2012 German GP - Hockenheim

[f1316]

What about the fact that Vettel was constantly using the run off areas as a part of the track lap after lap?

It wasn't just that one time. He was "going wide" almost every opportunity and was gaining time all the while.

I don't think it was helping him actually. The kerbing in Hockenheim is either quite high, or has astro - and if you run wide on exit kerbs like that it's like running over a big bump, or losing control. Point being I don't think he was running wide on exits on purpose to gain time - I think he was just driving ragged really.

I completely agree with this. Vettel was extremely ragged in the final stint and, whilst its possible he may have been trying to run wide to gain advantage, he was far too wide and wild for it to have beenfitted him. Like I said before, his driving at this point of the race was a further sign of his poor temperament when things don't go his way.

Regarding the penalty, as Martin Brundle pointed out, there's a bit of a problem with consistency (as ever) with how this rule is enforced. As someone pointed out, the run off at turn one in SPa has always been used in this way and people always ran off the track at Magny Cours to gain advantage, so it's far from a clear cut rule. Nevertheless, there was no need for Vettel to take the risk, as he clearly had the tyres on Button at that stage race, and was going to get through sooner or later with a bit more patience; his problem was that he was still thinking he could get Alonso, who was busy doing a stunning penultimate lap of the race!

[f1316]

Does anyone have the link to that site where we can see drivers' lap times lap by lap?

[raymondu999]

Regarding the penalty, as Martin Brundle pointed out, there's a bit of a problem with consistency (as ever) with how this rule is enforced.

Agreed. I wonder though.

This is just a harebrained theory, out of the blue.

People were crying foul of the Red Bulls getting away with the mapping shenanigans earlier before the race. Could this perhaps be "affirmative action" on the stewards' part? By that I mean - they were afraid that the public would perceive them as favoring Red Bull? Maybe, for example, the stewards found the case either borderline legal, or perhaps on the fence, but decided to do this to quell thoughts that they were perhaps favoring Red Bull. Thoughts?

[godsire]

Does anyone have the link to that site where we can see drivers' lap times lap by lap?

Drivers' times lap by lap

Just go a little bit down and choose a driver from the list

[PhillipM]

What about the fact that Vettel was constantly using the run off areas as a part of the track lap after lap?

It wasn't just that one time. He was "going wide" almost every opportunity and was gaining time all the while.

I don't think it was helping him actually. The kerbing in Hockenheim is either quite high, or has astro - and if you run wide on exit kerbs like that it's like running over a big bump, or losing control. Point being I don't think he was running wide on exits on purpose to gain time - I think he was just driving ragged really.

All the rest of the series run wide there deliberately to gain time, can't be that bumpy

[f1316]

Drivers' times lap by lap

Just go a little bit down and choose a driver from the list

Awesome, thank you for this link - I'll have to bookmark the page for next time!

This leads me to two points on Mercedes/Schumacher:
1) Michael had a 9.2 second gap over Perez before his final pit stop and, in the two laps prior to it, was only losing about a tenth per lap. So why did they feel it was necessary to make the stop? Webber was another 20 seconds back, so down side of staying out was likely the same as he ended up with anyway. Was it grandstanding for the Merc bosses? Getting the fastest lap looks better than an uneventful 5th?
2) If Mercedes were forced to make this final stop, why don't they accept their tyres issues and simply go with a three stopper from the start? By trying to be on the same strategy as the other they end up going slowly and still not making the tyres last, necessitating the three-stopper (if we suppose this to be the case), only at the end of which were they pushing. I've said this before, but I think there is margin for an aggressive, "one extra stop" strategy where the driver only needs to find about .3 a lap by pushing harder to make the extra stop worthwhile; however, this needs to be done from the outset to have any chance of working.

[mr moda]

really fed up with people that keep saying Alonso doesn't have a good car, or one of the best.

While it has been consistent and reliable, it is certainly not all that fast.

Alonso got pole and quite easily led on a technical track even with Button and Vettle getting DRS behind so to say it's not fast is not looking at the facts in hand.

Today they did everything right, and Alonso surely controlled the race. But it was clear his pace did not match Button's or Vettel's. They all said so after the race, btw.

The second half of the track the Ferrari pulled time every lap, Button and Vettle were never in a position to challenge at turn 1 or 2 ever during the race and only ever caught up under DRS but again, never drew alongside to challenge into the hairpin. I'm sure there's 20 other drivers out there who would like that lack of pace under them.

As for Vettle's penalty, sure it's technically true that passing while on the wrong side of a white line is illegal but to determine an outside pass on a painted surface as "gaining an advantage" is ridiculous and I'm not sure I've seen it applied before.

