The British Grand Prix 2016

[John S]

It took the stewards THREE HOURS to decide on a penalty for the radio advice.  If it takes longer than a race to decide if the radio call was illegal... there is no way it was illegal.  Mercedes had maybe 60 seconds to decide what they could say.  If the Stewards can't decide it's illegal in 60 seconds, then it's not.

Otherwise, ban team radio 100%, and make all communication through an FIA appointed middleman.  The team tell them what to say, and on the spot they decide what to transmit.  It might slow things down a little bit, but it will take this ridiculous element out of the sport.

I think the stewards decided to deal with the matter after the race because they did not have the data about how critical to safety the situation was. Only Merc would have the data on the car actual systems and I presume they would have been ordered to take relevant info to the stewards room before the penalty was given.

Personally I don't think the situation was ever safety critical, terminal for the car probably without the reset issued by the team but not really a safety issue.

Faced with the car coming to a halt the team took the decision to broadcast an illegal message as they had nothing to lose, an exclusion from the race would be the same as a DNF at that point - anything else was a bonus. 3rd turns out to be a very big bonus.

On the point of only penalising the team; if my above assertion is correct, and I'd stake my house that it is, then the driver benefited as much as the team from the illegal radio traffic.

 

[Scott]

The enforcement of the out-of-bounds regs was ridiculously random at Silverstone. In Q3, the stewards took down Lewis's first timed lap for having all four wheels over the line. In Q1, K-Mag did the same thing on the same corner and the lap was let stand. That bumped Button down to P16 & out of Q2. Kimi had a similar out of bounds in Q2 & the lap was allowed.

Just for info K Mag did have a lap deleted for exceeding track limits at Copse, which is where Lewis went off as well. The lap that stood for K Mag to get trough to Q2 had him off the track at Woodcote - which the marshals/stewards were ignoring for some reason as plenty of drivers ran wide there. I reckon they decided there were not enough personnel, or hours in the day, to police the whole track so they just concentrated on certain corners. Bring back gravel beyond the kerbs - failing that put some of them sausage kerbs from Austria in.

 

It was more likely that they chose to enforce at corners where there was an actual advantage running wide.  As for gravel, I always hated gravel ending a drivers race, though I completely agree there should still be some sort of penalty for exceeding track limits, but prefer it to be an electronic version, and immediate.  Take the stewards out of the equation and put sensors in the track and car.  Over?  Penalty.  Not over?  No penalty.

[Scott]

I think the stewards decided to deal with the matter after the race because they did not have the data about how critical to safety the situation was. Only Merc would have the data on the car actual systems and I presume they would have been ordered to take relevant info to the stewards room before the penalty was given.

Personally I don't think the situation was ever safety critical, terminal for the car probably without the reset issued by the team but not really a safety issue.

I think the rule stipulates that they are allowed to give instructions if saves the car from a mechanical DNF.  What seems to be the question is whether it really would have resulted in a DNF or just reduced performance.  Of course they could have just told him to change some settings and leave it as vague as that.  I don't think Nico would have figured it out on his own, but you never know.

I'm waiting for Ali's check in and clarification of the rules to be sure... 

[Jericoke]

The enforcement of the out-of-bounds regs was ridiculously random at Silverstone. In Q3, the stewards took down Lewis's first timed lap for having all four wheels over the line. In Q1, K-Mag did the same thing on the same corner and the lap was let stand. That bumped Button down to P16 & out of Q2. Kimi had a similar out of bounds in Q2 & the lap was allowed.

Just for info K Mag did have a lap deleted for exceeding track limits at Copse, which is where Lewis went off as well. The lap that stood for K Mag to get trough to Q2 had him off the track at Woodcote - which the marshals/stewards were ignoring for some reason as plenty of drivers ran wide there. I reckon they decided there were not enough personnel, or hours in the day, to police the whole track so they just concentrated on certain corners. Bring back gravel beyond the kerbs - failing that put some of them sausage kerbs from Austria in.

 

It was more likely that they chose to enforce at corners where there was an actual advantage running wide.  As for gravel, I always hated gravel ending a drivers race, though I completely agree there should still be some sort of penalty for exceeding track limits, but prefer it to be an electronic version, and immediate.  Take the stewards out of the equation and put sensors in the track and car.  Over?  Penalty.  Not over?  No penalty.

