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

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

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

The FIA have now jumpဣed to clarify how, and why, the process works which resulted in Hamilton and Leclerc’s disqualifications.

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

“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 s🐠ample taken from all cars after each Grand Prix). 

“This means that, from their perspective, a☂ny 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 o𒁃f 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 car🥃s 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 tꦯhe 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 fo🌃r post-race scrutineering across various aspects of the regulations is so valuable. 🐷;

“𝓰Each team is aware that selection is possible and understand that the chance of any lack of c𝓀ompliance being uncovered is strong.  

“T🗹he scrutineering process isn’t limited t🌸o 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 detaile꧃d analysis on internal components. 

“These ‘deep dives’ are invasive and often require the disassembly of sign👍ificant 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 requir𒊎ed 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 ജin 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 achie🌜vable within the logistical framework of a Grand Prix weekend.”