Following the disqualification of Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc, the FIA has shed light on its post-race scrutineering procedures.

The disqualification of the two led to the inevitable backlash on social media where those still arguing the case for the British driver in Abu Dhabi in 2021, claimed that the seven-time world champion had been picked on once again.

In reaction to the claims, and in a bid to dispel any notion of bias, the FIA has shed light on its post-race scrutineering processes.

A series of random checks are carried out every weekend on different areas of the cars," it explains. "This process has been in place for many decades, and exists to ensure compliance with the regulations by virtue of the fact that the teams do not know before the race which specific areas of which cars might be examined beyond the standard checks carried out on every car each weekend (such as the fuel sample taken from all cars after each Grand Prix).

This means that, from their perspective, any part of the car could be checked at any time, and the consequences for non-compliance with the Technical Regulations can be severe.

The FIA's F1 technical team has a wealth of experience, as well as data from a plethora of sources and sensors that help inform decisions on what aspects of compliance might be checked.

The vast majority of the time, all cars are found to be compliant. However, as happened in Austin, breaches of the rules are occasionally found and reported to the stewards, who decide the appropriate action to take.

In conducting these tests, a huge amount of work goes on in the limited time available after a Grand Prix finishes and before the cars need to be returned to their teams for disassembly and transportation to the next race. However, even though a wide array of checks are made, it is impossible to cover every parameter of every car in the short time available, and this is especially true of back-to-back race weekends when freight deadlines must also be considered.

This is why the process of randomly selecting a number of cars for post-race scrutineering across various aspects of the regulations is so valuable. Each team is aware that selection is possible and understand that the chance of any lack of compliance being uncovered is strong.

The scrutineering process isn't limited to post-qualifying and post-race checks. The FIA also conducts additional examinations between qualifying and the race, and as well as the number of cars selected for post-race checks, at least one is selected for even more detailed analysis on internal components.

These 'deep dives' are invasive and often require the disassembly of significant components that are not regularly checked due to the time it takes to carry out the procedure. This process involves comparing the physical components with CAD files the teams are required to supply to the FIA, as well as verification of team data that is constantly monitored by the FIA's software engineers.

As with everything in Formula 1, the process has evolved and been refined over the years to constitute the most stringent and thorough method of monitoring F1's incredibly complex current-generation cars, acting as a serious deterrent while being practically achievable within the logistical framework of a Grand Prix weekend.

In Austin, the cars of Hamilton and Leclerc were not the only two cars to be checked post-race, for those of Verstappen and Lando Norris were also checked but found to be fully legal.

Check out our Thursday gallery from Mexico City here.

LATEST NEWS

more news >

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

Click to go to the main galleries section

READERS COMMENTS

1. Posted by dejan, 28/10/2023 0:20

"@Tardis40 - The 50% that were found to be legal benefited by moving at least a place up because of Hamilton's DQ.

Even if one is found to be illegal, that should trigger checking all of the other cars as well. Every car that is found to be legal after that check would potentially benefit from moving up in the classification."

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

2. Posted by Tardis40, 27/10/2023 16:40

"People keep saying that 50% were illegal and there should be ramifications based on that.

Well 50% were legal. What should the ramifications be for that?

"

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

3. Posted by kenji, 27/10/2023 4:20

"@Defiant...Thanks for your comment. If one was a cynic ,Hamilton's comments re 'others' could be seen as an attempted distraction to lessen adverse reactions resulting from bending the rules for a specific [ increased downforce ] benefit. "

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by Defiant, 27/10/2023 1:34

"I pretty much agree with every comment here. The first two post particularly make a lot of sense. I also agree with kenji here, if you're gonna make an accusation like that don't do it half baked. Finish your statement otherwise it's just gossip."

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

5. Posted by kenji, 26/10/2023 23:43

"Now that a couple of cars/drivers have been disqualified the calls for further post race testing have been amplified somewhat and that is not without some merit. However, Hamilton has now 'bet his bank balance' on the information he has that others were in breach as well....without naming those teams!! That is a very serious claim and surely casts a pall over the entire F1 field bringing the sport into serious disrepute. Until he names names his statement is simply an opinion and as we all know opinions are not facts. There's no halfway house here to park rumours. Why aren't LibertyFOM/FIA all making noises for Hamilton to make a full and frank disclosure? Fess up or shut up!"

Rating: Positive (2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

6. Posted by Burton, 26/10/2023 17:35

"When half the cars checked are illegal, test more, especially the sister cars of the illegal ones.

Also, now it's a ground effect formula and there's tangible advantage of running as low as possible (wearing out the plank) maybe this test should become part of the standard mandatory checks, like the fuel sample."

Rating: Positive (4) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

7. Posted by Ricardo_sanchez, 26/10/2023 17:16

"@Spindoctor - the cars of Verstappen and Norris were checked. "

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

8. Posted by Spindoctor, 26/10/2023 16:04

"@Motorsport-fan & @Team Hack have hit the proverbial nail.

In many other branches of Motorsport the winning cars are usually checked (after all they are most likely to have been "fiddled"). What's the point of randomly checking a Williams or Haas?
Wer'll never know if (say) Lando or VMax also had worn-down planks....

In this instance given F1's existing procedures, it seems odd that with a 50% failure rate more cars weren't checked. Surely had more than a few more cars failed the test it would have indicated a systemic problem with how the race was organised & run? Maybe the lack of setup time in a bumpy partly resurfaced track had something to do with it?"

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

9. Posted by Team Hack, 26/10/2023 10:15

"To longer term enthusiasts this is all totally normal and similar procedures have been in place throughout motorsport over many years from Clubbies to F1.
I would imagine that most of the chagrin is from the newer fans brought in by Liberty who understandably will not usually have an in depth knowledge on the machinations of behind the scenes of motorsport.
Whether or not these procedures are fair or not,it is the same for everyone and most of the time competitors accept that certain checks will potentially be carried out at some time and for various areas of the car.

I do however agree with @Motorsport-fan that checks should be carried out on all points paying positions INCLUDING those who inherit points due to the transgressions of others in front of them."

Rating: Positive (12) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

10. Posted by Motorsport-fan, 26/10/2023 9:32

"I think what irks everyone is that only 4 cars where checked, 50% of those 4 being found illegal, it appears the cars inheriting positions due to the disqualifications where not checked, surely it would not have taken to much time to do a plank thickness check on all the cars in points positions."

Rating: Positive (12) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

FIA sheds light on post-race scrutineering procedures

LATEST NEWS

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST IMAGES

POST A COMMENT

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

Share this page