[LM24 Race] 2019 24 Hours of Le Mans: ACO/FIA WEC '18/'19 Season Finale

[Jam3s]

It's not the ACO's responsibility to check cars fuel capacities or rig rates.

[carbsmith]

There is absolutely no way to determine a car is 100% legal without tearing it down after the fact or having the technical inspectors build the car themselves immediately before it goes on track. It is in absolutely no conceivable or practical way the organizers' responsibility that teams participate with a legal car, particularly when it doesn't concern safety. That's why there's penalties in every single racing series ever.

[old man]

Originally Posted by chernaudi

We can argue if the Keating Ford deserved such a harsh penalty for being barely over the limit. But look at what NASCAR became until they started DQ people for major violations.

If teams were just fined for such things, the only one's who might be happy are the ACO's and FIA's accountants. And the better off teams would get away with more questionable crap than smaller ones.

.01 of a liter isn't much, but it's technically over the limit, and given how the rule's worded and treated, I don't think the ACO had much other alternative. It is what it is.

It was actually 0.1 ltd, still not much!

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Jam3s

It's not the ACO's responsibility to check cars fuel capacities or rig rates.

If they want to make it a rule then yes, yes it is. It's a BS run of penalties given other teams were given a verbal warning for things with much greater impact on the racing but .1L, which was not found out until the car was ripped apart to check every last drop, gets you excluded? Sorry but over pressure and under minimum refueling actually impacts the racing and should be more than a Don't do that again or we'll tell you not to do it again ruling

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

https://sportscar365.com/lemans/wec/...ns-gte-am-win/

55.2s second penalty. Drops to second. Gutted.

Indeed, and then disqualified. Very sad. It was an emotional win for the Keating team.

From personal experience bag tanks tens to expand when in a hot car, perhaps that was the problem with the volume. However the 44.4 secs rather than 45 secs fueling time should have been spotted by the team early on.

[carbsmith]

Originally Posted by broadrun96

If they want to make it a rule then yes, yes it is. It's a BS run of penalties given other teams were given a verbal warning for things with much greater impact on the racing but .1L, which was not found out until the car was ripped apart to check every last drop, gets you excluded? Sorry but over pressure and under minimum refueling actually impacts the racing and should be more than a Don't do that again or we'll tell you not to do it again ruling

It was .1L before they "ripped the car apart" to show it was more, and you should know as much.

Pre-race scrutineering only allows a car to take part in the Competition. This allowance is certified by a
dedicated sticker (see Article 7.1.8).
The fact that a car, part or Competitor has satisfied its obligations concerning pre-race scrutineering presumes nothing of its conformity to the applicable Technical Regulations, which is of the exclusive responsibility of the Competitor (see Article 1.3.3).
Pre-race scrutineering concerns a minima:
o Documents, such as (non-exhaustive): the equipment declaration form (which must be continually updated during the Competition), the Homologation Form of the cars.
o Safety features and devices of the cars.
o Safety features and devices of the drivers, such as (non-exhaustive): the homologation of the overalls, helmets and frontal head restraint devices (in the conditions defined in Appendix L to the Code). No modification to the helmet and frontal head restraint device is authorised apart from those homologated. For easier identification and for the unity of the crews, the drivers of one and the same car are obliged to wear identical overalls.

Competitors must ensure that their cars satisfy the conditions of eligibility, compliance with the technical regulations, and safety throughout the Competition. The presentation of a car for scrutineering will be deemed an implicit statement by the Competitor of the conformity of the car.

Specifically pre-race inspection is just weighing the car, laser scanning it to see if anything on the outside doesn't match homologation, and doing a visual inspection.

The penalty for mid-session BoP infractions are directly stated in the sporting regulations. The only ones you don't get at least one reprimand for before a time penalty in a race session are using more 1.02x or more than the maximum fuel per lap, using more than the maximum fuel per stint, team fault for fuel flow meter error, and messing with sensor signals, as well as the mandatory repair for CAN channel errors and excessive cockpit temps. Overboosting and under-lambda are each 5s stop go penalties on the second offense and 30 on the third offense, which rather covers the .5s you might gain from a single overboost in the right place. Even American open wheel has never strictly enforced maximum boost limits as such, you'd just get hammered by the pop-off valve opening up or the spec ECU's hard cut when you overboost.

[Akrapovic]

Just to point out, the car was not 0.1L over. It was at least 0.1L over.

http://www.dailysportscar.com/wp-con...lification.pdf

"The "Maximum Onboard Fuel Volume" of the car, measured by the scrutineers using calibrated measuring churns, was found to be at leasy 96.1 lites. As the fuel volume recovered by draining out the fuel already exceeded the maximum permitted volume, the Scrutineers reported to the Stewards that they did not open the tank and recover the fuel that is usually found in the tank after the draining procedure is complete, meaning the complete on-board volume is likely to be greater than the measured amount.

