planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:56 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 5918
Location: Michigan, USA
Davidbl wrote:
Well in that case then we all know that the first lap is treated differently to the rest of the race.

Yeah, it typically is. I don't know that I necessarily approve of it, but the FIA has a consistent history of being very lax on the first lap.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 11:18 pm
Posts: 229
Either way then it is desperate to show the picture of Vettel then as they are not comparing a like-for-like example.

Everyone keeps saying there are loads of examples in the past race. Name them then. No one will be able to at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 6:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
Lewis Hamiltons view!



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
mikeyg123 wrote:
guardiangr wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
guardiangr wrote:
Did anyone else completed a pass outside the track limits and didn't get penalised at this race? I'll answer it for you, no.

Bottas arguably. Would need to see the onboard to pass proper judgement, but driving off the track at turn 1 vs Ricciardo on lap 2 certainly helped him maintain his position.

Bottas was pushed outside the track limits by Ric, if anything Dan should've get a penalty for forcing a driver off the track.

Max had plenty of room and yet he decided to straight out a corner off the track.


But Bottas did pass Ricciardo off track? So you agree it's not always black and white?

I can't say Bottas passed Ricciardo as he was never behind Ricciardo on the driver order.... Bottas was forced wide by Ricciardo and surely had the right to come back on track as they were along side. That won't have helped him getting pushed right off the track at all. This was on lap 2. On lap 4, Ricciardo dived down the inside of Bottas at turn one. Clearly got ahead. But ran wide and well over the kerb by almost a cars width. If that pass worked out, I don't think he'd have got away with it as it wasn't Bottas who pushed him off.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
Option or Prime wrote:
Lewis Hamiltons view!


I don't know why that post says he needs lewis's opinion. As if his opinion will suddenly give give a podium for 3rd that has already gone by! Nothing will change.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
No, I agree but what he says and the further discussion is interesting. Its not about who says it it is about what is being said! He reinforces other poster's comments earlier in the thread.

We know nothing will change but the thread is about track limits.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Herb wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Actually, the FIA was very efficient this sole time. Verstappen cut the inside to get around Raikkonen, and within 3 minutes the word had come down. That is the quickest decision I have ever seen in Formula One.

But as long as humans are allowed to weigh in on what is essentially a yes or no issue, politics,money, prestige, and other factors come into play. Does the technology exist so we can have a consistent and impartial system? Yes, by running sensor wires under the track limits.


BIB. This - there is no excuse for allowing cars to exceed track limits. A simple warning policy, three warnings and you are issued a 5-second penalty.


I'm liking this idea more and more. I do wonder how would it work though? I know they do it in other motorsports, Nascar has the transponders for example, but I thought that they are just monitoring the position of the car on the track in relation to the other, as long as measuring speed, etc. So how would they measure if the car has reached the track limit? I do not follow other motorsports as much as F1, so some insight would be grateful.

Apart from the capital cost of fitting every track with the wires, which will be a really big cost, would the cars have peripheral sensors? Where would these be placed on the car? At the very edge of the car somewhere? What if the car gets damaged (plenty of times they bump each other's sides) and the sensor won't work?

Can't really think of something that would work at the moment.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 11:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2007
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Actually, the FIA was very efficient this sole time. Verstappen cut the inside to get around Raikkonen, and within 3 minutes the word had come down. That is the quickest decision I have ever seen in Formula One.

But as long as humans are allowed to weigh in on what is essentially a yes or no issue, politics,money, prestige, and other factors come into play. Does the technology exist so we can have a consistent and impartial system? Yes, by running sensor wires under the track limits.


BIB. This - there is no excuse for allowing cars to exceed track limits. A simple warning policy, three warnings and you are issued a 5-second penalty.


I'm liking this idea more and more. I do wonder how would it work though? I know they do it in other motorsports, Nascar has the transponders for example, but I thought that they are just monitoring the position of the car on the track in relation to the other, as long as measuring speed, etc. So how would they measure if the car has reached the track limit? I do not follow other motorsports as much as F1, so some insight would be grateful.

