Formula 1
Postmaster
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,066
Likes: 7
From: Over There
Wow that sucks, when I first read the title I thought they weer mad at himfor what he said at the podium interview. "I'm tripping ***** right now" couldn't have been the kind of thing F1/FIA find appropriate.
As for the flow rate BS, it's clear that it's not reliable. To give such a drastic punishment based on such unreliable equipment is very suspect to me. It sounds more like a case of emotional decisions based on "how dare they" and "how could he without cheating".
The real question then is how was Nico SOOO much faster then everyone else without using more fuel flow.
As for the flow rate BS, it's clear that it's not reliable. To give such a drastic punishment based on such unreliable equipment is very suspect to me. It sounds more like a case of emotional decisions based on "how dare they" and "how could he without cheating".
The real question then is how was Nico SOOO much faster then everyone else without using more fuel flow.
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 18,787
Likes: 30
From: Melbourne, Aus
It's disappointing that he was disqualified, but the evidence against Red Bull is pretty damning. (FIA asked Red Bull to lower the fuel rate during the race, a request which Red Bull ignored). I'd be surprised if an appeal is successful.
Apart from Rosberg running away with the win, it was a great race.
Apart from Rosberg running away with the win, it was a great race.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 149
From: In the field...
I am sorry if I offend anyone...(you don't like the sound of the new engine) I like the new F1 better because it puts more emphasis on the driver.
The previous configuration had so much down force the driver was just an astronaut, along for the ride.
I will take a driver like Juan Manuel Fangio any day. He drove different vehicles in different disciplines successfully, like Mark Donahue, A. J. Foyt, Parnelli Jones and Mario Andretti. I am sure there are others to add to the list.
Looking forward to a very interesting F1 season.
The previous configuration had so much down force the driver was just an astronaut, along for the ride.
I will take a driver like Juan Manuel Fangio any day. He drove different vehicles in different disciplines successfully, like Mark Donahue, A. J. Foyt, Parnelli Jones and Mario Andretti. I am sure there are others to add to the list.
Looking forward to a very interesting F1 season.
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 18,787
Likes: 30
From: Melbourne, Aus
I'm with you - I'll agree that the sound isn't as impressive, but I don't think F1 would still be "relevant" for auto manufacturers if they kept on using V8's that rev to 18k, and a turbo car is always going to be a lot quieter.
Its interesting to able to hear other things now (like the drivers with their radio messages!)
I think the more torque/less downforce is going to make it much more exciting. Qualifying was really impressive.
Its interesting to able to hear other things now (like the drivers with their radio messages!)
I think the more torque/less downforce is going to make it much more exciting. Qualifying was really impressive.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 149
From: In the field...
I'm with you - I'll agree that the sound isn't as impressive, but I don't think F1 would still be "relevant" for auto manufacturers if they kept on using V8's that rev to 18k, and a turbo car is always going to be a lot quieter.
Its interesting to able to hear other things now (like the drivers with their radio messages!)
I think the more torque/less downforce is going to make it much more exciting. Qualifying was really impressive.
Its interesting to able to hear other things now (like the drivers with their radio messages!)
I think the more torque/less downforce is going to make it much more exciting. Qualifying was really impressive.
Postmaster
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,066
Likes: 7
From: Over There
I'm all about the combination of man and machine. But the way F1 is setup it's really a team engineering competition sold to the public as a driver competition. When it comes right down to it driver points only matter to the driver, it's the constructors points that really matter. The driver matters sure, but the team and car matters much more. I do like the new direction F1 is going in though.
As for Ricciardo's disqualification and Red Bulls' refusal. They refused to put on and rely on a part they and the FIA knew to be defective. And they refused to slow there car down based on the information from a new sensor they were confident was unreliable. Trusting math and software(pressure*pulse width/flow rate) over a proven unreliable sensor. I'm with Red Bull here.
As for Ricciardo's disqualification and Red Bulls' refusal. They refused to put on and rely on a part they and the FIA knew to be defective. And they refused to slow there car down based on the information from a new sensor they were confident was unreliable. Trusting math and software(pressure*pulse width/flow rate) over a proven unreliable sensor. I'm with Red Bull here.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 161,999
Likes: 75
From: 3rd Rock
Interesting ...............
Why F1 has fuel flow sensors in 2014
Posted on March 17, 2014
We have had a lot of readers asking why F1 has introduced a fuel flow rate monitoring regulation this season as part of the new rules for the hybrid turbo power units.
