Bauer Says Fuel Collector Not A Secret

[Kaciaj 0]

Bauer says fuel collector not a secret

The FIA technical delegate delegate Jo Bauer admitted at the FIA International Court of Appeal that he knew about the fuel collector inside the BAR fuel tank in Malaysia and was not a secret mechanism.

"It was not a secret mechanicsm," Bauer said. "It was an additional tank inside the fuel tank and we have been aware of that since the Malaysian GP this year."

[Kaciaj 0]

This means good or bad news?!?!

[Jenson_Rules 0]

no this is good news, if they were aware and bar know its no secret it would have been taken to court before!!!

[rodders47 2]

I must be missing something here or I am totally stupid !!!

If BAR have a seperate "Fuel Collector " in the MAIN fuel Tank, then how can that mean they are "Running Light " during racing ???

Surely whatever is STORED or CARRIED by the F1 car, no matter where all adds to it's overall weight !!!! What if the driver had say a 2 kilo meal prior to the race ??

Where am I going wrong ?

[Kaciaj 0]

It's going to be very stressing...what if Ferrari were found cheating...I doubt very much FIA would have asked to thrown them out of the championship,since they are so keen on keeping them on board that they force other teams to pay them a tribute..

[Taku 0]

like i've posted in the main thread, this appears to be good news and helps explian why they weren't excluded from imola. ie the fia knew of the tank before. but don't breath deeply yet, as neither cars finished at bahrain or sepang, so weren't subject to official scrutiny. they may have wanted to check but couldn't.

this doesn't allay my original fears that this whole exercise is the fia re-interpreting the rules at bar's expense. it still sounds like a witchunt, as why didn't they seek clarification from bar from when they presumable first discovered it at sepang??

[Monty 0]

I must be missing something here  or I am totally stupid !!!

If BAR have a seperate "Fuel Collector " in the MAIN fuel Tank, then how can that mean they are "Running Light " during racing ???

Surely whatever is STORED or CARRIED by the F1 car, no matter where all adds to it's overall weight !!!! What if the driver had say a 2 kilo meal prior to the race ??

Where am I going wrong ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is my understanding. perhaps I'm wrong.

The secret compartment is filled with 10 litres of fuel and lets assume that is 10 kgs. So when the car starts the race the secret compartment is filled so the total weight of the car is as per the FIA rules, and when they come back for the first 1st pitstop, this compartment is not filled, so the car has an advantage of running less 10 kgs (now they have broken the rules) . Finally when they come for the 2nd pitstop the compartment is filled again and never used (now the weight is as per the FIA rules). Get it. So the advantage is for about 20 laps or so.

[Fed up 0]

unless the FIA have a bombshell up their sleeve

[Taku 0]

yes but you've left one important bit out monty.

bar are saying that despite the mini-tank being empty (or full) at any point in the race, the car is always above the minimum weight limit at all times (thanks to excess fuel).

this they say they can prove with data, and this which they apparently proved to the stewards at imola.

the questions then become:

1. is this second fuel tank legal?

2. can fuel be used as ballast (removable weight)?

3. can bar prove at every race in question that they maintained minimum weight given that the answer to questions 1 & 2 are yes.

that's my basic understanding of the situation. if the answer to either 1 or 2 turns out to be no, then bar are f*cked at this court of appeal business, as fia want a 1 year ban. all is not lost for bar though, as they can get questions 1 & 2 re-interpreted by a higher court.

then there are all sorts of secondary questions like, if the fia knew about it, why didn't they do something earlier? who told the fia? are any other teams doing what bar did? the keys are q's 1 & 2, provided bar can prove question 3.

[Monty 0]

Yeah Taku, it is just getting more complicated that I actually thought it was.

[rodders47 2]

2. can fuel be used as Ballast ( removeable weight )

well if the 2nd tank is within the main tank that would not apply !!!

Correct ?

[Taku 0]

monty: i didn't mean it that way, because it was as simple as that at imola. bar obviously provided a decent defence at imola to prove that it wasn't underweight.

it's the greater issues that the fia is trying to hit bar with now and it smacks of witchunt imo. if bar are cheating then fine, ban them, but it looks fishy to me.

[Taku 0]

2. can fuel be used as Ballast ( removeable weight )

well if the 2nd tank is within the main tank that would not apply !!!

Correct ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ah i imagine that that is exactly what they are arguing about right now rodders, with max no doubt arguing the other way!

i think you are correct, bar think you are correct, the imola stewards think you are correct. but the fia (read max) does not. therein lies the problem.

edit: sorry i misread your post. the 2nd question is key because once the car was drained it was underweight. fuel as ballast is a very key issue, regardless.

[Monty 0]

Sorry Taku I don't think i made it clear, I was refering about the witchhunt as well and not about your post.

This is just such a blow especially when BAR got their reliabilty and pace back, and the thought of having 4 teams fighting at the top end would always be a pleasure to watch