2012 European GP - Valencia

[Traction]

Is it possible that the alternator received to much current from the Kers? An alternator will overheat with too much charge/ current and considering the alternator handles/directs the energy back to the engine it might be that it might be possible. No?

alternator and kers have no connection whatsoever.The source of the failure is to be found elsewhere ..Alternator 12V -
KERS- High Voltage-

But kers utilises an alternator no?

[beelsebob]

Is it possible that the alternator received to much current from the Kers? An alternator will overheat with too much charge/ current and considering the alternator handles/directs the energy back to the engine it might be that it might be possible. No?

alternator and kers have no connection whatsoever.The source of the failure is to be found elsewhere ..Alternator 12V -
KERS- High Voltage-

But kers utilises an alternator no?

No, KERS utilises its own MGU.

[Trailer23]

By far, the best race of the season.

If U think about it, Red Bulls B-Team was probably the reason why Vettel didn't finish the race. Senna got a drive-through for getting hit from the back (what a shocker). Petrov & Riccardo have a bigger incident with no result.

If there were any more surprises in store for us at the end of the race, it would have been the Ice Man winning & making it 8 of 8.

After all the drama, one has to wonder...how is Webber 2nd in championship points?

[myurr]

They had it In Canada and it didn't give them a place, but even if it had then those would be few and far between during the course of a season. Whereas the failure rate isn't as low as you're suggesting, based on current evidence. If they introduced it two races ago then there have been 11 pit stops and 1 failure. That's not one in 80 or 100, that's just one in 11.

Let's accept that your 0.3 seconds gain is accurate, then they've gained 3 seconds and lost 10.

[Ganxxta]

Correct me if I am wrong. It seems that Mercedes does not seem to have a good race pace to match Red Bull, Ferrari and Lotus. They really have to improve their car in order to keep up with their rivals.

I agree with you, but anyway, nicely done by Schumacher, finally he found some luck and it seems the the extra Engineer in his Team paid of. =D>

hm seems I lost my bet to my mate that he wouldn't get more than 10points this season 10 bucks away^^
But there is still the Fia decision open, in my opinion he used the DRS before the yellow flags and closed it right when he saw the yellow flags, it wasn't a fullcourse yellow if I remember correctly...

[Cuky]

Senna got a drive-through for getting hit from the back (what a shocker)

Senna got a drive through because he pushed that Sauber (i think that was Sauber) in the wall

[simos]

After all the drama, one has to wonder...how is Webber 2nd in championship points?

He had some crazy races. His Q results weren't that bad (5 top 5), but he usually lost a lot of places on start and went under radar during races. I really don't remember if he ever lead, except in that Monaco race.

His Q results;
R1: 5th
R2: 4th
R3: 7th
R4: 3th
R5: 11th
R6: 2th
R7: 4th
R8: 19th

[beelsebob]

They had it In Canada and it didn't give them a place, but even if it had then those would be few and far between during the course of a season. Whereas the failure rate isn't as low as you're suggesting, based on current evidence. If they introduced it two races ago then there have been 11 pit stops and 1 failure. That's not one in 80 or 100, that's just one in 11.

Your sample size is too small. 1 in 80 or 1 in 100 can look like 1 in 1 if it fails first time and then not 79 or 99 times .

Let's accept that your 0.3 seconds gain is accurate, then they've gained 3 seconds and lost 10.

The point is that McLaren are operating with far more information than we are. The fact that they used it in the race says that when you actually have a large enough sample, the failure rate is lower than it currently appears.

[Trailer23]

I think its fair to say that up until now, Webber had been flying low under the radar.

[simos]

Senna got a drive-through for getting hit from the back (what a shocker)

Senna got a drive through because he pushed that Sauber (i think that was Sauber) in the wall

There was no way Senna could possibly know that car was behind him. There was a lot of action ahead of him and no time to look in mirrors, then someone behind him drove on ideal line just as he was moving there. Onboard from Senna shows, that he only stayed on his line.

Btw, for which speeding under the yellows was Hamilton under investigation?

[zyphro]

There appears to be confusion re. DRS and yellow flags (certainly on other boards).

The question is not: whether he (Schumacher) had the DRS open, it is whether he had slowed down. Sources suggest he had. So I don't see a penalty coming.

[Ganxxta]

There appears to be confusion re. DRS and yellow flags (certainly on other boards).

The question is not: whether he (Schumacher) had the DRS open, it is whether he had slowed down. Sources suggest he had. So I don't see a penalty coming.

+1, and he directly closed the drs when he reached the first yellow flag.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idgrUbrx ... ure=relmfu[/youtube] @1:40

[myurr]

They had it In Canada and it didn't give them a place, but even if it had then those would be few and far between during the course of a season. Whereas the failure rate isn't as low as you're suggesting, based on current evidence. If they introduced it two races ago then there have been 11 pit stops and 1 failure. That's not one in 80 or 100, that's just one in 11.

Your sample size is too small. 1 in 80 or 1 in 100 can look like 1 in 1 if it fails first time and then not 79 or 99 times .

Ditto for claiming it's 1 in 14,000,000. In real world usage it's still currently at 1:11.

Let's accept that your 0.3 seconds gain is accurate, then they've gained 3 seconds and lost 10.

The point is that McLaren are operating with far more information than we are. The fact that they used it in the race says that when you actually have a large enough sample, the failure rate is lower than it currently appears.

Abundance of data hasn't stopped poor decisions in the past.

[beelsebob]

They had it In Canada and it didn't give them a place, but even if it had then those would be few and far between during the course of a season. Whereas the failure rate isn't as low as you're suggesting, based on current evidence. If they introduced it two races ago then there have been 11 pit stops and 1 failure. That's not one in 80 or 100, that's just one in 11.

Your sample size is too small. 1 in 80 or 1 in 100 can look like 1 in 1 if it fails first time and then not 79 or 99 times .

Ditto for claiming it's 1 in 14,000,000. In real world usage it's still currently at 1:11.

Right, as I said earlier, I was pulling numbers out of my ass... But the point is, McLaren are sitting on the data, and made that decision. It's likely therefore that the data they have says it gains them sufficient time that it's worth having, and hence that the actual rate is an order of magnitude higher than 1:11.

[zyphro]

Finally, a comeback podium for Michael. =D> Let's go for a win in next races! [-o<

Schumacher drove the wheels off the W03 to stay in touch during his first stint. The medium tyres simply were not the way to go at the start. Rosberg made the softs last nearly as long and didn't loose as much time. Clear then reverted Schumacher to plan B which I assume was the two stop strategy. His performance on the mediums in the first stint kept him in touch.

+1

Correct me if I am wrong. It seems that Mercedes does not seem to have good race pace to match Red Bull, Ferrari and Lotus. They really have to improve their car in order to keep up with their rivals.

Totally agree, this race was a miracle for them. Hopefully this gives them a morale boost, we need upgrades and more pace!