GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: J.Clark on July 04, 2016, 01:01:44 PM
-
Back to Silverstone. Something of a home circuit for a majority of the teams as so many have their operations based near it.
In 1943, this circuit was known as RAF Silverstone. It was a bomber air base with the typical triangular runway design. Following WW-II, it was more-or-less deserted, and in 1947, an impromptu race was held on the runways basically. There were 12 entries. One of the drivers hit and killed a sheep, and as a result, it was known as the "Mutton Grand Prix."
The circuit design/layout used by 1950 remained basically unchanged until 1990, which saw major renovations. The changes made it a more technical circuit by adding some slower speed corners, while retaining high speed sections. The first race on the "new" circuit was won by Mansell for his home crowd. Senna ran out of gas on the final lap, and Nigel picked him up on his victory lap and gave him a lift back to the garage on his side pod.
In 1994, a big push on safety resulted in several circuits modifying sections, and Silverstone is one of them. The entry to Stowe from the Hanger Straight was changed a bit to make it safer for drivers and Abby became a chicane.
I must be suffering from CRS (Can't Remember sh*t), but whatever year it was recently, more renovations were made. The pit entry and start/finish were changed.
This circuit will be a sharp contrast to Austria's Red Bull Ring. Set ups that worked well there will not do well at this venue. As I stated previously, this is a much more technical circuit and a true challenge for the designers and engineers. For example, the run through turns 10, 11, 12, 13 and into 14 require good down force and grip, but are followed by the highest speed section of the circuit.
The race is 52 laps around the 18 turn, 3.66 mile circuit. Lap record for the current layout: 1:33.401 is held by Mark Webber, Red Bull Racing, 2013. Alonso held the record for the layout previously used.
Current grid members who have won:
Hamilton (3)
Alonso (2)
Rosberg, Vettel, Raikkonen have each won it once.
With things as they are at present, I would say that either Hamilton or Rosberg are likely to add one to their tally this weekend. Their car is still the fastest one out there.
Ferrari, over the years, has not regularly done well at Silverstone. Their best run was back with Schumacher and Barrichello when they won it three or four years in a row. The car is improving and both of their drivers have won this race so they have a shot at it I believe.
Red Bull with Webber and Vettel did well here and so with the only big differences since those days being the driver line-up, I would not be surprised to see them perform well.
Williams has gone well here, but they haven't had a consistent race winner since the mid-1990s when they won six of seven races. I am not sure what is going on with the team. Out of the box, two years ago, they were very strong; however, since then (2015 and so far in 2016) they have simply slid backwards for various reasons, with the occasional great performance.
Force-India have shown a remarkable surge this season. They could surprise a few people at Silverstone.
Haas is a true question mark. This is just one more new circuit for the fledgling upstarts. They have had some fantastic runs for a new team, and a couple of races in which they did well to not be back-markers. I think they should be able to perform well here though and I am hoping they find good fortune.
-
Here we go. Morning practice is in the books now.
1. Hamilton Mercedes 1m 31.654
2. Rosberg Mercedes 1m 31.687
3. Hulkenberg Force India 1m 32.492
4. Vettel Ferrari 1m 32.501
5. Ricciardo Red Bull 1m 32.773
6. Raikkonen Ferrari 1m 33.039
7. Verstappen Red Bull 1m 33.202
8. Perez Force India 1m 33.235
9. Sainz Toro Rosso 1m 33.446
10. Alonso McLaren 1m 33.527
11. Kvyat Toro Rosso 1m 33.738
12. Button McLaren 1m 34.132
13. Bottas Williams 1m 34.263
14. Massa Williams 1m 34.456
15. Grosjean Haas 1m 34.547
16. Palmer Renault 1m 34.787
17. Nasr Sauber 1m 34.805
18. Leclerc Haas 1m 35.869
19. Ocon Renault 1m 35.980
20. Ericsson Sauber 1m 36.003
21. Wehrlein Manor 1m 36.136
22. Haryanto Manor 1m 36.647
Title rivals Rosberg and Hamilton have made identical tire choices for next month's British Grand Prix. The Mercedes duo have chosen seven sets of the soft, five sets of the medium and just one of the hard. It will be in the first time in three races that Hamilton and Rosberg have matched each other's tire choices after differing in their picks for Azerbaijan and this weekend's Austrian GP.
