Melbourne Grand Prix

To try and get this back on track

How do people feel about the accusations that Schumacher was party to 'cheating' in the past, launch control and traction control software after it was outlawed in '94 is a consistent rumor? The 'modified' fuel rig that Benetton used that led to the pit fire on Vestanppen's car? As well as some of the minor rules infractions such as overtaking Hill on the sighting lap at the British GP in '94. Most of that team moved to Ferrari with him.

I accept that it is a business rather than a sport these days but so is WWF or whatever it is called and I don't want to see F1 go that way.

Regards

Andy

WWF?

You mean the World Wildlife Fund for Nature?? Unfortunately this is now what WWF stands for after a court case against the previous 'owners' of the above acronym!

I believe said 'previous owners' are now known as the WWE.

Don't ask me how I know that, though

Regards,

Jon

quote:

How do people feel about the accusations that Schumacher was party to 'cheating' in the past, launch control and traction control software after it was outlawed in '94 is a consistent rumor?

Not rumour at all, it has been well documented in various books and magazine articles. I will do some digging for you, and find exactly what was written, unless of course some of you guys have to hand.

Regards
Clive

quote:

Originally posted by cunningplan:

quote:

How do people feel about the accusations that Schumacher was party to 'cheating' in the past, launch control and traction control software after it was outlawed in '94 is a consistent rumor?

Not rumour at all, it has been well documented in various books and magazine articles. I will do some digging for you, and find exactly what was written, unless of course some of you guys have to hand.

Regards
Clive

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Looking forward to it Clive.

Deane

I thought it was common knowledge? Also be interested in seeing any links to the reference materials if they're accessible on a site. The day before his death, Senna went on at some length (off record it is alleged) on how Beneton had devoted a lot of time and resources to covert aids which were illegal. Of course you have to take that in context and you can't say for sure that no other teams were at it, but like I said, I thought it had all pretty much been outed some time ago.

Cheers

Harry

OK
This is an extract from a book written by Journalist Richard Williams on "The Death Of Ayrton Senna" and I quote;

"At the French Grand Prix in late June, Schumacher beat Hill off the line with a start so flawless that it hardened the suspicions lurking in many minds. This was the kind of get-away that had been seen many times in the previous two seasons, when the top teams had enjoyed the benefit of the now proscribed traction control systems and fully automatic gearboxes.

Announcing its ban on most kinds of computer controlled devices, the FIA had been loud in its insistence that the new regulations would be regularly and strictly policed. And in July, shortly after the British Grand Prix, the FIA's technical commission produced the findings from a software analysis company, LDRA of Liverpool, which it had hired to conduct its spot checks into the computer programs being used by three teams Ferrari, McLaren and Benetton.

To enable these checks to be made, the teams had first to agree to surrender their source codes: the means of access to thier computer programs. Ferrari spooked by the unpunished discovery of their use of a variation on traction control at the Aida Grand Prix, readily complied; their cars were found to be clean. McLaren and Benetton, however, refused to produce the source codes, claiming that to do so would first compromise the commercial confidentiality and second infringe the "intellectual copyright" of their software suppliers. When it was pointed out to them that LDRA is often enlisted by the British Government to look into military software whose confidentiality is covered by the Official Secrets Act and carries weightier consequences than in a silver cup, a few bottles of champagne and the further inflation of a few already oversized egos, they gave in.

Both teams were fined $100,000 for attempting to obstruct the course of justice. And, when the findings emerged, both appeared to have something to hide. In McLaren's case it was a gearbox programme permitting automatic shifts. After much deliberating, and to the surprise of many, the FIA eventually decided that this was not illegal. But Benetton had something far more exciting up their sleeves.

When LDRA's people finally got into the B194's software, they discovered a hidden programme, and it was dynamite: something which allowed Schumacher to make perfect starts merely by flooring the throttle and holding it there, the computer taking over to determine the correct matching of gear-changes to engine speed,ensuring the car reached the first corner in the least possible time, with no wheel spin or sideslip, all its energy concentrated into the forward motion. Before the winter, this combination of traction control and gearbox automation would have been legal. Now, although explicity outlawed by the regulations was still there. If you knew how to find it. Because it was invisible.