I like the idea, but thinking it through, if you've cut the corner you're probably in a tight fight for position.  If your car immediately slows down, there's a risk of the trailing car crashing, and being truly vicitimized.

Instead of an immediate power cut, it would come in, say, 10 seconds.  The light on the back of the car would turn blue (or whatever) to warn trailing cars a passing opportunity is about to happen.

I like the punishing feature of the gravel traps, but they aren't safe.  It takes equipment to move a car, and we want as little extra equipment/people in the areas an F1 car might occupy at high speed.

[Alianora La Canta]

It took the stewards THREE HOURS to decide on a penalty for the radio advice.  If it takes longer than a race to decide if the radio call was illegal... there is no way it was illegal.  Mercedes had maybe 60 seconds to decide what they could say.  If the Stewards can't decide it's illegal in 60 seconds, then it's not.

Otherwise, ban team radio 100%, and make all communication through an FIA appointed middleman.  The team tell them what to say, and on the spot they decide what to transmit.  It might slow things down a little bit, but it will take this ridiculous element out of the sport.

I think the stewards decided to deal with the matter after the race because they did not have the data about how critical to safety the situation was. Only Merc would have the data on the car actual systems and I presume they would have been ordered to take relevant info to the stewards room before the penalty was given.

Personally I don't think the situation was ever safety critical, terminal for the car probably without the reset issued by the team but not really a safety issue.

Faced with the car coming to a halt the team took the decision to broadcast an illegal message as they had nothing to lose, an exclusion from the race would be the same as a DNF at that point - anything else was a bonus. 3rd turns out to be a very big bonus.

On the point of only penalising the team; if my above assertion is correct, and I'd stake my house that it is, then the driver benefited as much as the team from the illegal radio traffic.

They had 3 different statements to judge and needed a full car data download to analyse to confirm if even the first of them was legitimate. This is because they have to check there was no possibility that the team could have had a secondary purpose to their call, that it wasn't pulling double-duty by carrying both a legal and an illegal message; it's not as simple as it is for the team, who simply have to decide if there's a critical problem (using data that, for the most part, is also not available to the stewards until investigation commences, and hence has to be analysed separately from the incident) and - if they care about not getting a penalty - stick to expressing just what the rules permit in that situation.

The third of the three statements to be investigated could probably have been confirmed as against the rules without even bothering to replay it, but parts 1 and 2 were more difficult. (Part 1 was eventually declared legitimate due to an unpublished technical directive and Part 2 was ruled part and parcel of the definitely-illegitimate part 3). Stewards could not provide a ruling until all 3 messages' validity had been determined.

Of course, having part of what is permitted to be said be dependent on an unpublished technical directive (the one that permitted chassis default sensors to be bypassed via radio command) can't possibly help the stewards' jobs!

As for the track limits, my Dad suggested a plan I like. Put four big yellow lights at the back of each car. Light one each time a driver has 4 wheels cross a white line. 4 lights during the race weekend and confirmed as avoidable by the driver in question means a penalty - and if it happens during qualifying, stewards would be sent a timestamp for each violation so they can check and penalise quickly and accordingly, no matter where it happened. Other on-track in-race violations could also be added, if there are any where the first offence does not automatically result in a penalty.

The lights would be deliberately positioned for maximum visibility, to make it easy for viewers, commentators and pursuing drivers to know how far a driver is off a penalty and whether pressurising a driver into an unforced would allow for an easy pass.

[Monty]

Light one each time a driver has 4 wheels cross a white line. 4 lights during the race weekend and confirmed as avoidable by the driver in question means a penalty - and if it happens during qualifying, stewards would be sent a timestamp for each violation so they can check and penalise quickly

This would be the safest solution and therefore has a lot of merit but I would hate the likelihood that penalties may still be imposed after the end of the race - potentially someone standing on the podium then loses places when the penalties have been checked. Also, it doesn't give the penalised driver a chance to 'drive through the field'. Automatically cutting power at the point of exceeding track limits or soon after means that although the driver is penalised he would have time to rectify any lost places.

