Quote from ajp71 :

I reckon A was the driver that caused that, all over the place and cut across car C. Car B shouldn't have come down like he did and car C was too optimistic, still without an idiot in car A I doubt they'd have crashed.

That's how I see it too. B and C stayed in their lane so their path was foreseeable. A was the one swerving around. Also he didn't have to go that low to pass B, and if had used the middle lane, C wouldn't have thought about passing between them.

For example p52:

Pedro DE LA ROSA
No, but I must tell you why. When Mike told me the figure, it was so radically different from ours
that there was no way that our care could ever achieve that. The whole philosophy of our car was
--------------------------------. We had managed to-----------------------------------------. There was
no point. At the previous stage, I thought the information might be important and that we could try
it in the simulator, but then the figures were so different.

In the version of the 13/9 transcript that I downloaded when I posted that link, blanked-out text isn't visible (more exactly it's been replaced with spaces). Only the period at the end of deleted sentences is visible. I didn't download the 26/7 transcript by then.

Hmm, I suspect that you meant "he may not correct anyone's English" rather than "he can't".

But what do I know? After all I'm only French.

Quote from BlueFlame :

I'm just saying hes not English so he can't correct anyone's English.

This is so wrong! French is my mother tongue. Does that make me unable to notice that you spelt "hes not English" incorrectly?

The FIA posted the transcripts of the World Motor Sport Council hearings in Paris:

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre ... /September/190907-01.html

Blocked dad under blue flag?

Mosley's explanations on why McLaren drivers didn't loose their points too: http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php ... item.php?fes_art_id=32822

Thanks for looking into these, Gai-Luron!

Quote from Gai-Luron :

It's normal because each car don't use same quantity of fuel. But 2 or 3 Lap later this work again

Believe me, I understand how it is supposed to work. But it doesn't. Once the track or the car changes, the fuel indicator stops working on my machine until I quit and re-launch LFS and LFSRelax.

Quote :

Fuel don't work if it's not your car ( protection of player's strategy ). But on replay i don't try i, but i think fuel don't work

That's right. Even LFS itself doesn't show it. But the important point in my sentence was "even when you go to multiplayer or single player next".

To summarize, the only way I can get LFSRelax to display fuel is to go to multiplayer first thing after I launched them. As soon as I go to single player or replay, fuel won't work (even in multiplayer) until I re-launch LFS/LFSRelax.

Feel free to PM me if you'd be more comfortable discussing this in French.

Flip

Quote from bozo :

Yes, I agree. There's no proof of the information going any further into the McLaren organisation.

I meant the opposite.

Quote from Gabkicks :

whats the name of the driver that caused that accident? he just barged his way in and i bet he thought he would get away with it.

It was David Coulthard who caused it. He hit the grass on the left, spun across the track, and bounced on the wall.

Edit: Or did you mean in the second vid?

Last edited by FL!P, Fri 14 Sep 2007, 19:33.

I'm not calling it art because it's a car, but because of the dedication and the work this guy have put in it. It's not the medium that matters, it's the passion and the work.

Quote from bozo :

I did read the whole report before posting ... and kept coming across statements where the WMSC were given evidence that Coughlan or de la Rosa had information, and then surmised that they 'must have' informed the team, and the team 'must have' made the decisions about what they did with the info. But you could equally look at it another way. I'm a test driver and I need to perform for my team to stay in contract. If I can acquire info and use it, and it makes me look good, why should I tell the team - especially if the info was gained in a rather illicit fashion.

Sorry I misunderstood your first post, and thanks for the clarification.

For what we know, the FIA got the evidence from the drivers because they had their Super Licenses to use as leverage. At this point it's not a proof that no one else at McLaren had got or used Ferrari's data.

I've read they'll release more info in about a week (after blanking out whatever data Ferrari wants to keep secret). Maybe some of it will bring more light on this.

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Yeah I understand that. I don't know. I just know a lot of talented people who are putting a lot of effort into going nowhere and it reminds me of them.

I think you just don't see it for what it is: an amazing piece of art.

It's not more a model than a Michelangelo painting is a picture.

Quote from Dajmin :

It's like being charged for theft when the owner hands you the item.