Apart from the capital cost of fitting every track with the wires, which will be a really big cost, would the cars have peripheral sensors? Where would these be placed on the car? At the very edge of the car somewhere? What if the car gets damaged (plenty of times they bump each other's sides) and the sensor won't work?

Can't really think of something that would work at the moment.


I think I've read some formulae use the wires around the track system, and whilst trying to find out which ones do, I found that F1 used it in Hungary last year.

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Herb wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Actually, the FIA was very efficient this sole time. Verstappen cut the inside to get around Raikkonen, and within 3 minutes the word had come down. That is the quickest decision I have ever seen in Formula One.

But as long as humans are allowed to weigh in on what is essentially a yes or no issue, politics,money, prestige, and other factors come into play. Does the technology exist so we can have a consistent and impartial system? Yes, by running sensor wires under the track limits.


BIB. This - there is no excuse for allowing cars to exceed track limits. A simple warning policy, three warnings and you are issued a 5-second penalty.


I'm liking this idea more and more. I do wonder how would it work though? I know they do it in other motorsports, Nascar has the transponders for example, but I thought that they are just monitoring the position of the car on the track in relation to the other, as long as measuring speed, etc. So how would they measure if the car has reached the track limit? I do not follow other motorsports as much as F1, so some insight would be grateful.

Apart from the capital cost of fitting every track with the wires, which will be a really big cost, would the cars have peripheral sensors? Where would these be placed on the car? At the very edge of the car somewhere? What if the car gets damaged (plenty of times they bump each other's sides) and the sensor won't work?

Can't really think of something that would work at the moment.


I think I've read some formulae use the wires around the track system, and whilst trying to find out which ones do, I found that F1 used it in Hungary last year.


Ah, ok, thank you. Wasn't aware of this last year. Still don't know how it works exactly, apart from the system being 1.6m off the track.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
So what is wrong with Hamiltons suggestion of making the run offs grass or gravel, is it dangerous? Perhaps even a little moat!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm
Posts: 1316
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Actually, the FIA was very efficient this sole time. Verstappen cut the inside to get around Raikkonen, and within 3 minutes the word had come down. That is the quickest decision I have ever seen in Formula One.

But as long as humans are allowed to weigh in on what is essentially a yes or no issue, politics,money, prestige, and other factors come into play. Does the technology exist so we can have a consistent and impartial system? Yes, by running sensor wires under the track limits.


BIB. This - there is no excuse for allowing cars to exceed track limits. A simple warning policy, three warnings and you are issued a 5-second penalty.


I'm liking this idea more and more. I do wonder how would it work though? I know they do it in other motorsports, Nascar has the transponders for example, but I thought that they are just monitoring the position of the car on the track in relation to the other, as long as measuring speed, etc. So how would they measure if the car has reached the track limit? I do not follow other motorsports as much as F1, so some insight would be grateful.

Apart from the capital cost of fitting every track with the wires, which will be a really big cost, would the cars have peripheral sensors? Where would these be placed on the car? At the very edge of the car somewhere? What if the car gets damaged (plenty of times they bump each other's sides) and the sensor won't work?

Can't really think of something that would work at the moment.


There are three mandatory transponders already fixed to the car for timing and scoring purposes. To complete the rest of the system just requires a simple wire buried just under the road surface. The wires do not have to cover the entire track distance, just the corners where track cutting may occur. Installation of those wires is very cheap, easy and simple.

edit: as a former road construction worker and also licensed electrician I can state with authority that installation of such a system is very cheap and attainable.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 6446
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Siao7 wrote:
Herb wrote:
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Actually, the FIA was very efficient this sole time. Verstappen cut the inside to get around Raikkonen, and within 3 minutes the word had come down. That is the quickest decision I have ever seen in Formula One.

But as long as humans are allowed to weigh in on what is essentially a yes or no issue, politics,money, prestige, and other factors come into play. Does the technology exist so we can have a consistent and impartial system? Yes, by running sensor wires under the track limits.