[Scott]

Light one each time a driver has 4 wheels cross a white line. 4 lights during the race weekend and confirmed as avoidable by the driver in question means a penalty - and if it happens during qualifying, stewards would be sent a timestamp for each violation so they can check and penalise quickly

This would be the safest solution and therefore has a lot of merit but I would hate the likelihood that penalties may still be imposed after the end of the race - potentially someone standing on the podium then loses places when the penalties have been checked. Also, it doesn't give the penalised driver a chance to 'drive through the field'. Automatically cutting power at the point of exceeding track limits or soon after means that although the driver is penalised he would have time to rectify any lost places.

I like the delay idea Jeri posted.  For example as soon as a driver goes over the line, bright lights flash on the back of the car for, say 5-10sec or so, giving any trailing car to get the heck out of the way before the power cuts for another 5-10 seconds.

I don't like the 4 lights idea because it means the driver has 4 chances, and could potentially finish the race with three lights lit and no penalty.

[cosworth151]

The problem with an automatic power cut is highlighted by what happened on the last lap in Austria. Lewis was forced wide by Nico. with an automatic system, Lewis would have been shut down & Nico would have gone on. The same thing with Vettel's overrun at Silverstone this past Sunday

[Monty]

The problem with an automatic power cut is highlighted by what happened on the last lap in Austria. Lewis was forced wide by Nico. with an automatic system, Lewis would have been shut down & Nico would have gone on. The same thing with Vettel's overrun at Silverstone this past Sunday

Very good point - COS for head of FIA 

[F1fanaticBD]

The problem with an automatic power cut is highlighted by what happened on the last lap in Austria. Lewis was forced wide by Nico. with an automatic system, Lewis would have been shut down & Nico would have gone on. The same thing with Vettel's overrun at Silverstone this past Sunday

Very good point - COS for head of FIA 

Cossie will play havoc if its been implemented.

[Jericoke]

The problem with an automatic power cut is highlighted by what happened on the last lap in Austria. Lewis was forced wide by Nico. with an automatic system, Lewis would have been shut down & Nico would have gone on. The same thing with Vettel's overrun at Silverstone this past Sunday

Interesting. 

I wonder if the GPS units in the cars are accurate enough to enforce penalties automatically.  The FIA could define what is (or isn't) a blocking manoeuvre, or if a lead car left enough room for a passing challenger, or if a passing attempt came past the braking zone.

Hell, the the Driver's association decide.  They do have driver's meetings where they theoretically discuss the 'rules of engagement', so why not let the drivers themselves decide what they think is fair?  I have a feeling they'll allow for more aggressive driving than the FIA would.

Sports like football (American), tennis and baseball use electronic systems for evaluating where things are, why not F1?

[cosworth151]

Sports like football (American), tennis and baseball use electronic systems for evaluating where things are, why not F1?

In American football, the National Football League (NFL) takes their crucial measurements with two big sticks linked by ten yards of chain. 

Note: The guys with the orange tiger striped helmets are the fantastic Cincinnati Bengals.       

[Monty]

The problem with an automatic power cut is highlighted by what happened on the last lap in Austria. Lewis was forced wide by Nico. with an automatic system, Lewis would have been shut down & Nico would have gone on. The same thing with Vettel's overrun at Silverstone this past Sunday

Very good point - COS for head of FIA 

OK I've got it. A completely new and fool proof solution. Build fences on the outside of corners - lets call them legco fences..., no perhaps armco barriers. If a driver exceeds the track limits they will get penalised by completely wrecking the car. I can't think why this has never been thought of before?

[Jericoke]

Sports like football (American), tennis and baseball use electronic systems for evaluating where things are, why not F1?

In American football, the National Football League (NFL) takes their crucial measurements with two big sticks linked by ten yards of chain. 

Note: The guys with the orange tiger striped helmets are the fantastic Cincinnati Bengals.       

I was sure they'd moved on to computer chipped footballs.  Isn't that how they get the fancy lines to show up on the TV?

They really still eyeball first downs?

[Scott]

The first down poles look like they are ready for cgi, they just need to clothe the linesmen in green.