Benetton's Side of 1994: The Plank

The infamous wooden skid block exceeded the wear limit, but it passed the weight test.

Sing before breakfast, you’ll cry before night. In the first four months of the 1994 season, Benetton celebrated the unprecedented for them amount of success in Formula 1. However, in July and August, the team found themselves at the center of controversies and allegations. From tasting champagne to swallowing bitter pills. From looking at the paddock from the highest steps of podiums, to being look at with suspicious glances by the media, FIA, and rivals. It all went downhill during the hottest months of summer.

Truth be told, even before the first black flag controversy, there had been rumors and allegations circulating in the paddock. Benetton's success had attracted attention and raised suspicions of cheating.

According to Ross Brawn it had a lot to do with them being a team owned by a fashion brand:

It was a terrible period, obviously, and it became very highly charged politically. In that environment I think we became focused on for all the wrong reasons. Here we were, a T-shirt manufacturer, beating McLaren, Williams and Ferrari, who felt they had a God-given right to win GPs. That went against the grain. They had to explain to their sponsors and boards why they were being beaten by someone so inconsequential. The easy reason was that we were supposedly using traction control, doing this, doing that.

In hindsight, it’s not a surprise that people like Brawn, Rory Byrne, Pat Symonds, Nikolas Tombazis to just name a few brought success. But back then, just like Michael Schumacher, they hadn’t achieved more in the sport than occasional wins. The only man in the team with F1 championships on his resume, at least among the higher ranks, was Frank Dernie.

The black flag incident at Silverstone, the hidden code for launch control in the B194’s software and the pit lane fire at Hockenheim caused, according to the FIA, by a removal of an internal filter, only made the group of those convinced that Benetton had been achieving their glory via illegal means, to grow in numbers. And the end of August gave them another reason to strengthen their belief.

Wooden Skid Block

Not much there is to say about the 1994 Belgian Grand Prix, other than that Rubens Barrichello took his maiden pole in a Jordan, and probably the two most famous corners in Formula 1 – Eau Rouge and Raidillon were slowed down by an artificial chicane.

The weekend is famous for another reason: Schumacher crossed the finish line as the winner, only to be disqualified later due to excessive wear on the plank mounted to the underside of the B194.

Skid block was a safety measure introduced for the German Grand Prix, and it has been a part of Formula 1 ever since. Its purpose has been to limit the minimum ride height. The skid block is 10 millimeters thick, and only 1 millimeter of wear is permitted.

Schumacher’s plank exceeded the limit. Instead of 9, it was 7.4 millimeters thick for a portion 80 centimeters long, close to its front edge. The team tried to explain it by referencing an unspecified problem that Schumacher encountered during a pit stop. When that explanation failed, they pointed to their driver’s spin on the kerb at the exit of Fagnes on lap 19. Finally, Benetton brought up the plank’s weight. All to no avail.

Benetton contested the disqualification. Their appeal was included in the hearing before the World Motorsport Council concerning the Hockenheim fire. On September 7, the disqualification was upheld.

Accidental Damage

Steve Matchett, in the episode of Formula One Decade covering the race in question, stated that if a plank was damaged in an accident, it must have also been weighed. If its weight was within 90% of its original weight, the plank had to be deemed legal.

On lap 19, Schumacher spun out at the exit of Fagnes, causing the underside of the car to slide on the kerb. Benetton asserted that the skid block was damaged due to the spin and, as a result, should be weighted.

Schumacher's plank successfully passed the weight test.

Here is how Brawn recalled the disqualification in Total Competition:

In Spa we had worn the plank too much at the front, but we’d also smashed it, it was substantially damaged. Michael had been over some curbs and smashed the plank up. So we said, ‘It’s damaged and therefore you have to weigh it. That’s what the rule says. If a plank is damaged you don’t measure it anymore, you weigh it.’ And the FIA said, ‘No, we are doing both.’ And we lost that one. For me that was black and white. The rules said it can’t wear more than 9 mm but if the plank is damaged you weigh it, you don’t measure it anymore. And it was interpreted differently to how it should have been. So I lost the one that I thought was really a slam dunk and an easy decision.

Matchett's and Brawn's accounts differ in one thing. The former doesn’t mention the wear at the front, which is the basis for the disqualification, only notes the scratches at the rear caused by the serrated kerb.

Rainy, Sunny Spa

The plank’s weight was also bitterly brought by Symonds, who had been Schumacher’s race engineer, in an interview given in 2007. He additionally mentioned one more important thing: the weather during the 1994 Belgian Grand Prix weekend. The race was dry, but it had been raining on Friday and Saturday. The morning warm-up, a brief 30-minute practice session held on Sundays and ultimately abandoned in 2003, took place on a damp track that was gradually drying out.

Back then, to set up a car for wet weather, engineers raised its ride height, among other adjustments, to prevent it from bottoming out on wet, slippery surfaces. Today, this issue is addressed by tires. Intermediates and full wets slightly elevate the car. However, in the 1990s, the aforementioned method was employed.

With no opportunity for dry running, there was insufficient time to adjust the ride height for dry conditions, except during reconnaissance laps just before the start of the race. Additionally, the plank was a new thing, introduced only two races prior.

On different occasions, Symonds admitted that Schumacher, right before the start of the race, had asked him to raise the ride height because he had been bottoming out during a reconnaissance lap. At that time, teams could do that. Nowadays it’s illegal due to the parc fermé rules, which have been in effect since 2003.

Political Tension

Symonds stated in 2007 that the disqualification at the Spa event was politically motivated to prevent Schumacher from winning the championship. While this remains speculation, the rift between the FIA and Benetton's top management in 1994 is a documented fact.

After the tragic events at Imola and Karl Wendlinger's near-fatal accident during the first practice session in Monaco, the governing body hastily implemented regulation changes to slow the cars down. It didn’t sit well with certain teams.

Benetton, McLaren, Williams, Jordan, Lotus and Footwork went on strike and demanded a meeting with the FIA President, Max Mosley, during the Spanish Grand Prix weekend. The meeting took place. The parties found a compromise.

But before the protest took place, the Team Principal at Benetton, Flavio Briatore, had written a very critical open letter to Mosley. Together with Tom Walkinshaw, the Engineering Director, he had circulated it to the media. According to Brawn, it haunted the team for the rest of the season:

Flavio and Tom were behind that famous letter which suggested Max wasn’t fit to run F1 and, as an engineer I saw we were getting out payback. There was no discretion shown in any way, shape and form towards us. We were given no leeway at all. We only had to stray one fraction and we would get hammered.

For certain, Benetton received no leniency from the stewards at Spa. However, should the team have been granted some consideration, given the circumstances?