BIB. This - there is no excuse for allowing cars to exceed track limits. A simple warning policy, three warnings and you are issued a 5-second penalty.


I'm liking this idea more and more. I do wonder how would it work though? I know they do it in other motorsports, Nascar has the transponders for example, but I thought that they are just monitoring the position of the car on the track in relation to the other, as long as measuring speed, etc. So how would they measure if the car has reached the track limit? I do not follow other motorsports as much as F1, so some insight would be grateful.

Apart from the capital cost of fitting every track with the wires, which will be a really big cost, would the cars have peripheral sensors? Where would these be placed on the car? At the very edge of the car somewhere? What if the car gets damaged (plenty of times they bump each other's sides) and the sensor won't work?

Can't really think of something that would work at the moment.


There are three mandatory transponders already fixed to the car for timing and scoring purposes. To complete the rest of the system just requires a simple wire buried just under the road surface. The wires do not have to cover the entire track distance, just the corners where track cutting may occur. Installation of those wires is very cheap, easy and simple.

edit: as a former road construction worker and also licensed electrician I can state with authority that installation of such a system is very cheap and attainable.


This makes sense, however the transponder's accuracy is what is in question. How accurate is it? It is a wire loop under the tarmac, if I get this right. However it is a bit like WiFi or Bluetooth, it emits a signal; how will it know that the car is in or out of the track? We could be talking of a few inches that the tyres was in or out of the track, how can it track this with accuracy?

Regarding the installation, I agree that it has to be only a few places on the track, but I think it needs to be hardwired as well, which means digging trenches. Wouldn't that start piling the costs? I am not an expert of course


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 9:08 pm
Posts: 1583
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Actually, the FIA was very efficient this sole time. Verstappen cut the inside to get around Raikkonen, and within 3 minutes the word had come down. That is the quickest decision I have ever seen in Formula One.

But as long as humans are allowed to weigh in on what is essentially a yes or no issue, politics,money, prestige, and other factors come into play. Does the technology exist so we can have a consistent and impartial system? Yes, by running sensor wires under the track limits.


Running a sensor wire could be part of a workable rule.

I think they would need to rewrite the rules so each driver had a responsibility to allow the other drivers to remain on the track - both inside and outside of the track. The sensor can detect a car exceeding the track limit, but there will always be a need to decide if the driver was forced off the track by another driver.

There would also be a decision needed as to whether a driver knew another driver was there. The current system is not good enough and they would have to figure out a way of ensuring that the leading driver has enough vision and time to react - otherwise the overtaking driver would be the one being judged.

Its different from the way they have been doing it, but it could be a fair system that can actually be applied quickly - if the data was collectable and the rules written to make use of the data quickly.

It's a bit like driving at Monaco - except the circuit could have opportunities to overtake.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1857
Herb wrote:

I think I've read some formulae use the wires around the track system, and whilst trying to find out which ones do, I found that F1 used it in Hungary last year.


Forget formula racing, there are RC car tournaments where this happens. They have wire sensors covering complete track. And depending on event and class, you get warning and can be disqualified as well for exceeding track or cutting corners.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8057
It does not need to be a wire, it could be paint. Either through colour or dielectric compound or even metallic compound.

If the cars are not going to br repeatedly running over it (or they get pinged) it is not going to scrub off in one weekend


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5461
I prefer tracks like Suzuka that have grass when you run wide. It punishes drivers for making errors and it separates the best from the rest because you need to have a feel for how far you can go. You can't just run wide 5-6 times during free practice finding the limit because that could end up with your mechanics pulling an all-nighter fixing the car.

Unfortunately many of these circuits have to be used for motorcycle racing too and that's the main reason why they have these asphalt runoff areas. It's all about safety really.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
sandman1347 wrote:
I prefer tracks like Suzuka that have grass when you run wide. It punishes drivers for making errors and it separates the best from the rest because you need to have a feel for how far you can go. You can't just run wide 5-6 times during free practice finding the limit because that could end up with your mechanics pulling an all-nighter fixing the car.