Ferrari has chosen an extra set of softs and hards, leaving it with two fewer mediums for Kimi and Seb.
Williams has matched the allocation chosen by Mercedes, while Red Bull has chosen an extra set of hards and one fewer of the mediums.
Force India's Hulkenberg and Perez have the most sets of hard with three and just six sets of softs, the fewest of any.
Sauber has picked the most soft sets of any team with nine sets, along with one hard and three mediums.
Haas is the only team to have a differing selection between drivers, with Grosjean taking an extra set of hards and one fewer mediums.
-
The 5 best passes @ Silverstone:
http://www.formula1.com/en/video/2016/7/Five_of_the_best_Silverstone_overtakes.html
-
That is a strange choice for Ferrari, bacsuse I thought they thrived on medium. Hards grain too fast for them, and soft took more time to work, hence less time could operate in their best.
I think the rivalry will take the ugly turn, because very likely Mercedes will not be retaining the same line up next year, so whoever gets it right, stays with the team.
-
Rosberg didn't make it out for FP2. His car had a water leak.
01 Lewis Hamilton Mercedes AMG 1:31.660 36
02 Daniel Ricciardo Red Bull Tag Heuer 1:32.051 30
03 Max Verstappen Red Bull Tag Heuer 1:32.286 36
04 Sebastian Vettel Ferrari 1:32.570 40
05 Kimi Raikkonen Ferrari 1:32.736 38
06 Fernando Alonso McLaren Honda 1:33.040 31
07 Valtteri Bottas Williams Mercedes 1:33.493 38
08 Romain Grosjean Haas Ferrari 1:33.614 32
09 Jenson Button McLaren Honda 1:33.763 20
10 Felipe Massa Williams Mercedes 1:33.801 29
11 Carlos Sainz Toro Rosso Ferrari 1:33.840 27
12 Esteban Gutierrez Haas Ferrari 1:34.000 32
13 Daniil Kvyat Toro Rosso Ferrari 1:34.139 35
14 Felipe Nasr Sauber Ferrari 1:34.154 25
15 Nico Hulkenberg Force India Mercedes 1:34.321 35
16 Sergio Perez Force India Mercedes 1:34.356 37
17 Pascal Wehrlein Manor Mercedes 1:34.549 40
18 Jolyon Palmer Renault F1 1:34.610 41
19 Marcus Ericsson Sauber Ferrari 1:34.722 36
20 Kevin Magnussen Renault F1 1:34.959 41
21 Rio Haryanto Manor Mercedes 1:35.841 36
22 Nico Rosberg Mercedes AMG -:—.--- 0
-
It's a bit damp at Silverstone this morning, so practice has been uneventful thus far.
Hamilton is looking very strong and Rosberg is on the back foot because of that water leak on his car yesterday. Hamilton ought to take pole. Mercedes also ought to dominate the weekend.
It's great watching the cars at Silverstone. The high speed corners and swift changes of direction make it a great spectacle.
-
Saturday's FP3 is now a matter of record.
Erricson brought things to a halt when crashed dramatically at the exit of Stowe. He was taken to the hospital, and whether or not he will be able to run in qualifying is in doubt.
1. Hamilton Mercedes 1m 30.904
2. Rosberg Mercedes 1m 30.967
3. Ricciardo Red Bull 1m 31.488
4. Verstappen Red Bull 1m 31.561
5. Vettel Ferrari 1m 32.049
6. Bottas Williams 1m 32.736
7. Alonso McLaren 1m 32.754
8. Hulkenberg Force India 1m 32.798
9. Raikkonen Ferrari 1m 32.833
10. Sainz Toro Rosso 1m 32.889
11. Gutierrez Haas 1m 32.895
12. Button McLaren 1m 33.042
13. Grosjean Haas 1m 33.344
14. Perez Force India 1m 33.361
15. Massa Williams 1m 33.440
16. Kvyat Toro Rosso 1m 33.538
17. Nasr Sauber 1m 33.710
18. Palmer Renault 1m 33.769
19. Magnussen Renault 1m 34.049
20. Haryanto MRT 1m 34.471
21. Ericsson Sauber 1m 34.551
22. Wehrlein MRT 1m 34.658
Realizing the session was red flagged for a period, it is interesting to note that from P6 on back to 12th no teammates are next to each other and all six of them are the only one of the team in that group of six.
