Grand Prix 2021 Monaco Grand Prix Practice, Qualifying & Race Discussion

Many of our loyal readers will have noticed that this seasons PQR threads have taken on a more frivolous tone. I feel that in these trying times a little humour goes a long way. Having said that however, we are now going to discuss the Monaco GP so a different tone is required.

Monaco is the jewel in F1’s crown. It is the fresh crisp linen on clean bedding day. It is the smell of new mown hay on a warm summers evening. It is to F1 what that first visit to the toilet after a long drive home is to relief. A special place for special people. Racing in Monte Carlo gives the average person a chance to see how the rich and famous live. To look down lovingly on the chosen few in their yachts and trackside balconies while being grateful to spend time in such giddy company.

To honour this track then, I will review 3 classic races that made front page headlines the world over and helped contribute to the myth and the legend that is the Monaco grand prix circuit.

Firstly, we must start with the absolute classic that was the 1966 Monaco GP. Few would have predicted at the start of this race that impact it would have on the world championship. A championship that would end in tragedy and go right down to the wire. The race weekend saw a close fight between the Brit, Scott Stoddard and American Pete Aron in the racing green and gold Jordan cars and their rivals Jean-Pierre Sarti and Nino Barlini in the Ferraris. Few remember now that the opening laps were quite dull. As the mid race point approached however, Pete Aron started to experience gear box issues. Desperately trying to fend of Stoddard, who had been gaining on him lap by lap, Aron struggled to keep the car in gear. Coming on to the waterfront stretch of the track Aron thrust his arm in the air to allow Stoddard to pass when suddenly the engine on his Jordan seized and he lost control sending Stoddard into a fiery crash and pitching both men and cars into the harbour. Stoddard’s injuries were severe and enough to see him miss a significant part of the season while Aron was immediately fired from the Jordan team. The impact this had on the season was significant. Going into the final round at Monza, Stoddard had made an amazing recovery and, with Aron now racing for the Japanese Yamura team, any one of the four drivers could still win the title. What happened at that race will have to wait for another day.

The next race I would like to focus on involves sports cars. Another class of racing which alongside rallying, has left its mark on the principality. The 1977 Trans-France Race was an absorbing battle won in truly remarkable fashion. The race unfolded into a four-way battle between Jim Douglas driving a Volkswagen, Diane Darcy in a Lancia, the German Bruno Von Stickle and the Frenchman Claude Gilbert. The battle between the four of them was fierce and even at times potentially lethal. Darcy was first to retire when her Lancia failed, and this was followed shortly after by Gilbert departing from the race. Von Stickle however, still held a commanding lead and would be extremely difficult to pass as the cars headed into the narrow streets of Monaco. It was then that Douglas pulled off a move in the number 53 Volkswagen that is still being talked about today. As the two cars entered the narrow-tunnelled section of the F1 circuit, instead of passing Von Stickle, Douglas drove his car firstly along the barrier and then up the tunnel wall and finally upside down along the tunnel roof. It was a thrilling victory and marked the 20th win for Jim Douglas and the Volkswagen car. Hearts were also set racing when it was announced that Jim Douglas and Diane Darcy had fallen in love after the race.

Finally, here's a more recent race that captured the headlines for all the wrong reasons. Another type of racing that takes place in Monaco usually occurs one or two weeks prior to the F1 GP. The Historic Monaco Grand Prix takes in cars from all over the world and all eras of history. On this occasion the race featured a demonstration race involving cars that had raced in the IRL series in previous years. One of these cars was sponsored by Amreican industrialist Tony Stark. Only a few weeks before Stark had announced to the world that he was the man behind the armour known as Iron Man. His presence in Monaco had already caused headlines when he decided that he was going to replace his regular driver and take to the street track himself. Stark, a keen amateur racing driver acquitted himself well and increased his pace as the race progressed. Suddenly, at around the mid race point, Anton Vanko, a former Stark industries employee with a major grievance against his old boss, encroached on to the race circuit and caused carnage with two electrified whips. Fortunately, Stark managed to just about fend Vanko off and while the number of cars destroyed was high and the fiery explosions seen world-wide on TV looked deadly, no one was seriously injured in the incident.

