Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Yup! That’s what I was thinking of. I’m almost certainly wrong but I was under the impression that they couldn’t prove it because they didn’t have a like for like DRS actuator mount, but that could’ve been the potential way out of the DQ if they had
they couldn’t prove it because they didn’t have a like for like DRS actuator mount, but that could’ve been the potential way out of the DQ if they had.
I thought they were punished because they couldn’t prove that it was damaged in session and not before so the FIA had to assume that the drs actuator mount was beyond the specification specified by the regulations for the whole session.
Yup! That’s what I was thinking of. I’m almost certainly wrong but I was under the impression that they couldn’t prove it because they didn’t have a like for like DRS actuator mount, but that could’ve been the potential way out of the DQ if they had
Like I said, probably wrong and misremembering
I thought they were punished because they couldn’t prove that it was damaged in session and not before so the FIA had to assume that the drs actuator mount was beyond the specification specified by the regulations for the whole session.