It took even LDRA's people a while. What you had to do was call up the software's menu of programmes, scroll down beyond the bottom line, put the cursor on an apparently blank line, press a particular key (no clues to that either) and, hey presto, without anything showing on the screen, the special programme was there.

They called it "launch control", and LDRA's computer detectives also discovered the means by which the driver could activate it on his way to the starting grid. It involved a sequence of commands using the throttle and the clutch pedals and the gear-shift "paddles" under the steering wheel. Benetton couldn't deny its existence, but they did say it hadn't been used since it had been banned. So why was it still there, and why and its existence been so carefully disguised?

It had remained in the software, they said, because to remove it would be too difficult. The danger was that the purging of one programme, other might become corrupted. Best to leave it be. But, so that the driver couldn't actually engage it, thereby unintentionally break the new rules, "launch control" had been hidden carefully away behind a series of masking procedures.

"That's enough to make me believe they were cheating," an experienced software programmer with another Formula One team told me. "Look, we purged our own software of all illegal systems during the winter. I did it myself. OK,our car isn't quite as sophistacted as the Benetton. But it only took me two days. That's all. Perfectly straightforward. And the fact that they disguised it was very suspicious."



My fingers are hurting after all this typing.
Other articles on the same thing have been written in magazines etc.. so it is well documented.
To me it shows that Mr Schumacher will go to any lengths to gain an advantage to win either by driving into people, Hill 94 and Villenueve 97 to try and win world championships, as well as knowingly driving a car with illegal traction/launch control.

Senna had his suspicions after the first race in Brazil and then again in Aida, he wasn't wrong was he.

Regards
Clive

"When the sport’s governing body called in experts to examine the Benetton they found a curious thing. Buried deep within the engine-management software was an apparently secret program that allowed the B194 to make perfect starts by matching gear changes to engine revs.

To find it you had to call up the software menu, scroll down to the line below, put the cursor in exactly the right place and press just the right key on a laptop to turn it on. There was also a sequence of button presses and paddle shifts that would have allowed a driver to activate this launch control as he drove around a warm-up lap before the start of a race.

Was it ever used? Benetton claimed it was not. They said the program was so embedded that it was impossible to remove. "

When interviewed, early in the season MS had mentioned that "sequence of button presses and paddle shifts" as the start sequence for his car. That comment about the pre start sequence of his car probably led to some suspicions, that then led to the discovery of the software.

After Senna was out of the previous GP he sat on the barrier by the corner and watched the entire race, paying particular attention to the Benettons. It was afterwards that he made his unofficial feelings known.

I'm sorry I called it rumour, I had forgoton the facts but Google turned up some gems.

Regards

Andy

How about this fact.


No charges were ever brought against Benneton for the use of illegal electronic driver aids.

Interesting - and sounds familiar now I see it again. I don't think you can accuse Schumaker of personally cheating - the alleged facilities would have been available to any driver in the team. But I do agree with the comments about driving into Hill and JV. But who started that? JV's dad wasn't averse to mixing it and Prost turned in on Senna at Suzuka. A move that Senna repaid a year later. It's also worth mentioning that in addition to being stripped of all his points after Herez, Schumaker has sometimes come off worse when chopping. Again I question why someone with so much talent needs to fight dirty, but he isn't the first and he's seldom been peanalised for moves on other drivers - so whether you like his style or not, it's perfectly legal. And at the end of the day his super human abilities can surely not be in dispute?

Thanks for digging that stuff up.