So, contrary to popular belief, Monaco isn’t a track that’s far too narrow, provides for dull racing and almost no overtaking while only remaining in the calendar because it is a playground for the rich and famous. As these examples above have shown, it provides for thrilling races throughout its history and we all hope that the next GP here will be another of those.
 
its a weird one, because every team breaks the rules its in F1, to go through the loopholes. stretch the rules as much as they can

Sky sports talked to Christian Horner & mercedes who have opened this can of worms. looked guilty towards the same offence he blaming of others of. as the front wing looked very bendy from the footage sky f1 showed
 
There are rules that can be interpreted to gain an advantage, however designing a flexible aerodynamic device that flexes ( moves) in a specific direction in certain conditions to give an advantage it becomes a movable aerodynamic device and thus illegal, the fact it passes certain flexing tests just indicates it doesn't flex more than permitted in those tests. The moment a team admit they have designed a flexible device ( call it what you will) to gain an aerodynamic advantage it becomes illegal under the Movable Aerodynamic Structures rule.
 
The FIAs various interpretations and reinterpretations of what amounts to moving aerodynamic devices have been causing shit in F1 ever since they were brought in but more specifically since the early 80's.

I say, if a team finds a natty way of interpreting the rules for themselves then jolly good luck to them.

Ross Brawn admitted he could drive a coach and horses through the diffuser regs in 2009 and then proceeded to do so. I didn't hear any calls to bung his team out then?

I've always thought the Red Bull's front wing is genius. The F-ducts amusingly inventive and mass dampers a clever device.

Tony Rudd, Len Terry, Gordon Murray, Colin Chapman and many others all knew their way around a rule book.
 
With the double diffuser in 2009, that was just that a loophole in the regs was spotted. With flexible wings, it’s different, as these are explicitly banned, and Horner’s response has always been that if it passes the test, then it’s Legal. However, speed cameras are often set 10% above the legal speed limit. That doesn’t mean that it’s legal to drive 75 in a 70 zone…
 
There's a subtle difference between the fingers on the front with deflecting without the base moving (the red bull does it too) and the entire bloody rear wing bending back and down at speed, there's pushing the limit and taking the piss, and red bull, as usual, are taking the piss.
 
With the double diffuser in 2009, that was just that a loophole in the regs was spotted. With flexible wings, it’s different, as these are explicitly banned, and Horner’s response has always been that if it passes the test, then it’s Legal. However, speed cameras are often set 10% above the legal speed limit. That doesn’t mean that it’s legal to drive 75 in a 70 zone…

I would ask, how much you know about the regulations, and where they were exploited to create the double diffuser? needless to say in application, there was a need for a steel ruler and plenty of gaffer tape to make the solution work, and pass regulations. I see it as no different from flexi wings.

The rules state a) what is allowed, and the b) tests that will be applied to validate. If you can beat a) by foxing b) fair enough, that means that b) is not good enough to catch a)

One thing that does stick in my craw a bit is when McLaren tried their own flexi wing, which was banned following video evidence, rather than the failure of a test.

Otherwise, if the scrutineers are happy with it, hats off!
 
Indeed, the FIA set the rules and the test which will be applied to enforce the rules. The "spirit" of the rules is a wonderful sporting ethos, like expecting footballers not to dive, rugby players not to eye gouge, or cricketers to walk when they have nicked the ball.

Unfortunately we live in the real world where people will find ways around the rules which offer them an advantage, and F1 has been like this since the very start. I doubt the sport, or any sport, would move forward if it weren't for clever people bending the rules.
 
The Pits - I'd argue that flexi-wings which "pass the test" are more in line with Ferrari's 1999 car "passing the test" with their barge-boards. The barge boards were clearly outside of the allowed areas, as written in the rules, but (somehow?) successfully argued that there should be a 5% (or was it 5mm) tolerance, using a regulation from somewhere completely different.

So, even though the car was illegal, broke the rules of the game, they were allowed to keep their Malaysia points. If they break the letter of the written regs, they shouldn't be allowed to compete. (Scrutineering checks may be how the rules are applied, but they are not the written rules).
 
