is he talking about further sensors and future changes to more
accurately monitor the energy deployment?
This is what annoys me about Ferrari. They don't hesitate to... bend the
rules. This combined with their elevated position within F1 (the right to
veto propositions and taking the biggest bite of the profits) means that if
they get caught it's higly unlikely they'll be punished. I like fair play
and it bugs me that my favourite motorsport series is often *not* unbiased
and fair to all teams.
Whiting works for the FIA, not FOM. Whiting pissed off Mercedes by
naming the people who complained about Ferrari, the first time that has
been done. The FIA keep on losing staff, are those left capable of
staying up with current technology? As for allowing unmetered
connections to a battery, that's beyond belief.
~misfit~
2018-05-30 00:41:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M2T
Post by ~misfit~
This cut'n'pasted from https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/44274546
near the bottom of the page.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Off track, Monaco was dominated by a row over Ferrari's battery,
which its leading rivals suspected of being illegal.
Governing body the FIA has been investigating it for a month. F1
director Charlie Whiting says they were already on it when Mercedes
technical director James Allison brought it to their attention
before the race in Azerbaijan a month ago.
Mercedes knew about it because of a new employee, who had recently
joined from Ferrari after six months' gardening leave.
Batteries are important in F1 because they are part of the engine's
hybrid system. And if a team can find a way of supplying more energy
from the battery to the hybrid system, that is more power overall.
It would also be against the rules.
The issue was that Ferrari's battery design was different to that of
the other teams.
Whiting told BBC Sport: "The architecture does potentially allow
some of the current going to the MGU-K to bypass the meter - the
FIA-approved sensor. It doesn't mean it is by-passing it. We wanted
to be absolutely sure it wasn't."
The FIA says it is now satisfied that Ferrari had not been using the
system inappropriately and has put in place a fix to ensure it can
now be monitored more effectively than before.
But it is less than perfect because it requires, Whiting says, "some
fairly complex checks" and the FIA would rather Ferrari added a
sensor that enabled them just to see the answer straight away.
The governing body, Whiting says, has discussed with Ferrari how
this might be done via "a robust long-term solution" through "the
implementation of additional sensors to verify more quickly that the
energy and power limits are not being exceeded".
But as battery systems are complex, teams only have two for the
season, and a sensor would have to be custom-designed and made, it
will take time. Right now, though, with Mercedes and Red Bull both
concerned about
whether Ferrari have been exceeding the limits on power produced by
electrical energy, there is a fundamental question: can the FIA
assure people that the integrity of the championship has not been
undermined? Whiting said: "Absolutely."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That is about the most comprehensive report of the issue I've seen
written in one place but I have a few notes to add that I've picked
Firstly; The ex-Ferrari Mercedes employee who bought the issue to
their attention did so because he had experience of it from last
year. Secondly (and this isn't clear above); Whiting as said that he's
confident Ferrari hasn't exceeded the allowed energy deployment
based on data gathered over the last two races - this statement can
only apply to those races. That leaves the first four races of this
year (and who kinows how many previous to that) as unknowns due to
Ferraris crafty wiring. Thirdly; When Whiting says that he can assure
people that the
integrity of the championship hasn't been undermined he's saying
that as an employee of FOM with a vested interest and knowing that
there isn't anyone who is in a position to bring facts to disagree
with him. There are no facts or data to say otherwise as Ferrari
deliberately designed their system so that energy could be deployed
without being monitored. If Whiting was absolutely sure Ferrari were
playing within the rules
why then is he talking about further sensors and future changes to
more accurately monitor the energy deployment?
This is what annoys me about Ferrari. They don't hesitate to... bend
the rules. This combined with their elevated position within F1 (the
right to veto propositions and taking the biggest bite of the
profits) means that if they get caught it's higly unlikely they'll
be punished. I like fair play and it bugs me that my favourite
motorsport series is often *not* unbiased and fair to all teams.
Whiting works for the FIA, not FOM.
True. However without Formula One Management there's a good chance he
wouldn't be in the elevated and esteemed position that he is currently in.
It's an incestuous situation.
Post by M2T
Whiting pissed off Mercedes by
naming the people who complained about Ferrari, the first time that
has been done. The FIA keep on losing staff, are those left capable
of staying up with current technology?
Not without tip-offs from the teams it seems.
Post by M2T
As for allowing unmetered
connections to a battery, that's beyond belief.
Yep I agree - and it seems it's been that way for a while. How did the FIA
inspector/s let that go? Do they have 'future contracts' with Marenello?
--
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)
D Munz
2018-05-30 12:01:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M2T
Whiting works for the FIA, not FOM. Whiting pissed off Mercedes by
naming the people who complained about Ferrari, the first time that has
been done. The FIA keep on losing staff, are those left capable of
staying up with current technology? As for allowing unmetered
connections to a battery, that's beyond belief.
As I have read the details, Whiting didn't actually name the individuals. The press said was it so-and-so and he confirmed that. Probably a trivial point but he did not jump up to the podium and say "...based on a compliant from James Allen..." or such.