Unfortunately many of these circuits have to be used for motorcycle racing too and that's the main reason why they have these asphalt runoff areas. It's all about safety really.


Excellent point about the bikes, but grass would be OK.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 5:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
I think the root of the problem is common sense applied by the FIA, stewards and race control, which is hollowed out through abuse by the drivers. The principle of being given an inch, and taking (followed by expecting, followed by demanding) a mile.

The solution is fairly simple, and doesn't require an electronic system; reinstate high and/or disruptive kerb stones. If a driver makes an honest mistake, he won't make it twice.

Should the drivers prefer to keep the current generation of ballroom kerbstones, then simply punish each and every transgression that is seen on television, or reported by the track marshals. (That is after all one of their jobs.)

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 8:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14181
In all seriousness why is it not grass there? It's not a run off area and it's not somewhere anyone's ever going to end up but accident.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1857
Frankly its not arbitrary application of the law. Drivers, stewards and FIA have pre race briefings where it is discussed and clarified what is allowed for that specific tracks.

And frankly I get the decision to go this route.

As much as I honestly hate allowing cars from going even 1 inch wider than track limits (all 4 wheels ofcourse), enforcing it extremely strictly will result in the show getting marred in unnecessary controversies more often. Also it will kill the flow of certain tracks making them not fun to watch or drive.

I had expressed my desire for more stricter track limit enforcement last year, but having pondered on this, I get why FIA is doing what they are doing..



As far as putting grass immediately after the kerbs, its not safe option at many tracks. Some people like to argue about tracks like Monaco where we have walls right next to the track and why it shouldnt be same everywhere. Frankly Monaco is one of the most boring tracks for me. Do we really want all tracks to be like that? Also do we want higher retirements? If answer is yes, then you can have grass everywhere, but that will mean it will kill the flow of lot of tracks and lot of tracks will need re-profiling for safety reasons.


I think we criticise FIA without thinking about every single track on calendar and all safety protocols they have to consider. Its easy to bash them sitting on the sidelines and in front of TV, but its completely different set of scenarios these people have to think about.

I think before we jump to that, what we need to do is give FIA time to implement track limit sensing technology with fine precision and to be implemented at all GP tracks and data to be studies and also made available to fans, so we know why drivers take some lines, why FIA thinks its necessary to have the run off at particular point on the track.

We simply cannot go back to tracks from 60s, 70s, 80s or even 90s where there is grass or gravel everywhere. Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 7:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
funkymonkey wrote:
I think before we jump to that, what we need to do is give FIA time to implement track limit sensing technology with fine precision and to be implemented at all GP tracks and data to be studies and also made available to fans, so we know why drivers take some lines, why FIA thinks its necessary to have the run off at particular point on the track.


Problem is there is no indication that the FIA are in any way motivated to do that. Neither are they motivated to look at full time stewarding in any format.

funkymonkey wrote:
We simply cannot go back to tracks from 60s, 70s, 80s or even 90s where there is grass or gravel everywhere. Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.


Not really sure how maintaining a run off but making it grass would increase the risk of mortality, is there a reason?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 7:23 pm
Posts: 326
to me it is still amazing how everyone is still talking about this, considering everyone agrees he went off track.

He went off track, it could be anyone, and would still deserve to be penalised ( give the place back ).

The only idiotic thing is to still question this thing.

If everyone is respecting the enforced limits, and someone doesn't, he is not outsmarting the rest, he is just a punk.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
The thread is discussing enforcing track limits not the rights and/or wrongs of the incident.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 8:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 29, 2016 1:00 pm
Posts: 72
Option or Prime wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
We simply cannot go back to tracks from 60s, 70s, 80s or even 90s where there is grass or gravel everywhere. Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.


Not really sure how maintaining a run off but making it grass would increase the risk of mortality, is there a reason?


Tarmac run offs are a more abrasive surface and are more efficient to slow the cars down in the event of a crash, while they would drift over the grass at constant speed.