Harry

Harry
The reason I accused Schumacher of cheating, and so did a lot of others at the time. The fact was he had to set the traction/launch control into action himself. I'm not saying he wrote the software, he just took advantage of it, unfairly.
Are you telling me that a man of his ability wouldn't know if he had some sort of traction control working on the car. Senna knew he had it and he wasn't driving a Benetton.
So much is made of Schumacher and his abilities, how he can feel every little nuance of the car, and how it handles. Well isn't strange that his car was so much better than the rest in handling and performance.
F1 is a political game at times, and the powers to be are not averse to playing the same games.
Can you imagine the uproar in 94 if Benetton had been kicked out of the championship, to go along with the death of two drivers and two potentially serious accidents; Barrichello in Imola and Wendlinger in Monaco. It was something the sport didn't want or need.

There has been a lot written about what Benetton did, they were just given the benefit of the doubt.
But for the people in the know, the people who worked in F1 mechanics, engineers etc.. who knew something wasn't right I know who I believe, if other people here choose to believe otherwise then that's there choice.

The love of Mr Schumacher can certainly be blind

Regards
Clive

doesn't anyone here think Williams, who ended up finishing 2nd in 1994, might have made just a little bit of a protest if it was "common knowledge" that Benetton were cheating and thereby robbing them of the championship?
These teams walk a very fine line. ABS is banned in F1, but how often do you see the cars lock a wheel? Well, that's because while automatic cadence braking may be illegal, automatic acceleration while braking is not. The end result is pretty much the same.
How about the Michelin tyres that were wider than allowed because Michelin worked out they were only measured at the start of the race, not the end? Do we hear all those drivers being accused of cheating because they knew their tyres were too wide? No, of course not, somehow it was Schumacher that was cheating because Ferrari/Bridgestone pointed the problem out to the FIA and they, quite rightly, acted on it.
The there's Williams at Canada last year. Didn't know their brake ducts were rather larger than they were meant to be? Right, if you believe that one I've got a nice bridge for sale.
The love of Mr Schumacher may be blind but so is the belief that they're not ALL 'at it'.

I'm not saying othere teams don't bend the rules, the things you mentioned like tyre widths and brake ducts are easily seen and measurable by the scrutineers after the race. If they don't conform the teams are excluded from the results pending appeal. All teams look for loopholes in the rules, (Michelin tyre groove sizes for one) its gone on for as long as I can remember. The difference with Benetton is that the software was hidden, and suspiciously so. If people want to believe Bennetton when they say they didn't use it, just as the FIA did then that's fair enough.
The FIA can't punish the team unless they catch them in the act.
Here is another extract from the same book which confirms what I just stated about being caught.

"Then he told me the most interesting thing I heard all year. Here's what you can do, he said, if you really want to get away with something. You write an illegal programme - an offspring of traction control, say, such as a prescription for rev limits in each gear for a particular circuit - and you build into it a self-liquidating facility. This is how it works. The car leaves the pits before the race without the programme in its software. The driver stops the car on the grid, and gets out. His race engineer comes up and, as they do in the pre-race period before the grid is cleared, he plugs in his little laptop computer into the car - and presses the key that downloads the programme. For the next hour and a half the driver makes unrestricted use of it. Thanks to its efficiency, he wins the race. He takes his lap of honour, he drives back down the pit lane, he steers through the cheering crowds to the parc ferme where the scrutineers are waiting to establish the winning cars legality, and he switches off the engine. And the programme diappears, leaving no trace of its existence. And it's just about impossible to police."


Now I appreciate almost any team on the grid could have use some illegal software on their cars. But it was Benetton, McLaren and Ferrari that were brought to the attention of the FIA with Benetton having the most to hide. As I said before people can make their own minds up from what has been written. All this is old stuff and isn't going to change anything, but remains interesting nevertheless.

Regards
Clive

Whatever the politics of what was happening in 1994, there is no denying that it was an exciting sport back then, and it isn't now. We could even look back to 1994 and consider it to be the glory days, just as in 1994 when we looked back to the Prost/Senna McLaren era as a golden age.
We need to focus on the future of F1 (if there is one) and stop looking back.
BTW. What happened to Bernie? Has he gone?

quote:

BTW. What happened to Bernie? Has he gone?