I suspect it was more a case of Charlie being a bit media naive (which is inexcusable for a person with his pedigree and position) than outright naming. Perhaps he was thinking it was obvious to all so there was no point in denying it. More of an unforced error than anything else.

FWIW
DLM
M2T
2018-05-30 12:59:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by D Munz
Post by M2T
Whiting works for the FIA, not FOM. Whiting pissed off Mercedes by
naming the people who complained about Ferrari, the first time that has
been done. The FIA keep on losing staff, are those left capable of
staying up with current technology? As for allowing unmetered
connections to a battery, that's beyond belief.
As I have read the details, Whiting didn't actually name the individuals. The press said was it so-and-so and he confirmed that. Probably a trivial point but he did not jump up to the podium and say "...based on a compliant from James Allen..." or such.
I suspect it was more a case of Charlie being a bit media naive (which is inexcusable for a person with his pedigree and position) than outright naming. Perhaps he was thinking it was obvious to all so there was no point in denying it. More of an unforced error than anything else.
Whiting has never done this previously and he must have been asked
similar questions many times before, so why start now?

Time he was sacked.
geoff
2018-05-31 08:30:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by D Munz
Post by M2T
Whiting works for the FIA, not FOM. Whiting pissed off Mercedes by
naming the people who complained about Ferrari, the first time that has
been done. The FIA keep on losing staff, are those left capable of
staying up with current technology? As for allowing unmetered
connections to a battery, that's beyond belief.
As I have read the details, Whiting didn't actually name the individuals. The press said was it so-and-so and he confirmed that. Probably a trivial point but he did not jump up to the podium and say "...based on a compliant from James Allen..." or such.
I suspect it was more a case of Charlie being a bit media naive (which is inexcusable for a person with his pedigree and position) than outright naming. Perhaps he was thinking it was obvious to all so there was no point in denying it. More of an unforced error than anything else.
FWIW
DLM
Well nobody will ever employ that poor dude again, and nobody will
likely ever spill the beans again.

More than a bit naive ...

geoff
M2T
2018-05-31 14:20:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by geoff
Post by D Munz
Whiting works for the FIA, not FOM.  Whiting pissed off Mercedes by
naming the people who complained about Ferrari, the first time that has
been done.  The FIA keep on losing staff, are those left capable of
staying up with current technology? As for allowing unmetered
connections to a battery, that's beyond belief.
As I have read the details, Whiting didn't actually name the
individuals.  The press said was it so-and-so and he confirmed that.
Probably a trivial point but he did not jump up to the podium and say
"...based on a compliant from James Allen..." or such.
I suspect it was more a case of Charlie being a bit media naive (which
is inexcusable for a person with his pedigree and position) than
outright naming.  Perhaps he was thinking it was obvious to all so
there was no point in denying it.  More of an unforced error than
anything else.
FWIW
DLM
Well nobody will ever employ that poor dude again, and nobody will
likely ever spill the beans again.
More than a bit naive ...
Crap. Whenever an engineer, designer moves teams he takes knowledge
with him. Gardening leave is used in the belief that the info is out of
date by the time they start working for a new team. That's why all the
teams kicked off when that geezer left the FIA and moved to Renault.
Originally there was no gardening leave for him.