_________________
« Violent delights have violent ends »


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
Fantaribo wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
funkymonkey wrote:
We simply cannot go back to tracks from 60s, 70s, 80s or even 90s where there is grass or gravel everywhere. Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.


Not really sure how maintaining a run off but making it grass would increase the risk of mortality, is there a reason?


Tarmac run offs are a more abrasive surface and are more efficient to slow the cars down in the event of a crash, while they would drift over the grass at constant speed.


OK thanks, but couldn't a zone in the immediate proximity of the track be grass or similar to discourage crossing it whilst the remainder of the run off be designed to maximise safety. Off course that is if the FIA want to do anything about it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 10:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
Apart from contributing a fine post, I also very much liked this typo. It even makes sense, though I see Option or Prime did read it as mortality.
funkymonkey wrote:
Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2605
Fiki wrote:
Apart from contributing a fine post, I also very much liked this typo. It even makes sense, though I see Option or Prime did read it as mortality.
funkymonkey wrote:
Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.
That did make me chuckle a little.
On the subject of run-offs isn't F1 set to visit Paul Ricard next year? I believe that circuit has a high-abrasive run-off that is both safe and will slow down any driver that uses it. May be a good test bed for future races / other circuits to consider adopting.

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 11:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2007
tootsie323 wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Apart from contributing a fine post, I also very much liked this typo. It even makes sense, though I see Option or Prime did read it as mortality.
funkymonkey wrote:
Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.
That did make me chuckle a little.
On the subject of run-offs isn't F1 set to visit Paul Ricard next year? I believe that circuit has a high-abrasive run-off that is both safe and will slow down any driver that uses it. May be a good test bed for future races / other circuits to consider adopting.


Don't the Paul Ricard run-off areas damage the tyres too? I might have read that somewhere? That'll keep them on the track! Feel bad for anyone that gets forced off though.

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2368
I guess the FIA have this problem now where if the tracks have grass that's one thing, but if you take it away and then put it back and then someone has an accident because they went on the grass are they then open to getting sued? Isn't that effectively like what they are saying about the halo, now that they have it they can't not use it because if someone dies next year then they would have to answer why the halo was not in place.

The problem really is that any 'physical' solution - ie: grass, gloss paint, water - is liable to cause a loss of grip and potentially cause an accident, which leaves the FIA open to sanction. So clearly the answer is to have a rule (Which I seem to remember at one point we did have) that you can't go four wheels off the track. I don't know why they ever let this slide and start making exceptions.

I also don't understand why bringing this rule back into force would cause endless penalties, because the drivers only do it because they know they can get away with it. That's like saying there's no point in having speed limits because we'll have to arrest everyone...

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2906
Location: UK
Fiki wrote:
I think the root of the problem is common sense applied by the FIA, stewards and race control, which is hollowed out through abuse by the drivers. The principle of being given an inch, and taking (followed by expecting, followed by demanding) a mile.

The solution is fairly simple, and doesn't require an electronic system; reinstate high and/or disruptive kerb stones. If a driver makes an honest mistake, he won't make it twice.

Should the drivers prefer to keep the current generation of ballroom kerbstones, then simply punish each and every transgression that is seen on television, or reported by the track marshals. (That is after all one of their jobs.)

I like the idea of higher kerbs, but sadly it's been tried and the drivers complained about safety. I think the idea fell out of favour after Massa broke his suspension at the Indian GP one year after striking the kerbs on the inside of corners a few too many times.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 25, 2017 9:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 844
Location: UK
Fiki wrote:
Apart from contributing a fine post, I also very much liked this typo. It even makes sense, though I see Option or Prime did read it as mortality.
funkymonkey wrote:
Runoffs have played an important role in reducing the morality from the Formula 1, you simply cant reverse that because a fan favourite driver is penalised. That is very narrow minded thinking by fans and even some pundits and some race drivers themselves.


