Crash.Net User: Googolplex

Comments rating: 4914
Position in rating: 12

Show Comments on:

Googolplex

March 17, 2014 7:58 AM
Last Edited 115 days ago

F1 » Rosberg comfortably wins season-opener


richard: googol. what planet are you living on? the fuel question, which was talked about immediately after the race, had absolutely nothing to do with my comment that the bull has just about the pace of the merc. the bull can put down power to the track, far better than the merc and as I said, if there had been no problem with sebs car, I would be reasonably confident that he would have been up there fighting for the win! absolutely nothing to do with overuse of fuel!
On planet earth when I last looked. Don't really understand how you can say the RBR got an unfair performance advantage with the extra fuel flow, yet also say the performance of the RBR proved it was on a par with the Merc. Over to you Rich, looking for some edification.

Googolplex

March 18, 2014 4:55 AM
Last Edited 116 days ago

F1 » Red Bull to appeal Ricciardo exclusion


107SS2009: Some of the posters on here that posts either while under emotional stress or through their tainted glasses should read carefully and understand. As per the rules fuel flow readings are only those read by the FIA supplied flow meter, as per the written technical procedure teams excepts fuel flow violation advice by the FIA, all teams go on the grid excepting those rules conditions. Andy Cowel of Mercedes said before the race that “The way fuel flow is measured is accurate and reliable, all the teams have their own consumption measurements via the injectors data, in the case of irregularities, the FIA will compare its values with those of the team, so we have a safety net.
Sunny, I can't speak for anyone else, but given that Dan is the first ever F1 driver from Sandgroper country (WA), as a fellow Sandgroper I will have to admit a degree of partiality. Still, I think I have endeavoured to put my arguments forward as dispassionately as possible.

Googolplex

March 17, 2014 8:31 AM
Last Edited 116 days ago

F1 » Red Bull to appeal Ricciardo exclusion


Article 5.1.4 reads: 'Fuel mass flow must not exceed 100kg/h.' The Stewards excluded Car No.3 for being in breach of that Regulation. It must be a question of fact whether the car has run with a fuel flow rate in excess of that prescribed by the regulations. Usually, a breach of that kind of rule cannot be reliably established using a meter to measure it which is known to be faulty. Any obligation to use the FIA homologated meter surely implies one that is functioning correctly. If RBR can put forward credible evidence that their own measure of the flow rate was correct, then I suggest RBR may have some legs with this appeal.

Googolplex

March 17, 2014 1:07 PM
Last Edited 116 days ago

F1 » Ricciardo excluded from Australian GP


Jeeves, Good post and welcome. Just on your last point, what if the FIA said to DR you have to weigh yourself on these official FIA scales even though they're dodgy and we accept are giving a false readings. Does that make any sense at all? Surely DR would be entitled to say, 'Well fellas if you're going to be like that then I'm going to stand on my own scales which I know are correctly calibrated and you can accept that or we can have a contest in the Appeal Court.'

Googolplex

March 16, 2014 11:25 AM
Last Edited 116 days ago

F1 » Ricciardo excluded from Australian GP


Richard, Unless Daniel was in some way responsible for the fuel flow setting, it was fate for him in that it was beyond his control. Are you suggesting he was in some way knowingly involved in setting the fuel flow above that permitted by the regulations? I did not say it was a cruel twist of fate for RBR. What is more, I made no comment whether he should or should not lose the podium result, I just described it as a cruel twist of fate for him personally.

Googolplex

March 16, 2014 11:43 PM
Last Edited 117 days ago

F1 » Rosberg comfortably wins season-opener


richard: googol. I did say "well done to all". but at the time, I was aware that there was a problem with ricciardos fuel usage, so didn't pick him out for special mention. yes, he drove well and exceeded expectations, but I am a realist. first race of the season always throws up surprises, and there were a number of these in the field. we do not know how his teammate would have fared, an that is the only way a comparison can be made. maybe after a half dozen races, it will be easier to see what his overall ability is, but for the moment, I still rate seb far ahead of him. and for your info, BEORE he came into f1, was talking him up, but since his debut, I am still unsure of him. he has done nothing spectacular
LOL Richard, so you knew about the fuel issue at the time of your original post. I suppose that is why you made the comment that it looks like the RBR (in Seb's hands) is a near match to the pace of the Merc.

Googolplex

March 16, 2014 1:48 PM

F1 » Ricciardo excluded from Australian GP


richard: googol. where did I say that dr knew about the over use of fuel? I didn't! but the fact is that he GAINED from the extra bhp, therefore it is right that his second place is being questioned. yes if it is found that the fuel flow was excessive, then rbr should be punished, but the fact is that even though it was an accident , the car/drive benefitted by the extra bhp, so obviously dr's claim to position is also dubious. it wasn't his fault, but it was a false performance. similarly, if another car got a place by receiving an advantage of additional bhp, then that driver/car should also be penalised. giveway. that is something that a prerace check could not notice. only by looking at data after a race, can it be ascertained what fuel rate was used.
I said it was a cruel twist of fate for daniel with which you disagreed. Otherwise we have no issue with each other.


Page 15 of 174
« 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  »

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2014 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.