Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

For ease of use, there is one thread per grand prix where you can discuss everything during that specific GP weekend. You can find these threads here.
User avatar
djos
113
Joined: 19 May 2006, 06:09
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

richard_leeds wrote:#-o to so many previous posts

Rule 40.4 - the duration of the safety car deployment is indicated by the lights/flags and SC board.

The green flags were shown on the last lap. That means the duration of safety car deployment ended on the last lap. If the duration of the safety car deployment extended to the end of the race then the lights/flags and SC boards would have remained in place until the cars cross the finish line.
Exactly, the green flags imo mean that the race did not finish under full course yellow/SC conditions making the move entirely legit.
Last edited by djos on 18 May 2010, 00:10, edited 1 time in total.
"In downforce we trust"

andrew
andrew
0
Joined: 16 Feb 2010, 15:08
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland - WhiteBlue Country (not the region)

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:I thought Lewis was told to "watch his brakes".
He was indeed. Don't know if it was his driving or a fault with the brakes.

User avatar
strad
117
Joined: 02 Jan 2010, 01:57

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

Obviously the creators of the rules included it for a reason,
Oh God...You think there is reason, logic or common sense involved with FIA rule making process?????
To achieve anything, you must be prepared to dabble on the boundary of disaster.”
Sir Stirling Moss

komninosm
komninosm
0
Joined: 05 Apr 2009, 18:41
Location: Macedonia

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

strad wrote:
Obviously the creators of the rules included it for a reason,
Oh God...You think there is reason, logic or common sense involved with FIA rule making process?????
You can put as many question-marks as you want at the end of your rhetorical question. It won't change the fact that you're wrong.
Rules are arbitrary (to some degree) anyway. I didn't say there was reason involved. I said there was "a" reason for the rule being written at least. I didn't say it was a good rule. All I did was refute the other poster's claim that the rule "can actually never be applied" which is patently false.

User avatar
ISLAMATRON
0
Joined: 01 Oct 2008, 18:29

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

PNSD wrote:
richard_leeds wrote:
marcush. wrote:Button was out because of the aux fan still in the cooling duct.. but then it was lap 2 when it went baang... so why on earth didn´t they pull him in directly after the formation lap?
The commentry was saying that apparently he'd have had enough cooling at race speeds. Apparently Whitmarsh told Button they'd fix it at the next pit stop.

That would have been OK on a normal track, but in this instance he'd have been better to pull into the pits after the formation lap and follow Alonso.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing isnt it.

I half expected Button to do something like that once he fell behind the Force India's.

Monaco is very much a track where an out of phase strategy can work.
Come on guys, I havent even got a chance to watch the race yet and I know the story better than you guys.

The plug to the radiator was left on the car on Button's recon lap... from the pits to his grid position... and that is all...
The pre-race championship leader dropped out on only the second lap due to the after-effects of a cooling cover having been accidentally left on the left sidepod on the way to the grid.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/83676

and many other sources

There was no time that he was actually racing with the plug in the radiator. But I do know it seems amazing that the temp sensitivity of these cars is so high that be could sit on the grid with dry ice in the sidepods and the car would still over heat after the formationlap, grid formation and then SC laps.

mx_tifoso
mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

Mandatory fans on each side? A quarter or half the size of each radiator would be enough perhaps? They already do it for promotional events.
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

feynman
feynman
3
Joined: 02 Mar 2010, 20:36

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

Hmmm, somethings gone wrong with modern F1 when the first resort is always to jump to the mandatory? I blame Mosley, gone, but he still done a number on the sport's head.

It is not asking too much for the teams to properly cool their own car.

Instead of, McLaren again, standing on their own tails, when stuffing a piece of black foam into a black hole, why not splurge for a sheet of fluorescent yellow card, pair of safety scissors and some craft glue, there you go, a project for someone working in 'the pinnacle of motorsport'.

Or if not, howabout some simple process and procedure, do it like the aircraft carrier deck crew, stand in front of the plane and pilot and show him the undercarraige chocks and chains that you have just removed.

TV remotes, foam bungs, good odds we will see Jenson set-off down the pitlane with a rattling tray full of Snap-On sockets on his rear-wing before the season expires.

Wakey-wakey time, that whole race operation and management has got lazy and stupid, it needs to get frosty and be quick about it. In the space of a week it has set one car on fire and sent another into the bushes with three wheels - it needs someone to get serious, someone to start banging heads together (and hopefully making that comedy coconut noise, boink). When is Symond's ban up? [joke]

Just_a_fan
Just_a_fan
593
Joined: 31 Jan 2010, 20:37

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

mx_tifosi wrote:Mandatory fans on each side? A quarter or half the size of each radiator would be enough perhaps? They already do it for promotional events.
Fans are banned because people use them for things other than cooling. That's the F1 way :lol:
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.

