Formula 1 engineers say the FIA’s system of inspecting cars after races does not need to change following the two disqualifications at the United States Grand Prix.
Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc were thrown out of the race results after the FIA’s checks revealed the planks on the underside of their cars had worn beneath the legal minimum. Two other cars passed the check, but 13 of the 17 finishers were not examined.Several drivers have said they believe other cars were outside the legal minimum in Austin. Max Verstappen said the FIA should have checked the cars belonging to the team mates of the two disqualified drivers, as he believes it is likely they would have had similar plank wear.
The FIA defended its inspection procedure, saying it would take too long to submit every car to the full range of technical checks. It selects cars at random so teams do not know in advance whether their cars will be inspected.
Speaking in an FIA press conference at Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez on Friday, representatives of three teams said they see no need to change the existing arrangement despite the events of the previous race.
“From my side I’ll leave it to them to decide which cars need to be tested,” said Alfa Romeo’s head of track engineering Xevi Pujolar. “I’m happy if they do, either way.”
Williams’ head of vehicle performance Dave Robson said it wouldn’t be possible to perform a full range of checks on all the cars.
“The way the regulation is policed at the moment, testing all cars at the end of every race is just not practical,” he said. “I think it would take so long that I think everyone will get frustrated by that.
“I think the spot checks and the severity of the penalty is enough that I think most of the time most or all of the cars will be legal. So I think it’s fine as it is.”
Haas chief race engineer Ayao Komatsu also believes the FIA’s regulations are working as well as they can.
“We know what the regulations are,” he said. “Each team decides on the margins, how much to push for it. Sprint event, normal race weekend, again that affects your margin. So it’s fine, no problem.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2023 United States Grand Prix
- US GP was Mercedes’ best race of 2023 despite disqualification – Wolff
- Singapore and Austin retirements cost me top 10 championship place – Ocon
- United States Grand Prix result unchanged as FIA rejects Haas’ call for review
- Sargeant admits he’s ‘struggled to use all the downforce at times’ in F1
- Mercedes’ Brazilian GP set-up was “conservative” after US GP disqualification
Zann (@zann)
28th October 2023, 8:14
It’s not the checks it’s the regulations that are the problem, trying to make all the cars the same with a million miniscule specifications, while pretending it’s prototype really honestly!
And the plank, they’ve totally lost the plot what it’s even for, stone age thing
Amped
28th October 2023, 17:25
“what it’s even for”
To stop cars from running too low! It really isn’t hard to understand.
Zann (@zann)
28th October 2023, 19:05
According to Scarbs it was brought in to stop cars taking off, in 1994. That’s 30 years ago btw. Now they’re worried about impacts up drivers’ spines, and what is it that’s delivering the impacts? How do teams measure their ride height?
You could try Indycars, they explain everything :)
osnola
28th October 2023, 20:24
It’s not ride height in itself that’s the problem. But load, suspension and the way a driver takes kerbs etc..
So they have to adjust the height to prevent excessive wear of the plank ( btw, not wood but a composite material)
A mm ride height difference can generate a lot of extra downforce as the air under the car is heavily influenced by it.
Zann (@zann)
28th October 2023, 21:54
yes my point is the plank. Not ride height. Is the point of the plank the ride height? No actually it’s not, because now they want ground effect so the point is the health of the drivers. They want to limit the amount of impact the drivers suffer, so they say ‘don’t wear the plank’ but the plank itself decreases ride height by 10mm doesn’t it. Giving more impacts up the drivers spines. They can measure those impacts directly with accelerometers perfectly easily, and they quite likely do
So the plank is like those signs that say ‘please don’t throw stones at this sign’ :)
SteveP
28th October 2023, 8:17
I take that as a criticism of the methods of policing, rather than an acceptance that it’s correctly done.
baasbas
28th October 2023, 8:45
The teams having no problem with it are the ones who got away without being checked maybe?
spoutnik (@spoutnik)
28th October 2023, 11:29
Surely 2 DSQ instead of 10 is what teams like with the actual system.
anon
28th October 2023, 11:35
baasbas, out of the three teams involved here – Haas, Alfa Romeo and Williams – Haas and Alfa Romeo have only had one driver tested during the season (twice each for Magnussen and Bottas), whilst Williams have not been tested at any point this season.
It is therefore fair to point out that the three teams commenting on the adequacy of the testing are the teams that are on the lower end of the testing regime, and that the team that was most outspoken in defence of the current regime is the team that has not been tested at all.
Tristan (@skipgamer)
28th October 2023, 12:39
How can they not see a problem with this? Sure F1, keep your head in the sand. Clowns will forever run the circus that is F1.
Imagine if this methodology of testing decided the WDC, which is entirely possible… Still not a problem? Farcical.
Tristan (@skipgamer)
28th October 2023, 12:41
The rules need to be the same for everyone, not left to the discretion of one person…
S
28th October 2023, 13:07
These rules are the same for everyone.
However – as with all things in F1 – the application is not necessarily equal.
But then, looking at it practically – the cars being tested the most are the ones most likely to cheat, as they are gaining the most from their superior performance.
As testing can’t be done completely on all cars at every event for the most obvious of reasons, they are at least biasing the testing the right way and focusing their resources where it is most important.
EffWunFan (@cairnsfella)
29th October 2023, 1:59
@S
First of all, I think this was the obvious intent of Tristan’s comment, though you are of course correct in the literal sense.
I have not heard a convincing argument for this, so I am unsure where your ‘most obvious of reasons’ comes from. The parts that needed to be inspected have been repeatedly shown. Sure, if you want to do the process as inefficiently as possible – get one car, take the parts off, take it to be measured, record the results, go to the next car – then time constraints may be an issue. But the only time needed is to take all the parts off. They can then all be taken to be tested.
Has it actually been established that these teams were cheating rather than unintentionally failing the tests due to miscalculated set ups? I mean I am sure you specifically meant ‘cheating’ as you are clearly concerned that correct terminology is used.
Quite possibly. But surely quite possibly not. These things are not blatantly linear and as such I see no reason why the worst car may not benefit the most, as the ride height change may make a more significant improvement to the entire cars airflow. I am not saying this “is” the case, but who actually knows.
It is subjective, I suppose, however I believe that the results of the tests conducted in this particular case were strongly indicative of a possibility that other cars may have not conformed at the end of the race. With such a strong possibility it is farcical – in my opinion – to have any excuse not to follow up on this. We are not talking a ‘slight hunch’ after all.
Coventry Climax
28th October 2023, 13:11
In an FiA press conference ….
Isn’t it the FiA that issued a law saying people working in F1 are not allowed to say anything that brings the ‘sport’ in discredit? With that very word, ‘discredit’ being defined by the FiA as well ofcourse.
anon
28th October 2023, 14:54
Coventry Climax, yes, the FIA’s sporting regulations do still include the clause that allows them to punish anybody that they deem to be bringing the sport into disrepute (although, as an aside, other series (e.g. IndyCar) do also have similar clauses).
Coventry Climax
28th October 2023, 21:49
You don’t throw your waste on the streets and justify that by saying someone else does it too.
Do we reinstate the death penalty because there’s other countries that have it?
One wrong is wrong, two wrongs is right?
Etc.