Imagine the protests at Spa (re; Turn 1) in the future.

Alonso was controling, Vettel and Button were racing.

[zyphro]

Regarding the penalty, as Martin Brundle pointed out, there's a bit of a problem with consistency (as ever) with how this rule is enforced.

Agreed. I wonder though.

This is just a harebrained theory, out of the blue.

People were crying foul of the Red Bulls getting away with the mapping shenanigans earlier before the race. Could this perhaps be "affirmative action" on the stewards' part? By that I mean - they were afraid that the public would perceive them as favoring Red Bull? Maybe, for example, the stewards found the case either borderline legal, or perhaps on the fence, but decided to do this to quell thoughts that they were perhaps favoring Red Bull. Thoughts?

I agree.

[beelsebob]

Regarding the penalty, as Martin Brundle pointed out, there's a bit of a problem with consistency (as ever) with how this rule is enforced.

Agreed. I wonder though.

This is just a harebrained theory, out of the blue.

People were crying foul of the Red Bulls getting away with the mapping shenanigans earlier before the race. Could this perhaps be "affirmative action" on the stewards' part? By that I mean - they were afraid that the public would perceive them as favoring Red Bull? Maybe, for example, the stewards found the case either borderline legal, or perhaps on the fence, but decided to do this to quell thoughts that they were perhaps favoring Red Bull. Thoughts?

I doubt it tbh, it's more likely simply the fact that he was off the track when he overtook, and therefore broke the rules that caused him to get a penalty

[Mr Alcatraz]

I doubt it tbh, it's more likely simply the fact that he was off the track when he overtook, and therefore broke the rules that caused him to get a penalty

Agreed!
I see no connection between the two. They were tossing around the idea on Speed TV post race broadcast that Red Bull abandoned this engine map for the race, (in fear of a retroactive penalty, which I find unlikely since they got the go ahead from Race Stewards) and even went on to say that Webbers inability to charge through the field like he did in Valencia was possibly evidence of it. They went on to say that Joe Bower was really hawk eying their cars pre race. Any thoughts on that hypothesis?

[raymondu999]

Agreed!
I see no connection between the two. They were tossing around the idea on Speed TV post race broadcast that Red Bull abandoned this engine map for the race, (in fear of a retroactive penalty, which I find unlikely since they got the go ahead from Race Stewards) and even went on to say that Webbers inability to charge through the field like he did in Valencia was possibly evidence of it. They went on to say that Joe Bower was really hawk eying their cars pre race. Any thoughts on that hypothesis?

Changing engine maps would requie them starting from the pitlane. Parc ferme regs and all.

[Mr Alcatraz]

Agreed!
I see no connection between the two. They were tossing around the idea on Speed TV post race broadcast that Red Bull abandoned this engine map for the race, (in fear of a retroactive penalty, which I find unlikely since they got the go ahead from Race Stewards) and even went on to say that Webbers inability to charge through the field like he did in Valencia was possibly evidence of it. They went on to say that Joe Bower was really hawk eying their cars pre race. Any thoughts on that hypothesis?

Changing engine maps would requie them starting from the pitlane. Parc ferme regs and all.

At the fear of sounding really stupid: could they just not engage that map. On my Aprilia (which is probably not a good example) I have to erngage my different engine maps manually on the fly or stationary. Certainly telemetry would show if they used it or not!

[bhall]

Teams used to have a lot more flexibility with engine maps. McLaren, for example, changed engine maps with every gear change. These days the rules are markedly more restrictive. Teams are restricted to two engine maps - dry tires/wet tires - and the map used for qualifying must be used for the race.

[Mr Alcatraz]

Thanks for that info.I guess I should pay closer attention to the regs as they change, because I remember reading a few years back that the some teams were making something like 50+ map changes a lap depending on the circuit.

[raymondu999]

Changing engine maps would requie them starting from the pitlane. Parc ferme regs and all.

At the fear of sounding really stupid: could they just not engage that map. On my Aprilia (which is probably not a good example) I have to erngage my different engine maps manually on the fly or stationary. Certainly telemetry would show if they used it or not! [/quote]
The car can only have 3 engine maps I believe, wet, dry and intermediate. If you run a wet or intermediate map your rainlight will start blinking.

I do remember though a few races back that Vettel used his rain map in Brazil 2011 - to reduce the torque going through his broken gearbox.

It raises an interesting issue. Could this perhaps be an option? Load your maps (as long as the map is within the rules as some teams are doing, as it will be checked by the FIA anyways) onto the rain or inter maps, then use it for the purpose of changing engine maps, no?

Alcatraz, they're allowed to change individual parameters, such as fuel mix, etc etc but not the actual "map"