Massa must remain perplexed. He said after Friday's practice that he was sure why they weren't fast, not even as fast as was normal. Bottas is about where he has been, and Felipe is still lagging well behind.
Quals are on in an hour or so.
-
Now that we have a grid, here it is.
1. Hamilton Mercedes 1m 29.287
2. Rosberg Mercedes 1m 29.606
3. Verstappen Red Bull 1m 30.313
4. Ricciardo Red Bull 1m 30.618
5. Raikkonen Ferrari 1m 30.881
6. Vettel Ferrari 1m 31.490*
7. Bottas Williams 1m 31.557
8. Sainz Toro Rosso 1m 31.989
9. Hulkenberg Force India 1m 32.172
10. Alonso McLaren 1m 32.343
11. Perez Force India 1m 31.875
12. Massa Williams 1m 32.002
13. Grosjean Haas 1m 32.050
14. Gutierrez Haas 1m 32.241
15. Kvyat Toro Rosso 1m 32.306
16. Magnussen Renault 1m 37.060
17. Button McLaren 1m 32.788
18. Palmer Renault 1m 32.905
19. Haryanto MRT 1m 33.098
20. Wehrlein MRT 1m 33.151
21. Nasr Sauber 1m 33.544
* Another 5 spot penalty for yet another transmission problem with Seb's car. :'(
Marcus Ericsson SWE Sauber-Ferrari No time – missed qualifying after big crash in FP3
-
I haven't seen that for a while that the difference between pole and 3rd place is more than 1 second. Gives you an idea, just how much advantage Mercedes have in this track. :fool: :fool:
-
The revised grid:
Row 1
1. Lewis Hamilton Mercedes
2. Nico Rosberg Mercedes
Row 2
3. Max Verstappen Red Bull
4. Daniel Ricciardo Red Bull
Row 3
5. Kimi Raikkonen Ferrari
6. Valtteri Bottas Williams
Row 4
7. Carlos Sainz Jr Toro Rosso
8. Nico Hulkenberg Force India
Row 5
9. Fernando Alonso McLaren
10. Sergio Perez Force India
Row 6
11. Sebastian Vettel Ferrari
12. Felipe Massa Williams
Row 7
13. Romain Grosjean Haas
14. Esteban Gutierrez Haas
Row 8
15. Daniil Kvyat Toro Rosso
16. Kevin Magnussen Renault
Row 9
17. Jenson Button McLaren
18. Jolyon Palmer Renault
Row 10
19. Rio Haryanto MRT
20. Pascal Wehrlein MRT
Row 11
21. Felipe Nasr Sauber
Pit lane
Marcus Ericsson Sauber, IF he is cleared to race. If not, then would their back up driver be able to run the race?
Start is not far off now. This is an interesting grid from P5 on back.
What the heck has happened to Sauber?
How is it that Wehrlein ran so well in the race a week ago and now this?
Why can't Williams get the rears to work on Massa's car, but they can on Bottas'?
How many more transmissions does Vettel have?
-
So, isn't it raining in England? I thought there would be some good discussion going on by the time I finished work.
First of all, there is the coaching penalty on Rosberg. I don't know if I would really call telling him to avoid a gear because it might cause gearbox failure to really be coaching, or at least to the point where he would lose a podium position over it.
Kimi's in 3rd place! I'm pleased.
I would have thought there would be at least one or two unsafe release penalties on the first lap. Again I don't see the point of penalizing an unsafe release (Palmer) when the car has to be pushed back to the pit to add a 4th wheel. I would call that penalty served.
