The impressive speed the car has shown on the track, even if it hasn’t yet translated into results suggesting its potential, has drawn even more attention from the teams.
At the Styrian GP, Sergio Pérez started only 17th after a troublesome wet qualification, and by the end of the race he was trying, though unsuccessfully, to snatch fourth place from Red Bull’s Alex Albon.
The Mexican surprised his rivals by maintaining a good pace even on old soft tires and by setting several faster laps after switching to the media.
Given that there has been talk of a protest from Barcelona, the only surprise was that it did not arise in the first race in Austria.
It was not that Renault expected an opportunity in which the exclusion of a career point could give the Enstone team points, because in the first round, Esteban Ocon finished behind Pérez.
In fact, the delay was for the same reason Red Bull protested the Mercedes DAS system on Friday at the Austrian GP rather than after qualifying or the race, when it would have been more damaging.
“To be honest, we were planning to do it in Melbourne, and we really didn’t have a chance to do it in Melbourne,” Renault CEO Marcin Budkowski told Motorsport.com.
“And the reasons why we didn’t do it last week were more related to the fact, it took a lot of FIA and F1 work to bring everyone together in a race. And I think we wanted to respect this, and we applauded the work that they have accomplished.
“And I think we know a lot of teams have contributed to it. And we thought it was not the right thing to do.”
“But we did it in the second race because, again, there was an opportunity to do it. That is really the reason to wait, but it is something we saw in Barcelona in the tests.”
Indeed, for the second race, Renault decided that the gloves were missing. It just happened that this time one of its drivers, Daniel Ricciardo, ended up behind both pink cars.
Budkowski won’t comment, but other teams in the pitlane have made their displeasure too clear, and sources suggest they privately endorsed Renault’s protest and shared their suspicions, even if they haven’t attached their names to the FIA document in public. . After all, only one team has to take action to get things moving.
Daniel Ricciardo, Renault F1 Team RS20, leads Lance Stroll, Racing Point RP20
Photo by: Mark Sutton / Motorsport Images
So what is the protest about and why is it focused on brake lines?
The case relates to the often controversial issue of the listed parties, and which teams can and cannot buy or borrow from their rivals.
The chassis and aerodynamic surfaces have always been considered the key elements for which teams are expected to create their own intellectual property, while items such as gearboxes and suspension are freely interchangeable. All the details are enshrined in Appendix 6 of the FIA Sporting Regulations.
Clearly having a key aerodynamic influence, the brake lines became a part of the list for the 2020 season.
“Basically, we maintain that the front and rear brake lines used at Racing Point are effectively a Mercedes design, so they have been designed by another competitor,” says Budkowski.
“What violates sports regulations, more precisely Appendix 6, and that’s why we protest against cars because of that.”
“First of all, brake ducts are a part of the list because they are a performance differentiator as they are an aerodynamically sensitive component. And they are also quite crucial in controlling tire temperature, which we know is a differentiator of pretty important performance in F1. “
“And they are regulated by Appendix 6, so we believe that these geometries in use at the Racing Point are effectively the exact design of last year’s Mercedes, potentially with some minor modifications to adapt to the Racing Point, or some minor evolutions, No However, it is not a Racing Point design.
“Then it is not their intellectual property. And that is explicitly prohibited in the regulations.”
The protest was accepted by FIA delegates at the Red Bull Ring, and will be heard at a future date, once the evidence has been gathered.
Budkowski emphasizes that it is not Renault’s job to demonstrate that its rival has violated the rules.
“It is not we who have to prove it, it is Racing Point. In F1 regulations, it is the competitor’s duty to demonstrate that his car is legal at all times. Therefore, it will be Racing Point’s duty to prove the legality of his car “.
No one has a problem with a team copying wings, etc. Everyone looks at what rivals are doing and comes up with the best ideas.
The RP20 case is unusual in that, as a general package, it closely resembles the W10.
In fact, the Racing Point team has made no secret of the fact that it took a shortcut to improve performance by copying the Mercedes concept, having reached the limit with the Red Bull-inspired theme it had been using.
Of course, this was not McLaren or Alfa Romeo or Renault copying the Mercedes concept, but a team that uses the Mercedes power unit and gearbox package, and indeed the Brackley wind tunnel, so it inevitably caused a stir among rivals.
The key is RP20 brake duct internal flow systems, which the FIA will now compare to the ducts used in the 2019 Mercedes.
Renault’s view is that the internal details are not visible to strangers, and therefore, in theory, you could not accurately replicate them without access to internal information.
“What we maintain is that design is not your design,” says Budkowski. “And there is similarity of geometry, which I think is obvious, but there is external geometry and internal geometry.
“You can copy the external geometry of the images, but it will be difficult to copy the internal geometry of the images. We don’t know, but it is up to the FIA to determine the similarities there.”
“Also, has there been an exchange of designs and parts potentially? We think there has been. Potentially, in the legal form, but nevertheless, if it was legal to change them last year, it is not legal to compete with them this year.”
“So I think the FIA will take into account not only the geometries, but also whether there has been any exchange of information between competitors that has led to this design.”
It could be assumed that Renault is taking a kick by assuming the ducts are internally identical, or too similar for it to be a coincidence: the FIA could determine that they are different enough.
Racing Point RP20 detail
Photo by: Giorgio Piola
“What we are saying is that we accept that it is possible to copy external geometries of images,” says Budkowski.
“We do not believe it is possible to copy internal geometries. Furthermore, we know that information transfers on the brake lines were allowed last year. But it is not allowed to use this information in your race car this year.”
“These parts weren’t on the list last year, and they’re on the list this year, so you can exchange information last year, but you can’t use this information on your race car this year. So if they’ve used information From the Mercedes ’19 car they received, we affirm that this is illegal.
“It is for the FIA to determine this. But what is clear is that any part of the list must be its own proprietary design. The regulations are clear, not only do you have to design it yourself, but you cannot outsource it to another competitor.
“And if a competitor designs it, they retain exclusive rights to use it. So there is no way you can base your design on someone else’s without violating the regulations.”
Does Renault believe that other elements of the car break the rules of the listed parts?
“We strongly suspect, if not a conviction, that these pieces are a design from another competitor,” says Budkowski. “If that is the case for the other parties, once again, it is up to the FIA to determine.
“If the FIA finds that the brake lines are of the same geometry or are based on the same geometry, then I hope they will start checking other parts as well, if they haven’t already.”
Clearly, this is a topic that has great importance for sport. The FIA has been pushing to move towards common and shared parts with the 2022 regulations, and faced resistance in some areas, even when the elements in question did not make the car faster.
However, aero remains the key aspect of performance that teams want to keep free, on the grounds that they must do their own R&D and not be able to buy performance.
Meanwhile, the move to the very different rules of 2022 comes amid cost cap and further tightening of restrictions on the use of the wind tunnel and CFD. Any close cooperation between partner teams, which could be seen as mutually benefiting from following a parallel development path, will be viewed with some suspicion by others.
Racing Point reacted strongly to Renault’s claims, noting that the protest is “misconceived and misinformed,” and emphasized that “each and every suggestion for wrongdoing is firmly rejected and the team will take all necessary steps to guarantee the correct application of the regulations to the facts. “
Racing Point’s real problem is that it has taken such a big step with its overall package that it has shaken not only the cages of traditional rivals like Renault and McLaren, but also Red Bull and Ferrari.
Sergio Pérez, Racing Point RP20
Photo by: Charles Coates / Motorsport Images