Actually I didn't read it properly, if it begins with an "m" and ends with an "ality" I just jump to conclusions. :blush:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 7:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2009 8:28 am
Posts: 8
Location: Finland
Well, I think Kimi put it quite well by saying "they all know where the track limits are".
As long as the drivers know/are briefed i'm ok with the penalty. I am pretty sure they went through these thing in the driver brifing and explained where and when you are allowed to go outside track limits. If Max didn't listen than he equally deserves the penalty.

Mika Salo, one of the jury members was very clear on that this was clear case and emphasized that even Jos Verstappen understood it after they talked, although he was raging at some point.

Now a different case altogether is that it would be very important to have logical rules so the fans understand and can appreciate the decisions made by the Jury. This is not always the case and needs improvement. Maybe sand outside the track limits would stop the drivers from using it...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm
Posts: 2368
j man wrote:
Fiki wrote:
I think the root of the problem is common sense applied by the FIA, stewards and race control, which is hollowed out through abuse by the drivers. The principle of being given an inch, and taking (followed by expecting, followed by demanding) a mile.

The solution is fairly simple, and doesn't require an electronic system; reinstate high and/or disruptive kerb stones. If a driver makes an honest mistake, he won't make it twice.

Should the drivers prefer to keep the current generation of ballroom kerbstones, then simply punish each and every transgression that is seen on television, or reported by the track marshals. (That is after all one of their jobs.)

I like the idea of higher kerbs, but sadly it's been tried and the drivers complained about safety. I think the idea fell out of favour after Massa broke his suspension at the Indian GP one year after striking the kerbs on the inside of corners a few too many times.


Exactly what are kerbs for? If they are to mark the corners then why are the drivers allowed to drive all over them?

It's the same thing as the grass isn't it. High kerbs, no because the cars launch off them or break the suspension. Sleeping policemen - no because they damage the cars. Paint, grass, water - no Health and Safety.

Makes you wonder why they bother having corners really, because most crashes happen in corners. Would be much safer to race in a straight line, why not have two huge straights connected by a series of chicanes that got the drivers facing the right way again at the minimum possible speed?

_________________
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 8:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7355
Location: Belgium
seaflyer wrote:
Well, I think Kimi put it quite well by saying "they all know where the track limits are".
As long as the drivers know/are briefed i'm ok with the penalty. I am pretty sure they went through these thing in the driver brifing and explained where and when you are allowed to go outside track limits. If Max didn't listen than he equally deserves the penalty.

Mika Salo, one of the jury members was very clear on that this was clear case and emphasized that even Jos Verstappen understood it after they talked, although he was raging at some point.

Now a different case altogether is that it would be very important to have logical rules so the fans understand and can appreciate the decisions made by the Jury. This is not always the case and needs improvement. Maybe sand outside the track limits would stop the drivers from using it...
I just watched the video showing the drivers' briefing at Austin. Nobody asked questions about track limits. Not a single driver. Max Verstappen did bring up the fact that the white lines and the kerbs were slippery...

Interesting bit of information on Jos Verstappen. Why would he be talking to Mika? And I would love to know whether Jos is going to say he (and possibly Jr.) stand corrected, after getting it explained. Also, it's interesting that it isn't just that one particular steward that makes decisions against Max. There were at least two this time... Perhaps Max needs to let his penny drop.

I've said it before, there's no need to install costly and superfluous technology. The marshals are supposed to report incidents, TV covers all of the track, cars carry cameras that can give us an "all angles" view of every transgression. It would take only one or two races for the drivers to know how to spot a white line and respect it. The leniency shown by race control and the stewards has resulted in people defending illegal overtakes. So that leniency, understandable enough in itself, needs to be taken away.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Last edited by Fiki on Thu Oct 26, 2017 8:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 8:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 1021
IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

This is mental.


What do we expect? Fans that are neutrals are furious over this. Fans that want racing yet want drivers penalised for track limits are furious.

In the words of Lewis, all these new tracks have too many run off areas that don't penalise the driver. Bring back grass.

The amount of drivers having all four wheels off the track with no punishment and was deemed "they gain nothing" now turns out a driver did gain something in the eyes of the stewards.

Bring back grass.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Caserole of Nonsense and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group