No he's still there running the circus

Regards
Clive

Yes, going back to what's been said earlier, I think that regardless of all this stuff about politics, alledged cheating and the like, the real problem with F1 nowadays is the lack of an intense rivalry between two equally talented and evenly matched drivers, like Senna and Prost. If Schumacher was consistently challenged by someone at every race then the result would almost always be in doubt until the last few laps - then that would really be worth watching.

Regards,

Jon

The problem for me is that the whole nature of the cars/drivers/circuits makes the races look like computer games. You have little sense of driver skill, when someone is really upping the pace or effort, battling with car control etc. Most of the drama now comes from rain/technical faults or pace car interventions. Uncertainty about the result would help, but seeing a race settled by overt skill/bravery/determination rather than tactics would be better even if the same person always won.

Bruce

quote:

Yes, going back to what's been said earlier, I think that regardless of all this stuff about politics, alledged cheating and the like, the real problem with F1 nowadays is the lack of an intense rivalry between two equally talented and evenly matched drivers, like Senna and Prost. If Schumacher was consistently challenged by someone at every race then the result would almost always be in doubt until the last few laps - then that would really be worth watching.

Regards,

Jon

Spot on Jon I've always said this. If he's the Senna of his era where's the Prost to put him under pressure? I'm afraid there hasn't been one.

Regards
Clive

Clive, thanks

Bruce, I see your point but I think the whole tactical aspect is part of it. Certainly I would like to see more overtaking manoeuvres but I think what would be ideal is of the right balance being struck between team tactics and out-and-out driving skill. Unfortunately I don't think the numerous rule changes they keep implementing at the start of every season seem to properly address this.

And I still don't get why they can no longer change tyres at pit-stops! What the hell are the mechanics supposed to do?

Regards,

Jon

quote:

What the hell are the mechanics supposed to do?

Plug in their laptops for a quick illegal download of software

Regards
Clive

quote:

Originally posted by John Sheridan:
doesn't anyone here think Williams, who ended up finishing 2nd in 1994, might have made just a little bit of a protest if it was "common knowledge" that Benetton were cheating and thereby robbing them of the championship?

No doubt they would if they had proof. And if it was common knolwegde in 1994. Even if it had been 'common knowledge' then, you still need to be holding the evidence in your hand. Despite being the best of the rest, Williams were very much on the back foot by then, fending off accusations that they'd killed Senna through negligence, and gearing up for the court case.

I agree that F1 can be boring, but it was ten years ago. The same observations on the difficulty of overtaking and dulling of driver skill were raging then just as they are now. Prost's World Championship winning Williams would have needed only minimal modification to have been driven by remote control from the pit wall. Some say it was.

What are they still doing racing at places like Monaco and Hungary (to name but two)? For gawd's sake let's get 'em onto some circuits where cars can actually pass each other. Watching one driver getting into position for 15 consecutive laps in order to make his overtaking move of the afternoon is worse than watching a goaless draw. Just.

Cheers

Harry

Some of the most exciting games I've been to have ended 0-0. Full of good saves, near misses, last ditch tackles etc. etc.

A friend of mine works for the Woking team. He usually watches a couple of GPs then loses interest once the pattern for the season is set.

No amount of rule changes seem to upset the current status quo, they are quite considerable this year and even the teams running 2004 cars have had to make a lot of changes to them.

For the past few years Ferrari have had the best car and MS has been the best driver by some distance.

I missed the Aussie GP and I don't think I'll make any effort to watch any of the others this year unless the weather's crap and there is nothing else to do, alternatively I could listen to some music...

Ah yes, music. Thanks for the reminder. I knew there was something...

quote:

Spot on Jon I've always said this. If he's the Senna of his era where's the Prost to put him under pressure? I'm afraid there hasn't been one.

David Coulthard?

Thanks Basil! I just sprayed coffee all over my monitor.

Don't forget that DC 'tried of kill' MS at Spa. Michael's quotes, not mine.

Cheers

Harry