This is in the light of Daniel Ricciardo’s disqualification for excessive flow rate in Sunday’s Australian GP.
JA on F1 technical expert Mark Gillan has written this advisory note on the matter:
It was decided pretty early on in the FiA Technical Working Group meetings (which I was a member of) to agree not only on a maximum fuel quantity (i.e. 100kg) but also to a maximum fuel flow rate in order to ensure that a significant emphasis was placed on both improved whole vehicle efficiency and on reduced fuel consumption. These limits, coupled with the move to the downsized 1.6L v6 engine, would ensure that suitable R+D resource was put into the new ERS which, with the addition of the MGU-H, are at the forefront of a potential technology revolution for new highly efficient down-sized road car and commercial vehicle power units.
The technical regulation for the power unit fuel mass flow is clearly stated in articles 5.1.5 and 5.1.5 which set a max fuel mass flow rate of 100kg/h at, and above, 10500rpm with this maximum reducing as the rpm decreases in line with the formula outlined in 5.1.5. These are maximum values and there is no margin for error if one exceeds these values.
The flow rate is monitored by the new ultrasonic sensor, supplied by Gill Sensors, and as discussed previously the accuracy and reliability of this sensor is key, as the ultimate performance of the car depends on it.
From the FIA Tech Regs for 2014:
- I would add only that in Melbourne I spoke to two teams running Mercedes and Ferrari engines who said that they had had various conversations with the FIA during the weekend on this matter of sensor accuracy and had reached a satisfactory conclusion.
Posted on March 17, 2014
We have had a lot of readers asking why F1 has introduced a fuel flow rate monitoring regulation this season as part of the new rules for the hybrid turbo power units.
This is in the light of Daniel Ricciardo’s disqualification for excessive flow rate in Sunday’s Australian GP.
JA on F1 technical expert Mark Gillan has written this advisory note on the matter:
It was decided pretty early on in the FiA Technical Working Group meetings (which I was a member of) to agree not only on a maximum fuel quantity (i.e. 100kg) but also to a maximum fuel flow rate in order to ensure that a significant emphasis was placed on both improved whole vehicle efficiency and on reduced fuel consumption. These limits, coupled with the move to the downsized 1.6L v6 engine, would ensure that suitable R+D resource was put into the new ERS which, with the addition of the MGU-H, are at the forefront of a potential technology revolution for new highly efficient down-sized road car and commercial vehicle power units.
The technical regulation for the power unit fuel mass flow is clearly stated in articles 5.1.5 and 5.1.5 which set a max fuel mass flow rate of 100kg/h at, and above, 10500rpm with this maximum reducing as the rpm decreases in line with the formula outlined in 5.1.5. These are maximum values and there is no margin for error if one exceeds these values.
The flow rate is monitored by the new ultrasonic sensor, supplied by Gill Sensors, and as discussed previously the accuracy and reliability of this sensor is key, as the ultimate performance of the car depends on it.
From the FIA Tech Regs for 2014:
- I would add only that in Melbourne I spoke to two teams running Mercedes and Ferrari engines who said that they had had various conversations with the FIA during the weekend on this matter of sensor accuracy and had reached a satisfactory conclusion.
Fleet Owner
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 28,609
Likes: 18
From: Lake Tahoe, Nevada
Red Bull got screwed in my opinion.
The idea of the damned sensor is redundant anyway. The amount of fuel is precisely limited and that alone should be more than enough. I would much prefer, if they have a fuel quantity limit, they should forget about everything else, save safety rules. That would put the creativity back in the game. I have ultimate admiration for the teams and what they can do. Give them a goal and let them decide how to get there.
The idea of the damned sensor is redundant anyway. The amount of fuel is precisely limited and that alone should be more than enough. I would much prefer, if they have a fuel quantity limit, they should forget about everything else, save safety rules. That would put the creativity back in the game. I have ultimate admiration for the teams and what they can do. Give them a goal and let them decide how to get there.
Fleet Owner
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 28,609
Likes: 18
From: Lake Tahoe, Nevada
Good. I was hoping I wasn't alone. It would be so great to see what they would come up with, how many paths they might follow and how high they
would ultimately rev their engines.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 9,263
Likes: 149
From: In the field...
Saw an article today that the owner of Red Bull is threatening to leave F1: Red Bull owner Dietrich Mateschitz threatens to quit F1 over Daniel Ricciardo's exclusion and quieter engines - Telegraph
Probably a lot of heat and not much light.
Probably a lot of heat and not much light.