A classic example of how Formula 1 can't even regulate itself with any degree of certainty comes from the use of sliding skirts in the 1970's. The 1960's rule book clearly banned moving aerodynamic devices. A sliding skirt was a moving aerodynamic device and yet it wasn't banned for several years. Eventually it was only banned due to the need to reduce the downforce generated by wing cars and not because it moved.

The rule was only clarified in 1981 due to the rumpus created by Lotus attempting to run it's type 88 "twin chassis" car.

Furthermore, Lotus were running a rubber mount on the rear wing of the type 72 in the early 70's that caused the wing to flex backwards under high speeds. This is nothing new to F1.
 
I'm very confused (nothing new there I hear you cry). There was an F2 race at Monaco today, but they never used to have any motor racing on the Friday of a GP weekend as it was a religious festival of some sort. Has the death or Prince Rainier turned Monaco into a godless, heathen back water or do they just not give a monkey's any more?

More to the point, why is F1 running practice on the Thursday when they can clearly now do it on the Friday.
 
@The Pits - I'd argue that flexi-wings which "pass the test" are more in line with Ferrari's 1999 car "passing the test" with their barge-boards. The barge boards were clearly outside of the allowed areas, as written in the rules, but (somehow?) successfully argued that there should be a 5% (or was it 5mm) tolerance, using a regulation from somewhere completely different.

This is exactly the rule that the double diffuser took advantage of!
 
I'm very confused (nothing new there I hear you cry). There was an F2 race at Monaco today, but they never used to have any motor racing on the Friday of a GP weekend as it was a religious festival of some sort. Has the death or Prince Rainier turned Monaco into a godless, heathen back water or do they just not give a monkey's any more?

More to the point, why is F1 running practice on the Thursday when they can clearly now do it on the Friday.

yeah F2 have always raced on friday for as long as ive watched it since 2012, from research it started in 2009 & its nice to spread the weekend out. normally its the feature race & normally a brilliant watch. today i wouldnt say race, as they had sprint race & it was 1 of the dullest things ive ever seen

but i think they were chatting about the this on commentary on FP2, apparently over the years, they could ran on the friday, as the holiday as soften a bit. but its steeped in tradition, that we cant lose that, monaco is thursday
 
few things i am confused at this, whole rule bending, why would this be banned mid season when other "illegal" Mercedes DAS system & then others like F duct, Double Diffuser wasnt banned until the end of the season

also whats the point this not like we are in midway through a regulation. in 5 months time we have got completely new cars, the biggest rule change for 25 years. theyve passed scrutineering for testing & every race clearly, so just put it down to many editions where F1 set the rules & teams have found a grey area

but for me this might a sense that mercedes are worried at red bull so much that they are know trying to nobble them
 
I think things like DAS and the F-Duct were clever engineering that the rule makers hadn't thought of, so they're more inclined to be "well played, you can have your fun this season, but not next"

Whereas the rule on moveable aerodynamics was specifically written ages ago to exclude wings moving, which is quite clearly what's happening. So designing your car to circumvent the rules is a no-no (don't mention the Ferrari fuel sensor shenanigans of which we must never speak), but exploiting a loophole like the f-duct/movable wheels isn't.

The f duct is actually one of my favourite bits of realtively recent F1 design genius, especially the way it was integrated into the car so that the driver operated it with their knee, so both hands stayed on the wheel.
 
Last edited:
Apparently stiffer (pardon the pun) rules on the flexibility of parts including the use of TV footage alongside even greater load testing, will be in place for the French GP.

According to Motorsport magazine, Toto is having a bit of a cry because he reckons they could tighten the rules now. Coincidentally, the Baku circuit has the greatest difference between twisty high down force and long low down force sections of any track on the calendar. Having a flexible rear wing here would be really handy. Cough Red Bull Cough.

Motorsport reckons that Toto hopes to create enough of a rumpus about flexible wings it may put RBR and others off from running them in case someone challenges them.

I don't think Mercedes would issue a challenge but, can anyone think of a team with close ties to Mercedes who recently suffered as a result of a legal challenge against their car and wouldn't mind some pay back?

:thinking:
 
Same old shit.

The cheating teams get to use illegal cars for another month and then will be allowed a 20% tolerance for an extended time.
 
Back
Top Bottom