Daniil Kvyat will keep his eighth place start for tomorrow’s Monaco Grand Prix as the stewards decided to take no action following Toro Rosso’s failed floor flex test.
After hearing evidence from the team, the stewards opted not to disqualify the Toro Rosso from qualifying after they were satisfied that the floor failed the test after damage from contact with the barrier in Q3.
The stewards ruling is as follows:
The team produced evidence that the car suffered an impact which reduced the downforce and resulted with a slower lap time than in Q2.
Therefore, whilst technically the car failed to pass the deflection test, the stewards have decided not to impose any penalty. However, the team is reminded that further tests will be conducted and that future failure of the test may not result in the same decision.
The FIA technical team is requested to further study the telemetry produced by the team and provide a report to the Stewards if appropriate.
Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
28th May 2016, 19:45
Pitpass reports Kvyat said he thinks he hit a curb hard during Q3, and that the car behave differently afterwards. If this is the reason why the car, which had previously passed this “5 mm” test, now suddenly failed, then that could suggest this car has suffered structural damage that has affected its load bearing capabilities.
http://www.pitpass.com/56243/Monaco-GP-Qualifying-notes-Toro-Rosso
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
28th May 2016, 20:59
The fact that no technical advantage was gained from a regulation breach is not supposed to exempt a driver or team from penalty. This is twice in the same session that the stewards have set a risky precedent in terms of enforcement and adherence to regulations.
Strontium (@strontium)
28th May 2016, 21:13
@alianora-la-canta it’s less that no advantage was gained, more that it wasn’t really a regulation breach, but rather damage to the car. And it’s not a risky precedent, as is clearly stated: “further tests will be conducted and future failure of the test may not result in the same decision.”
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
29th May 2016, 23:58
Damage isn’t supposed to exempt the driver or team, but if it’s been happening anyway, I suppose the stewards would have had the discretion to do it here through precedent. Still not impressed, but at least the decision now has coherence. (“Further tests will be conducted and future failure of the test may not result in the same decision”, is however, an admission of inconsistency being permitted in the rules, which is the exact risk I worried about).
Sensord4notbeingafanboi (@peartree)
29th May 2016, 2:35
@alianora-la-canta I agree, we shall see if STR keeps that part on the car anyway.
Mike (@mike)
29th May 2016, 5:30
The floor? I think they will keep it. :p
Gabriel (@rethla)
29th May 2016, 8:50
@alianora-la-canta
There are already many precedents set for failing floor flex test. Basicly you can get away with “it was due to damage” once but the second time you are screwed no matter your excuse.
Erix
29th May 2016, 3:33
Everybody has the same “damage” excuse for failed floor test ..so stewards should be very careful.
greg-c (@greg-c)
29th May 2016, 10:53
That is a great photo ,
The slip angle of the tyres to the guard rail just shows how much these things slide ,