Caterham had a double DNF on their first race, but despite the actual result, it was not all bad for the team. Both drivers had shown promising pace in the first half of the race, but for both drivers the reliability of their cars was not at the same level.
speedsense wrote:Wasn't this the lap that had full course yellows and SC signs? Whitmarsh made some comments about Vettel's speed under yellow? I went back and watched this a second time.. sure enough Vettel spent almost the whole lap at speed. Seems the steward's missed that one.
The SC light came on as Vettel was braking for T11. The first time we see an SC light on track, it's a shot of Vettel braking for T11. Even then it was next to him - he might not have been able to catch the light.
As soon as the SC signs are up you can hear Vettel shifting down and easing the revs, taking out speed massively. Of course he's not making a full stop to 80kph or whatever, why should he?
It doesnt matter now anyway. Sepang coming up, and Mclaren have the best car and if the fuel saving story is true, it will be great news for the Mp4-27 and bad bad news for the rest
GoLandoGo
Lewis v2.0
King George has arrived.
New found love for GT racing with Assetto Corsa Competizione on PS5 & PC
Let's not celebrate yet. Albert Park is a bad circuit to get a season benchmark, and if their fuel saving story was true - they'll need to carry more fuel weight, slowing them down and increasing tyre wear. And we don't know if they have a tank big enough to run a race without fuel saving.
raymondu999 wrote:And we don't know if they have a tank big enough to run a race without fuel saving.
Martin Whitmarsh was grumbling before the season because the FIA banned hot blowing when they'd already set the size of their fuel tank. Originally the exhausts were only going to be moved it was a later directive that banned hot blowing.
So if anything the fuel tanks are too big not too small to allow for the extra fuel burned whilst hot blowing throughout the race.
NathanOlder wrote:How many laps short were they if they ran at normal race pace ?
Someone in another thread claimed very early on - in the first stint.
That's not quite the same thing – they had to be in aggressive fuel save from lap 8 (or so the story goes)... But that doesn't tell us whether being in "fuel 4" for 1 lap uses 1% or 20% less fuel than being in their normal fuel mode, and hence doesn't tell us by how many laps they would have missed the end.
Did we get an explanation for why Petrov stopped the way he did? Why didn't he pull completely off the straight? Also, did he not have enough momentum to coast to end of pits? Thanks
DEVO wrote:Did we get an explanation for why Petrov stopped the way he did? Why didn't he pull completely off the straight? Also, did he not have enough momentum to coast to end of pits? Thanks
His steering was pulling increasingly to the right, he had no way to drive in a straight line any more.
DEVO wrote:Did we get an explanation for why Petrov stopped the way he did? Why didn't he pull completely off the straight? Also, did he not have enough momentum to coast to end of pits? Thanks
His steering was pulling increasingly to the right, he had no way to drive in a straight line any more.
thanks, that makes sense, just seemed odd that he kept it on the road instead of all the way on the grass section. either way, i bet a sc would have been called for.
DEVO wrote:Did we get an explanation for why Petrov stopped the way he did? Why didn't he pull completely off the straight? Also, did he not have enough momentum to coast to end of pits? Thanks
His steering was pulling increasingly to the right, he had no way to drive in a straight line any more.
Maybe could have gone down the pit entrance ? Just a thought
GoLandoGo
Lewis v2.0
King George has arrived.
New found love for GT racing with Assetto Corsa Competizione on PS5 & PC
1. Did anybody saw Hamilton`s KERS on-board footage working? Because there are rumors it didn`t … That would explain why:
a) he lost first place to Button even if he started on the clean side of the track; btw. it was very strange to see that cars on the first, third and fifth on the grid, which started on the clean side of the track, were actually started slower than the second, fourth and six's ones ...
b) his pace was poor compared to Button, because KERS is worth about 0,2-0,3 sec per lap;
c) he couldn`t have a chance to overtake Vettel in the DRS zones.
2. One official Renault staff member said that their engine is at least 10% fuel efficient than Mercedes engine. So let’s say is needed 150 kg (210 liters) of fuel to end the race, than RBR (Lotus …) would carry 135 kg at the start of the race. Knowing that 10 kilos of fuel worth 0,3-0,35 sec. per lap then that`s a huge advantage overall or at least at the first stint. Not to mention the tyre wear is much more milder …
atanatizante wrote:1. Did anybody saw Hamilton`s KERS on-board footage working? Because there are rumors it didn`t … That would explain why:
a) he lost first place to Button even if he started on the clean side of the track; btw. it was very strange to see that cars on the first, third and fifth on the grid, which started on the clean side of the track, were actually started slower than the second, fourth and six's ones ...
b) his pace was poor compared to Button, because KERS is worth about 0,2-0,3 sec per lap;
c) he couldn`t have a chance to overtake Vettel in the DRS zones.
The start issue was caused by the clutch biting too quickly, they can't use KERS up to a decent speed, and the start was pretty much lost within the first 2 seconds. No idea about working KERS for the rest of the race, though you would have expected it to be mentioned – Hamilton said he didn't understand why he couldn't keep up, surely he would understand clearly if his KERS was busted.
and if the fuel saving story is true, it will be great news for the Mp4-27 and bad bad news for the rest 