And while on the theme of penalties, Vettel's was not at all like Rosberg's last week. I don't even think Massa would have suggested he deserve a penalty for that one.
Turn one is downright dangerous when someone so much as spits on the asphalt. Crazy how many cars went off, spun or drifted that corner (I think it was Perez who had the drift of the race there).
Glad Lewis won. I hope the conspiracy theorists don't think Merc told Nico his gears were going so Lewis would get a few points at his expense :DntKnw: ;) ;)
I didn't change my picks again since before qualifying, and am fairly pleased I beat Dare and Wizzo (I know we got the same score, but for once I'm listed in front of them :crazy: :crazy: ).
Nice of Phil to drop in to chat while he's stuck in a blazing heat wave on the Italian Riviera. Nice to have the whole family by for a visit a few days ago.
Fun race, I enjoyed it. Would have liked another crazy last lap, but it was on the whole pretty good. I bet the Merc board and their sponsors were pleased there was a ton more TV time today than a typical weekend.
-
Nico was penalized 10 seconds for radio advice from the pits. This demoted him to P4.
-
Scott this was my first time out of last place in I've
lost count of the races.
And on another point I find it hard to feel sorry for Phil
be stuck in the blistering heat of the Italian Riviera when
I'm stuck in the blistering heat of Kentucky.Poor Phil :tease:
Pretty good race and like Scott commented it looks like Kimi
has lost some of the bravery from his earlier F1 days...he'd have
passed those cars without batting a eye.
-
Nico was penalized 10 seconds for radio advice from the pits. This demoted him to P4.
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 have demoted to 3rd.....
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/headlines/2016/7/f1-rosberg-third-after-penalty-silverstone.html
-
Take the radio's out of the cars all together.....if you
get a penalty for using them what purpose do they serve?
-
I wish these race reports would all agree with each other, some reports say Rosberg demoted to 3rd, others say to 4th. :DntKnw:
-
Rosberg down to 3rd - now just 1point ahead of Hamilton.
Horner summed it up perfectly - the rule is ridiculous but it is the rule.
I can't believe Mercedes are going to waste time appealing. It was obvious to all of us that it was 'coaching'! If they had given one simple command "Driver default 1-0-1" perhaps they could have persuaded the Stewards that it was to avoid a safety critical failure and therefore within the rules. However, the actual radio traffic became a 'conversation':-
Rosberg: “Gearbox problem.”
Engineer: “Driver default 1-0-1, chassis default 0-1, chassis default 0-1.”
Engineer: “Avoid seventh gear, Nico, avoid seventh gear.”
Rosberg: “What does that mean, I have to shift through it?”
Engineer: “Affirm Nico, you need to shift through it. Affirm, you need to shift through it.”
That was clearly coaching and therefore in breach of the rules. Probably 10seconds was a fairly lenient penalty.
While on the subject of ridiculous rules:
How can it be sensible to only give Vettel a 5second time penalty for forcing another car off the track but Palmer a 10second stop & go penalty (totalling about 25seconds on the road) because the team released an unsafe car - the poor guy had already lost 45seconds because of the release!
NB: for the record I do not think Vettel should have been penalised at all considering the conditions (although perhaps the team should have told him to immediately give back the place).
-
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.
-
I like the out of bounds, but it needs to be consistent and that includes all corners, not selected ones like they did. It was quite confusing, even to the commentators.
The race behind Hamilton was fun to watch, as several battles were going on.
-
The enforcement of the out-of-bounds regs was ridiculously random at Silverstone.
:good:
We have discussed this before - unfortunately the FIA do not read our advice!
The track limits should be treated as if there is a barrier just the other side of the white line but it is nonsense to have stewards looking at every car on every corner. This is F1 - pinnacle of technology. Use the available technology to cut power if the car crosses the white line (Palmersport already have this at the Bedford Autodrome Circuit).
For F1, a system could make sure that as soon as the car fully exceeds track limits the rain light would come on and the power is cut by 50% for three seconds. It would become obvious what has happened and the driver would be penalised enough to make sure he doesn't do it again.
