FIA investigations: inadequate method that certifies problems amid inability to monitor F1 teams

We have no evidence, let’s close the case: this seems to be the FIA’s particular way and method of doing things in Formula 1. The most important category of motorsport is “inhabited” by a lot of geniuses. We often tend to use this masculine noun only for Adrian Newey. We do this because the British engineer has proven, throughout his long career, to excel so much that he has reached heights unexplored by his colleagues. Undoubtedly, his skills are phenomenal, but the other engineers are not standing idly by. A demonstration of this can be seen by looking at McLaren, who is close to winning it’s first Formula 1 World Constructors’ Championship for the first time in almost three decades.

First of all, the Woking team, in the span of a season, has brilliantly reached and surpassed Red Bull, and this fact alone deserves to be commented with expressions like “hats off,” as they say. Secondly, the English team has found interesting solutions, on the edge of the regulations, such as the “mini drag reduction system.” While the FIA was monitoring the flexing of the front wings, the team led by Italian engineer and former Ferrari team member Andrea Stella studied a specific solution at the rear that could reduce aerodynamic drag with the device closed. A clever and quite effective move on some circuits of the Formula 1 calendar.

We are referring to tracks like Spa-Francorchamps and the Baku City Circuit, where the effectiveness of this solution in high-speed sections has brought significant advantages. Then, there is another issue that made the Brazilian weekend heated and concerns water in the tires. A rather complicated topic to explain and comment on. We addressed it by discussing the two possible advantages regarding thermal exchange and pressure adjustments. These are risky and potentially harmful practices, but ones that could theoretically positively impact performance.

There is also another issue that sparked a lot of debate in the Formula 1 paddock. We are referring to Red Bull’s T-Tray, a system that allows the modification of ride height during parc fermé conditions. A device inside the Red Bull RB20 single-seater allows this. The FIA intervened by inspecting the Austrian car. Not satisfied, they decided to visit the factory in Milton Keynes to gather more information. The investigation by the governing body concluded that no violation had occurred, with the F1 world champion team once again “coming out clean” from a controversial affair.

It is therefore clear that the FIA does not seem to have the right tools to monitor the teams. At this point, it is worth saying a few words about the competitors. We are talking about the other teams that, while standing by, have nonetheless expressed their opinion. Ferrari is fighting for the constructors’ championship precisely with these two teams. That is why the Maranello team cannot avoid getting involved. The position of the Prancing Horse on these issues has been very clear. Despite the fact that the political power of Ferrari is at historic lows, unfortunately, team principal Frederic Vasseur, specifically referring to the T-Tray issue, had labeled the use of the hypothetical system to change ride heights as “cheating.”

The same applies to the “Mini drag reduction system” issue, where, ironically, Frederic Vasseur referred to McLaren’s rear wing, pointing out that it certainly has not slowed them down on the straights. The position of the Italian team is important for understanding how the FIA is acting, as the French manager, relying on the work of the International Federation, hoped that the examinations of the case could reveal interesting elements, as there must be a clear distinction between pushing the limits and devices designed and created to break the Formula 1 rules. However, there is no evidence.

None of the three dynamics have resulted in any action. No grounds to proceed due to a lack of evidence. Certainly, the media do not have the authority to judge, we agree. However, when conversing cleverly with some engineers who work within various Formula 1 teams, it emerges that all these controversies are not just bar talk to “mess with” rivals. Hiding the dust under the carpet works only up to a certain point. When faced with questions to which it does not know the answers, the FIA often adopts this philosophy.

The reflection to be made is the following: is the pool of technicians at the International Federation capable of keeping all the teams under control? Apparently not, especially considering that the checks they perform almost always come from reports by teams accusing their rivals. For this reason, credibility continues to decrease. Racing car designer Nikolas Tombazis, currently the Director of the Single Seater Department of the FIA, referring to the Red Bull case, argues that the FIA does not have the ability to investigate events in the past 24 months, a period during which the Austrian team may have authorized this system.

The former Ferrari engineer also assures that he cannot vouch for Red Bull’s past compliance. The result? Case closed. Game over, in other words. Beyond the alleged irregularities discussed throughout the article, the umpteenth “all’s well that ends well” conclusion is quite hard to swallow. Another very predictable outcome that once again essentially certifies the FIA’s inability to successfully carry out its duties, showing itself to be an ineffective regulatory body. This is the summary of the situation. A déjà vu that keeps repeating itself in a loop.