[Anakattawl]

when lewis wheel hub feel out on the pit stop, they stuck it back in after which the thing was spinning with the wheel surely this makes it a moveable aero part, which is banned right? so surley he should be disquilifed i wonder if the stewards noticed this... unlikely

[Lebybynctisee]

when lewis wheel hub feel out on the pit stop, they stuck it back in after which the thing was spinning with the wheel surely this makes it a moveable aero part, which is banned right? so surley he should be disquilifed i wonder if the stewards noticed this... unlikely

Would they [The stewards] need to prove that a part, when designed and working properly is not a moveable device, is intentionally broken by the pit crew, costing the car in question 13 seconds, in order to attempt to gain an on track advantage by making the said broken dvice moveable..........

[TerriLS]

And disqualify Webber for loss of light!

[Zaxsdcxs]

By the logic of original poster, any car which suffers damage through a collision which loosens any aerodynamic part of the bodywork should be disqualified from the race.

[sharpyure]

Would they [The stewards] need to prove that a part, when designed and working properly is not a moveable device, is intentionally broken by the pit crew, costing the car in question 13 seconds, in order to attempt to gain an on track advantage by making the said broken dvice moveable..........

Yeah, penalize those cheaters good......ferrari is probably thinking gee, why did we not think of that in Australia, maybe Kimi would not have run off the track....set a good example by DQ both LH and HK, that will stop such stuff in the future

[pkxlugbsbv]

when lewis wheel hub feel out on the pit stop, they stuck it back in after which the thing was spinning with the wheel surely this makes it a movable aero part, which is banned right? so surly he should be disqualified i wonder if the stewards noticed this... unlikely

The device is already a "movable aerodynamic device" in it's functioning form. How can it become a "movable aerodynamic device" after being installed incorrectly.

The only reason this thing is allowed in the first place is because Ferrari somehow convinced the FIA that it shouldn't be classified an "aerodynamic device" because it's part of the breaking systems. Last I understood it extracted air through the brakes for cooling, and it moves when the tires steer. Personally I'm baffled how a MOVING AIR extractor is not a "movable aerodynamic device" in the first place.

[inmeirulez]

The device is already a "movable aerodynamic device" in it's functioning form. How can it become a "movable aerodynamic device" after being installed incorrectly.

But when installed correctly it doesn't move.

[Lilji]

FIA-RRARI RULES. GET OVER IT

[pkxlugbsbv]

But when installed correctly it doesn't move.

Yes it does. Wheel turns left, the faring turns left, etc.

The definition of a static aerodynamic device is one that is rigidly attached to the chassis. The brake faring is not attached to the chassis and moves with the movements of the wheels, theoretically being a movable areo device. But like I already said Ferrari were somehow able to convince the FIA is wasn't and now mostly everybody is doing it.

[vNZsk39B]

The definition of a static aerodynamic device is one that is rigidly attached to the chassis. The brake faring is not attached to the chassis and moves with the movements of the wheels, theoretically being a movable areo device. But like I already said Ferrari were somehow able to convince the FIA is wasn't and now mostly everybody is doing it.

Formula 1 car moves around the track, does that make it moveable aerodynamic device

[TerriLS]

FIA has disqualified the entire field. It was noticed every driver moved his head and helmets are a moveable areodynamic device! Some drivers even had their hands outside the cockpit. Horrors!!! Let us get real and quit nit picking.

[Anakattawl]

The device is already a "movable aerodynamic device" in it's functioning form. How can it become a "movable aerodynamic device" after being installed incorrectly.

The only reason this thing is allowed in the first place is because Ferrari somehow convinced the FIA that it shouldn't be classified an "aerodynamic device" because it's part of the breaking systems. Last I understood it extracted air through the brakes for cooling, and it moves when the tires steer. Personally I'm baffled how a MOVING AIR extractor is not a "movable aerodynamic device" in the first place.

it does not move if you watch closely

[herrdwq]

Formula 1 car moves around the track, does that make it moveable aerodynamic device

JJanicke is absolutely right. The wheel farings are not classed as aerodynamic devices by the FIA, they are considered to be brake cooling-aids. If the FIA considered them to be aerodynamic devices, they would be banned, because they aren't rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car and would therefore be considered moveable aerodynamic devices. Still, don't let your ignorance of the rules get in the way of a good bash.

[VFOVkZBj]

Of course they would be. But how can you have a brake cooling device which doesn't move? Every part of the car which gets air flowing over it so you could argue every bit of the car is an aerodynamic device.

[sharpyure]

It won't move if you close your eyes

[dalnecymync]

when lewis wheel hub feel out on the pit stop, they stuck it back in after which the thing was spinning with the wheel surely this makes it a moveable aero part, which is banned right? so surley he should be disquilifed i wonder if the stewards noticed this... unlikely

Agreed! let's disqualify him.

[dalnecymync]

Of course they would be. But how can you have a brake cooling device which doesn't move? Every part of the car which gets air flowing over it so you could argue every bit of the car is an aerodynamic device.

Good point. The only thing that apparently doesn't move is the track, but then it is part of the earth which rotates and revolves around the sun. We need Einstein to resolve this.

[herrdwq]

Of course they would be. But how can you have a brake cooling device which doesn't move? Every part of the car which gets air flowing over it so you could argue every bit of the car is an aerodynamic device.

Daniel, my point is...

The fact that Lewis Hamilton's wheel cover was rotating due to a fault is fairly meaningless, as it is not considered an aerodynamic device, and if it was, it'd be banned anyway as it is not rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car, and is already therefore, by the FIA's own definition, 'moveable'. From this I conclue that the OP is talking out of his arse.

[VFOVkZBj]

Daniel, my point is...

The fact that Lewis Hamilton's wheel cover was rotating due to a fault is fairly meaningless, as it is not considered an aerodynamic device, and if it was, it'd be banned anyway as it is not rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car, and is already therefore, by the FIA's own definition, 'moveable'. From this I conclue that the OP is talking out of his arse.

I just thought it was strange that you replied to DonJippo saying he was ignorant of the rules when he was merely making the same point but with humour.

The thing is JJanicke seems to think it IS an aero device so he's not completely right Personally I think it's a good bash

I too agree that the moving wheel cover is doesn't justify a thread. If there was any advantage gained I'm sure it was unintentional. No need for disquilification

[VFOVkZBj]

Good point. The only thing that apparently doesn't move is the track, but then it is part of the earth which rotates and revolves around the sun. We need Einstein to resolve this.

OMFG!!!!! Ban tracks! Air goes over them and they're moving. Moving aero device!!!!