The car failed the checks before they even completed them. It was then rechecked by the scrutineers and found to be greater than the 96.1 lites discovered in the first check. Keating observed the second check and agreed with it.

It also clarifies how Ford/Keating checked the car beforehand - using weight and density. So someone did some incorrect maths, rather than good old fashioned fill it and see.

Still gutted - it was the car I wanted to win. But someone made an ar*e of this one, unfortunately. And since Keating rightly said he put it on max fuel usage during his hero stint at the end, using the argument of "we didn't use it" doesn't work

[dwh43scale]

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmEmCvQZ

May I offer you some respite from the rather messy end to proceedings with my gallery from Saturday - gallery for Sunday to follow in the next day or so.

[Peter Mallett]

It's many years since I wielded a camera at a modern meeting and it's also many years since I was at an event as a spectator so, I took rather a lot of photos, of which I've posted the one's I like the best. Tried to capture all the cars but who knows I may have missed a few.

Sunday https://flic.kr/s/aHsmEmLDLT

Saturday https://www.flickr.com/gp/40981912@N03/7p6nmV

Thursday Qual: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmEmm1dt

Thursday Ferrari Challenge: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmEmb1Ln

Thursday RTLM: https://flic.kr/s/aHsmEmg2ad

Wednesday: https://www.flickr.com/gp/40981912@N03/Lzv5q5

Hope they captured the weekend, we really enjoyed ourselves.

[Mike E]

Some background on the Bentley that ran in the Road to Le Mans races.

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/arti...sa-connection/

[Slowsley]

Well, one thing is clear: since the race finished, it’s nothing but talk about the losers, conspiracy theories, and what’s wrong with WEC/ACO. This just after what many called a golden age.

[Slowsley]

But how about those Porsche Curves this year huh? They seemed particularly hungry this year.

[chernaudi]

Sadly, I think that Audi Sport spoiled us (and the ACO) for sticking around for so long in the top class. Same for when we had Audi, Porsche and Toyota fielding competitive cars at LM.

Not to mention that quite a few people have developed a dislike of the current rules package for LM and the WEC, the ACO clamping down on some stuff at the track itself, and people having a dislike of certain figures within the ACO and FIA.

Believe me, the same thing has happened with NASCAR because of the on-track product not living up to expectations. When that happens, the blame game starts.

[Simmi]

I definitely thought it was an improvement on last year's race - which was a low point for me in my time attending. Some niggling regulation stuff still jars and I don't trust the ACO to close things up next year. Some decent-sized shunts meant safety cars which did mess things up a bit. Shame about the late F-up from Toyota but it will at least make the race stand out further in the memory in years to go. Respect to Toyota, they are running almost faultlessly these days reliability-wise.

Probably had our best pitch ever in Houx this year which was good. Also managed to go in the Ford GT pits for final qualifying which was an amazing experience.

Finding myself getting the camera out less and less at Le Mans these days. Difficult to do anything too unique and I struggle for motivation to be honest. That said, here's some photos from the race:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/949985...57709154323182

1 by Richard Simpson, on Flickr
6 by Richard Simpson, on Flickr
2 by Richard Simpson, on Flickr
https://www.flickr.com/photos/949985...7709154323182/
4 by Richard Simpson, on Flickr
5 by Richard Simpson, on Flickr

[Peter Mallett]

Good pics. Certainly shooting below the fencekine gives a better result, instead of looking down all the time.

[dwh43scale]

https://flic.kr/s/aHsmEnCv1g

Sunday gallery now up. As some may know I contribute to www.pistonclick.com (LM report will follow shortly). Originally planned to only take my point and shoot and do a different sort of report but at the last moment decided to take the DSLR and glad I did. Need to take the long zoom next year though ... plus a lens elf to carry it round for me.

Playing around with some slower shutter speeds at Tertre Rouge plus some through the fence at Dunlop which I have tended to shy away from in the past. It's a bit like Silverstone in terms of riding a decent backdrop but overall broadly happy with the results.

[S griffin]

Tom Dillman has admitted Kolles weren’t ready for Le Mans. I guess it’s hard with the Super Season being a bit continuous.

Aston felt their chances were hamped by the late BoP changes

[Damian Baldi]

DragonSpeed have had the intention to use the Ginetta-AER instead BR1-Gibson in Le Mans?

DragonSpeed Bow Out Of LMP1, But Reveal A Request Was Made To Race A Different LMP1

Just before the #10 BR1 Gibson left the pits for the final time, the car expiring out on the circuit, DragonSpeed’s LMP1 adventure ending in the darkness, DSC caught up with Team Owner Elton Julian:

“We’re fighting on, we always do, but it feels like a losing battle with the car. We’ve tried to fix the problems, Dallara has tried to fix the problems, but ultimately it’s been a bridge too far.