User avatar
Mr Alcatraz
-27
Joined: 18 May 2008, 15:10
Location: San Diego Ca. USA

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

Hill – I acted properly and correctly
Schumacher gave Hill a ‘wry’ smile as he walked into the stewards room after the race and he certainly wasn’t expecting them to award him a twenty second penalty for his actions because the safety car was in and the rack was clear, and in previous years this meant he was free to overtake.

However, the rules now state that if a safety car controls the final lap of the race, there is no overtaking permitted, and as Schumacher did just that, the stewards found him guilty of breaching the rules and penalized him accordingly
.

http://f1.automoto365.com/news/f1/hill- ... 695-1.html



Hail Caesar Teodosio II

It is
History
after
all!


Image
Those who believe in telekinetics raise my hand

ggajic
ggajic
0
Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 20:11

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

komninosm wrote: Saying that 40.13 can actually never be applied is counter-productive to your argument. Obviously the creators of the rules included it for a reason, so it does apply in some instances. You should stick to attacking the green flags and stuff that created a confusion.
IMO the simple thing that would solve this would be for race control to add one more sentence to its communication. Either say "no overtaking allowed" or "overtaking allowed" and all the other crap they said. It's like they're trying to be as laconic as possible to win a poetry competition or some silly thing like that.
Article 40.11 together with green flags and newly introduced SC line effectively overrides 40.13 - so as I stated in current form - 40.13 can never be applied. If lights means nothing and has nothing to do with race control as I have seen stated that would also mean that Massa and Fisicella were unjustly black flaged in 2008. Canadian GP.. To me, it is obvious that creators of rules had intention but unfortunately implementation is confusing and subjected to misinterpretations..

Richard
Richard
Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2009, 14:41
Location: UK

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

ggajic wrote:Article 40.11 together with green flags and newly introduced SC line effectively overrides 40.13 - so as I stated in current form - 40.13 can never be applied.
Incorrect. They should have kept the yellows and SC boards showing to the finish, rule 40.4 says that this defines the duration of the intervention. In this scenario rule 40.13 is invoked to say the safety car has to slip off into Mornington Crescent on the last lap.

Richard
Richard
Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2009, 14:41
Location: UK

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

Moving on from Mornington Crescent...

I wonder if the drivers practice SC interventions in the simulators? That would give the chance to practice defending their line on the restart. It would also help them get familiar with the pit lane procedures and light combinations. That might explain Schumi’s excellent reaction to events on seeing the green flag.

Obviously Hamilton hadn't practiced SC procedures for Montreal 08 or Melbourne 09 ;)

ggajic
ggajic
0
Joined: 04 Feb 2010, 20:11

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

richard_leeds wrote: Incorrect. They should have kept the yellows and SC boards showing to the finish, rule 40.4 says that this defines the duration of the intervention. In this scenario rule 40.13 is invoked to say the safety car has to slip off into Mornington Crescent on the last lap.
True, but problem is that what you state can not be found in rules. I am discussing just written articles, not intentions of writer. So, article 40.11 plus green flags - 40.13 never comes into play.

mx_tifoso
mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

Just_a_fan wrote:
mx_tifosi wrote:Mandatory fans on each side? A quarter or half the size of each radiator would be enough perhaps? They already do it for promotional events.
Fans are banned because people use them for things other than cooling. That's the F1 way :lol:
Standardize this:
Image
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

komninosm
komninosm
0
Joined: 05 Apr 2009, 18:41
Location: Macedonia

Re: Monaco GP 2010 - Monte Carlo

Post

ggajic wrote:
richard_leeds wrote: Incorrect. They should have kept the yellows and SC boards showing to the finish, rule 40.4 says that this defines the duration of the intervention. In this scenario rule 40.13 is invoked to say the safety car has to slip off into Mornington Crescent on the last lap.
True, but problem is that what you state can not be found in rules. I am discussing just written articles, not intentions of writer. So, article 40.11 plus green flags - 40.13 never comes into play.
You use "never" erroneously. Green flags on this race's last lap may seem a bit conflicting with 40.13, but that does not mean that 40.13 can never be applied in other races. What 40.13 basically says (to the drivers) is that if there's still debris out on the last lap the SC will come in to the pits but you guys got to the finish line alone with no overtaking (as in don't be confused by lack of SC ahead of you, you're not allowed to overtake). It's pretty simple. The problem is that clearing a track can take many (SC) laps if it's a hard accident so if it happens 3 laps before the end it might need 5 laps to be cleaned (so never) or it might need 2 so it gets cleaned right on the last lap. That's the only situation that can be taken as confusing. Otherwise 40.13 is an easy rule to apply. It is patently not overridden in the majority of cases. There is only some ambiguity (according to some people) in a few cases. So your initial generalising statement was wrong. 40.13 is not "always" overridden, it only might be in this case.