Nothing stays sekrit in F1 for long.
~misfit~
2018-06-01 00:40:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by M2T
Post by geoff
Post by D Munz
Whiting works for the FIA, not FOM. Whiting pissed off Mercedes by
naming the people who complained about Ferrari, the first time
that has been done. The FIA keep on losing staff, are those left
capable of staying up with current technology? As for allowing
unmetered connections to a battery, that's beyond belief.
As I have read the details, Whiting didn't actually name the
individuals. The press said was it so-and-so and he confirmed that.
Probably a trivial point but he did not jump up to the podium and
say "...based on a compliant from James Allen..." or such.
I suspect it was more a case of Charlie being a bit media naive
(which is inexcusable for a person with his pedigree and position)
than outright naming. Perhaps he was thinking it was obvious to all
so there was no point in denying it. More of an unforced error than
anything else.
FWIW
DLM
Well nobody will ever employ that poor dude again, and nobody will
likely ever spill the beans again.
More than a bit naive ...
Crap. Whenever an engineer, designer moves teams he takes knowledge
with him. Gardening leave is used in the belief that the info is out
of date by the time they start working for a new team. That's why
all the teams kicked off when that geezer left the FIA and moved to
Renault. Originally there was no gardening leave for him.
Nothing stays sekrit in F1 for long.
Considering the ex-Ferrari employeee in question *did* serve gardening leave
this says to me that Ferrari have been using their questionable energy
deployment for at least two seasons, maybe right from the get-go.
--
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~
2018-06-02 04:38:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Once upon a time on usenet ~misfit~ wrote:
[snipped]
Post by ~misfit~
Considering the ex-Ferrari employeee in question *did* serve
gardening leave this says to me that Ferrari have been using their
questionable energy deployment for at least two seasons, maybe right
from the get-go.
It seems that indeed Ferrari have been runing their tricky battery system
since the get-go, the start of the hybrid era in 2014. Here's a video of
Scarbs mixing his knowledge with educated guesses. Note his smile while
Windsor is introoducing the subject an about 30 seconds in. To me it says
what I know and what I can say are two different things.



As they say there's no legitimate reason to be running two seperate battery
systems. My knowledge of charging / discharging Li-Ion and Li-Po cells
agrees with that. The cells within the batteries are adressed
semi-individually by the charging / balancing systems but it only adds
complexity and cost to then address the *battery* of cells as two entities.
There's only one reason Formula 1 teams add complexity and cost...
--
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)
Alan Baker
2018-06-02 05:32:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by ~misfit~
[snipped]
Post by ~misfit~
Considering the ex-Ferrari employeee in question *did* serve
gardening leave this says to me that Ferrari have been using their
questionable energy deployment for at least two seasons, maybe right
from the get-go.
It seems that indeed Ferrari have been runing their tricky battery system
since the get-go, the start of the hybrid era in 2014. Here's a video of
Scarbs mixing his knowledge with educated guesses. Note his smile while
Windsor is introoducing the subject an about 30 seconds in. To me it says
what I know and what I can say are two different things.
http://youtu.be/k5axHjNcgo0
As they say there's no legitimate reason to be running two seperate battery
systems. My knowledge of charging / discharging Li-Ion and Li-Po cells
agrees with that. The cells within the batteries are adressed
semi-individually by the charging / balancing systems but it only adds
complexity and cost to then address the *battery* of cells as two entities.
There's only one reason Formula 1 teams add complexity and cost...
There is no place for "legitimate" in this discussion.

Is it within rules? Yes or no. That's all there is.

Loading...