No, it's more like fencing, when you benefit from something you know you shouldn't have.

Read the whole report. There's lots of hard evidence. What I quoted is just the final summary.

The full decision of the World Motor Sport Council hearing of September 13th is available here as PDF.

Excerpt (for the lazy/buzy ones):

Quote :

8.8 In light of the evidence now before it, the WMSC does not accept that the only actions of McLaren deserving censure were those of Coughlan. While this situation might have originated with the actions of a single rogue McLaren employee acting on his own and without McLaren’s knowledge or consent, evidence is now available which, when taken in its full context, makes clear that:

- Coughlan had more information than previously appreciated and was receiving information in a systematic manner over a period of months;
- the information has been disseminated, at least to some degree (e.g. to Mr. de la Rosa and Mr. Alonso), within the McLaren team;
- the information being disseminated within the McLaren team included not only highly sensitive technical information but also secret information regarding Ferrari’s sporting strategy;
- Mr de la Rosa, in the performance of his functions at McLaren, requested and received secret Ferrari information from a source which he knew to be illegitimate and expressly stated that the purpose of his request was to run tests in the simulator;
- the secret information in question was shared with Mr. Alonso;
- there was a clear intention on the part of a number of McLaren personnel to use some of the Ferrari confidential information in its own testing. If this was not in fact carried into effect it was only because there were technical reasons not to do so;
- Coughlan’s role within McLaren (as now understood by the WMSC) put him in a position in which his knowledge of the secret Ferrari information would have influenced him in the performance of his duties.

Last edited by FL!P, Fri 14 Sep 2007, 14:36.

http://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/swf/pentagon_en.swf

http://www.voltairenet.org/mot37.html?lang=en

I think Storm's point is that if the FIA has enough evidence to condemn the team, then the whole team should be condemned. The current decision is a farce because, assuming they have proof that McLaren cheated, they still let their drivers race for point with cars that are the result of those cheats.

Quote from Leprekaun :

Oh right! sorry, I forgot, you're French FLIP . Just joking , I know everyone has their opinions of drivers

Don't get me wrong, Lep. I'm not a fan of Schumacher or of anyone else. I've been very impressed, in one way or another, by a lot of drivers, including Senna, Prost and Schumacher, but I never swore allegiance to any of them. As long as I can watch good races, I don't really care on who wins them.

Quote from bozo :

Just so long as they haven't touched Eau Rouge ...

Quote :

Eau Rouge was resurfaced in 2003 and, whilst it has the same radii and incredible undulation in the racetrack, it is now simply a great risk without being a great challenge because it is absolutely flat out from the word go. Drivers come out of the pits, go through it once on their warm-up lap and, by the time they return two minutes later, it is full throttle. There is no learning process.

It used to be that you built up to Eau Rouge throughout the weekend until your final qualifying lap. You'd start with a bit of a lift from the throttle and a dab of the brakes on the way in, followed by another lift halfway through. Then you would forget the brakes and, eventually, not lift on the way in, leaving just that bit in the middle. Finally, and inevitably, someone such as Villeneuve would go over the top.

But that is no more. Eau Rouge is easy today. Which is why Pouhon has taken its place as the ultimate challenge at Spa.

Martin Brundle (Working the Wheel)

Well said, Storm!

Very nice. Congrats!

Quote from tristancliffe :

Paddles first used in F1 in 1988 I believe.

Had to look it up. We're both wrong, apparently.

From f1technical.net

Quote :

As recently as 1992, the steering wheel on a Formula 1 car was a relatively plain, straightforward piece of equipment, round in shape, with a metal plate at the centre to attach it to the steering column, and generally no more than three buttons – one for selecting neutral, one for releasing liquid through a tube in the helmet for the driver to replenish his fluid levels and one for the radio.

The advent of complex electronic systems in Formula 1 throughout the 1990s changed all that. McLaren engineer John Barnard was the first to introduce this system and enabled Nigel Mansell to shift gears without having to move a hand away from the steering wheel.

According to f1-live.com, there's another spying affair emerging, that involves Renault. They'd be using "unauthorised intellectual property" belonging to McLaren on the R27.