“We knew it would be like this here, and we tried, really very hard, to get agreement from the organisers to run a different car here in LMP1. The discussions went a long way down the road but ultimately we did not get the necessary approval. With the hindsight that’s a real shame.”

DSC believes that the team requested, but were denied, an opportunity to exchange the BR1 for the Ginetta AER for Le Mans. It is understood that another team requested, but was refused, an exchange of car earlier in the season outside LMP1.

source

[gert]

Originally Posted by Damian Baldi

DragonSpeed have had the intention to use the Ginetta-AER instead BR1-Gibson in Le Mans?

source

That was posted on the WEC Ginetta LMP1 thread too. Like I said there:

I fail to see who had anything to gain actually.

* The BR1 is not a bad car, otherwise SMP would not have had the results either
* Dragonspeed seems to be unable to get the car sorted. Does that tell us something about the car, or something about the team itself?

Now let them change the BR1 to a car they have 0 experience with, and that hasn't been raced for a year.
I'll agree that the Ginetta has been developed and upgraded and all, but I don't think it is at BR1 level yet, certainly not in the hands of a team that has no experience with it.

Let's say they achieve the same results as with their BR1, then what would be the conclusion?
* the Ginetta is still no good ?
or
* the Ginetta is still not reliable (enough) ?
or
* Dragonspeed is not the right team to run such a car ?
or
* ...


I don't think Dragonspeed would have gained anything in this scenario and I'm not sure it would have done Ginetta a lot of good either, by putting in a race rather unprepared.

Let them prepare for 2019-2020 and we'll see at the races what the car is worth.

Originally Posted by Damian Baldi

source

I would guess that to be Racing Team Nederland. AFAIK they are the only team that is known to switch chassis between now and the 2019/2020 season. IMO it was a WEC teams and not a LMS team since they could change chassis at the start of 2019 (see Highclass Racing)

[Damian Baldi]

I think the BR1-Gibson could be a difficult combination to put together. It has proved to be fast, but very few reliable.


About DragonSpeed trying to run a Ginetta, I think it could be more an idea from Ginetta, than a desire of DragonSpeed.

[carbsmith]

I wouldn't worry about Dragonspeed being able to sort out the car because it almost certainly would have been a factory Ginetta run under Dragonspeed's entry, perhaps most cynically in the way ESM rented out their second WEC slot for a couple rounds after they decided they were quitting. Which is probably not an unconsidered factor in not allowing it. The ACO doesn't want people selling on their Le Mans entries, you either race it as intended or withdraw and let a reserve in.

The RTN change for next season is also in large part about a switch from a Dutch collaboration to TDS Racing rent a team. They're just straight up buying a winning package and plugging their livery and drivers in, I don't think they'd buy an ORECA if it was still going to be run by Davytec.

[maximus]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Just to point out, the car was not 0.1L over. It was at least 0.1L over.

http://www.dailysportscar.com/wp-con...lification.pdf

"The "Maximum Onboard Fuel Volume" of the car, measured by the scrutineers using calibrated measuring churns, was found to be at leasy 96.1 lites. As the fuel volume recovered by draining out the fuel already exceeded the maximum permitted volume, the Scrutineers reported to the Stewards that they did not open the tank and recover the fuel that is usually found in the tank after the draining procedure is complete, meaning the complete on-board volume is likely to be greater than the measured amount.

The car failed the checks before they even completed them. It was then rechecked by the scrutineers and found to be greater than the 96.1 lites discovered in the first check. Keating observed the second check and agreed with it.

It also clarifies how Ford/Keating checked the car beforehand - using weight and density. So someone did some incorrect maths, rather than good old fashioned fill it and see.

Still gutted - it was the car I wanted to win. But someone made an ar*e of this one, unfortunately. And since Keating rightly said he put it on max fuel usage during his hero stint at the end, using the argument of "we didn't use it" doesn't work

It sucks because I was rooting for the Keating car to win too, but at the end of the day no other car apart from the Ford GT fell foul of this and rules are rules.

[Akrapovic]

https://racer.com/2019/06/19/insight...Ffz7oldmmcnqH0

0.4L over.

[tux]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

https://racer.com/2019/06/19/insight...Ffz7oldmmcnqH0

0.4L over.

Don’t worry about facts, it’s obvious it’s all a conspiracy because those pesky French hate IMSA and the USA......

[Adam43]

For interest here is the gap between the #7 and #8. When 8 is ahead it is positive, when 7 ahead it is negative. Pitstops for each car are shown above and below the 0 axis.

Let me know if you have any suggestions on the format