F1 Strat Group wants less driver penalties on overtake attempts

[John S]

Stewards to be told back off, for sake of show - obviously.

Now for me the rules is the rules, too many drivers already exceed the track limits without real loss of anything, isn't this just a veiled invitation for bumper car racing?

Can't help noticing also that one M Verstappen has a rather high tally, see the driver penalty list from last year below, and Red Bull have not had an awful lot going their way in other regulatory areas.

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/f1-chiefs-to-demand-stewards-leniency-to-help-overtaking-668816/


Who racked up the most penalty points in 15 season?

Max Verstappen - 8 (Monaco: 2; Hungary 3; Abu Dhabi: 3)

Pastor Maldonado - 6 (Malaysia: 3; Hungary 2; Brazil: 1)

Nico Hulkenberg - 4 (Malaysia: 2; Singapore: 2)

Romain Grosjean - 4 (Canada: 2; Hungary: 2)

Marcus Ericsson - 4 (Austria: 2; Italy 2)

Sebastian Vettel - 3 (Canada)

Kimi Raikkonen - 3 (Russia)

Two points - Sergio Perez, Felipe Nasr, Fernando Alonso, Jenson Button, Daniil Kvyat, Lewis Hamilton, Roberto Merhi, Valtteri Bottas

Zero points - Daniel Ricciardo, Nico Rosberg, Felipe Massa, Will Stevens, Carlos Sainz, Alexander Rossi

[Irisado]

Bring back real grass and gravel and the drivers will not keep running wide, rendering that particular issue null and void.

[Scott]

There has to be a better way than penalties for running off track.  How about instead of flat asphalt, build rumble strips on them that if they don't damage the car, they sure shake the car enough to make the driver lift and lose time.  I get why grass and gravel aren't ideal.

[Jericoke]

There has to be a better way than penalties for running off track.  How about instead of flat asphalt, build rumble strips on them that if they don't damage the car, they sure shake the car enough to make the driver lift and lose time.  I get why grass and gravel aren't ideal.

That even fits the ethos of motorsports influencing daily road driving.  Many of our highways make use of rumblestrips if you get too close to the edge of the road.

Would even add some noise to the proceedings.

[Scott]

Would even add some noise to the proceedings.

 

[Monty]

Bring back real grass and gravel and the drivers will not keep running wide, rendering that particular issue null and void.

^^^ What he said ^^^

I guess that will never happen so I think we need to turn to technology. Surely there must be an accurate way of detecting if a car exceeds track limits and when it does, the ECU should restrict power for a full lap.

[J.Clark]

With all of the technology and accuracy of tracking the car's exact position, perhaps something along the lines of a "shock collar" used on pets, but that influences the cars' performance.  A cut-back on power for say, 1 second should a driver get all four wheels off the track.

[Jericoke]

With all of the technology and accuracy of tracking the car's exact position, perhaps something along the lines of a "shock collar" used on pets, but that influences the cars' performance.  A cut-back on power for say, 1 second should a driver get all four wheels off the track.

That's an interesting idea for penalties as a whole.  No need for a stop and go, just disable the turbo for 20 seconds* (with appropriate warning light for trailing cars).

I wouldn't want the power cut to be instantaneous to the driver though, that could be dangerous if the car in front suddenly loses power.  However, if they go off track, they would get a warning light (and a tail light for trailing cars) to let them know the penalty was imminent.

*This is just an arbitrary suggestion. Between ERS, Turbo and DRS, there are plenty of variables available to penalize a car without clogging up the pit lane.

[Scott]

Monty, JC & Jeri have nailed it.  The ECU could revolutionize all kinds of penalties, from blue flag infringements to off track excursions, to negligent collisions.  As long as the FIA didn't screw it up (damn, back to the drawing board!). 

Seriously, it would be a brilliant way to sort things out and only have small penalties for small infringements and longer and/or more sever cuts in power for the major stuff.   

[Monty]

As long as the FIA didn't screw it up (damn, back to the drawing board!). 

So true 

[Irisado]

Playing with the cars using technology during the race is an invitation to causing an accident.  What happens if the warning light fails to come on, the turbo is deactivated, and the car following cannons over the rear of the penalised car in front?  That's just one example.  There's also the question of what happens if the technology fails and the penalty cannot be applied.

There is no need for a complicated solution when you can change the track to solve the issue as I stated earlier.

[Scott]

I'm inclined to trust the technology rather than the status quo.  IMO

[Jericoke]

Playing with the cars using technology during the race is an invitation to causing an accident.  What happens if the warning light fails to come on, the turbo is deactivated, and the car following cannons over the rear of the penalised car in front?  That's just one example.  There's also the question of what happens if the technology fails and the penalty cannot be applied.

There is no need for a complicated solution when you can change the track to solve the issue as I stated earlier.

Putting the cost back on tracks who already skirt bankruptcy just for the 'privilege' of hosting a race?

[J.Clark]

I don't mind at all if they penalize a driver for leaving the circuit and gaining an advantage as a result.

I do think they get too involved in some of the other matters though, particularly in crashes.

[Irisado]

I'm inclined to trust the technology rather than the status quo.  IMO

You have more confidence in it than I do.  I still remember the first race they brought traction control back in 2001, and everyone thought it would be relatively straightforward, and four cars stalled on the grid during the first race it was used.

Times have changed and things have moved on, but I remain highly dubious as to the kind of technology being described to regulate the speed of one car compared to the others being reliable or safe.

Putting the cost back on tracks who already skirt bankruptcy just for the 'privilege' of hosting a race?

The FIA can fund the changes.  After all, it was their decision to sanitise all the circuits in the first place.