The Mercedes driver impressed with a podium finish but he and Ferrari’s Charles Lec✅lerc were later DQ’d by the FIA after their post-race checks uncovered excessive plank wear underneath their cars.

Hamilton, Leclerc, Max Verstappen and Lando Norris’ cars were the four that were randomly chosen to be investigated post-race, and Verstappen’s an♏d Norris’ were in compliance with the rules.

That led Sky’s Martin 🤡Brundle to question if a 50% compliance-rate was worthy of the FIA reconsidering how they conduct their 🌱checks.

The FIA have now jumped to clarify how, and why, the process works which resulted in Hamilton and Lec൲lerc’s dꦆisqualifications.

“The answer is that a series of random checks are ca𝓡rrওied out every weekend on different areas of the cars,” an FIA statement explained.

“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 b✅efore 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 𓃲that, 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 majo𒆙rity of the time, all cars are found to be compliant. 

“However, as happe🔥ned in Austin, breaches of the rules are occasionally found and reported to the Stewards, whꩵo 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 – an🐓d this is especially true of back-to-back race weekends when freight deadlin⭕es must also be considered.

“This is why the process of randomly selecting a number of cars foᩚᩚᩚᩚᩚᩚ⁤⁤⁤⁤ᩚ⁤⁤𓃲⁤⁤ᩚ⁤⁤⁤⁤ᩚ𒀱ᩚᩚᩚr post-race scrutineering across various aspects of the regulations is so valuable. 

“Each team is aware that selection is possible and understand that the c꧑hance of any lack of compliance being uncovered is strong.  

“The scrutineering process isn’t limited to post-♛qualify💃ing and post-race checks. 

“The FIA also co♌nducts 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 c🍒omponents. 

“These ‘deep dives’ are invasive and often require the disassembly of significant co𓆉mponents 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 verifi⛄cation 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 being𒁏 practically achievable within the logistical framework of a Grand Prix weekend.”