-
For F1, a system could make sure that as soon as the car fully exceeds track limits the rain light would come on and the power is cut by 50% for three seconds. It would become obvious what has happened and the driver would be penalised enough to make sure he doesn't do it again.
Easy peasy...tie it in to the pit lane limiter and there is hardly even any software to write. Use GPS for car position or go low tech and use doggie invisible fence tech...can even shock the driver's backside as an added bonus.
-
:DD :DD Great idea Scott. :good:
-
Easy peasy...tie it in to the pit lane limiter and there is hardly even any software to write.
This could need the driver to reset the system back to normal race mode....oh hang on, then some of them would need banned radio messages to tell them what to do. :fool:
-
I think the solution to pit radios is much simpler. Just stop allowing the driver to adjust the car. Or, give him a sway/roll bar adjustment, brake bias adjustment and a 2 step performance/economy engine adjustment. Personally I would prefer the driver to drive the car full distance in the mode it was in on the grid.
-
And I think Vettel deserved his penalty. The NBC replay showed he made no attempt to turn into the corner. As Hobbs said, If you want the car to turn, you have to turn the wheels.
-
I guess radio message penalty tool so long to decide because it is first time after the introduction of the rule, where penalty would be handed over to the driver. Being first time I guess most of the time was spend engaging how much severe the penalty would be served.
The while-line issue seems very inconsistent and biased. If they want to implement a system, it should not have qualities mentioned above, actually they must prevent these sort of occurrence.
-
I have demoted to 3rd.....
It was the team that made the troublesome radio message, not the driver, so in a reasonable world the team should have championship points deducted, not giving the driver a penalty. Especially since he did not build, service, or design the transmission, or (presumably) did not actually acknowledge that he heard or used the information.
Why not just eliminate the use of radios entirely (no texting either)! :stop:
-
At least Mercedes have withdrawn the pointless appeal.
-
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 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.
-
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 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... ;) :D :D
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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 :good:
-
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 :good:
Cossie will play havoc if its been implemented. ;)
-
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?
-
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. :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :good:
-
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 :good:
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?
-
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. :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :good:
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?
-
The first down poles look like they are ready for cgi, they just need to clothe the linesmen in green.
-
Just make the curbs dangerous enough to cause harm of the floor panel if you get all four wheels on them. Let's see who have the audacity of running wide. And not all the corners, just where do you think it requires. I think Singapore did employed it brilliantly.
-
Or the suspension...that seems to work too. ;)
-
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...
I am not especially picky as to what the penalty is - the penalty could probably be very light, so long as it is penalised promptly, the penalty is declared (so not done as Technical Briefing AH-1348965...) and everyone is treated equally. The problem is that while there is a decent chance of bad driving being flat ignored, practically any penalty will not suffice to contain the problem.
If I had to declare a favoured choice of penalty (assuming it's not a track where the punishment is automatic such as Monaco), I'd be in favour of a drive-through on the fourth light appearing, unless the stewards can see there was something improper about one or more incident that means that one or more of the lights was unfairly awarded. I'd allow three fully-green-flag laps or six minutes (with a fully-green-lap being worth two minutes, in case of incidents near the end of the race) for stewards to decide on an exemption, with the light confirmed if no exemption is given... ...and the penalty formally being issued at the end of that period. I do not think it is unreasonable to have six-minute gaps between the qualifying sessions, or between race end and the podium in a regular race. (I would see Race Control's informing of the stewards of any problems as an automated process, so the possibility of Race Control being otherwise occupied at race end should not be a problem, and in-race larger problems would be covered by laps involving yellow flags not being counted - when those happen near the end of the race, it's rarely an issue if these get further investigation post-podium).
-
That race was quite exciting, but it could have been a lot more engaging and edge of the seat stuff had they pulled the safety car in three laps earlier. It stayed out for far too long and ruined the racing spectacle of the first part of the Grand Prix.
Hamilton drove well to win and there were some entertaining battles further back, along with a much higher number of driver errors than usual, but the race just lacked that spark which it could have had, leaving me somewhat underwhelmed.