Lotus F1 Team driver Romain Grosjean has been handed a one-race ban following his severe collision at the start of the Belgian GP. The driver has been involved in seven first-lap crashes already this season, surely a metric to have been influential in the decision making of the stewards.
Never heard they did that. I do remember Newey physically emoting during the first laps. The tv camera shots on him looked like he was being shocked with electricity at times. I do also remember RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.raymondu999 wrote:they cut the tyre open and then calculated the strategy based on the data they saw
I always considered that as a bit of a teflon shoulders cop out. They knew it was outside of normal operating safety margins and they also knew neither driver would ever refuse to race how it was. Nice cowardly way of paying lip service to your duty of care to the drivers.Chuckjr wrote: RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.
A driver cannot decide this.I still cannot understand this .I cannot understand how Mercedes back then decided to let the silver arrows start in LeMans after 2 flips of their cars in practise and warmup. and hoping for two diveplanes doing the trick..simieski wrote:I always considered that as a bit of a teflon shoulders cop out. They knew it was outside of normal operating safety margins and they also knew neither driver would ever refuse to race how it was. Nice cowardly way of paying lip service to your duty of care to the drivers.Chuckjr wrote: RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.
Lol. Reminds me of Spa 2010, when drivers took eau rouge one handed with a stalled rear wing. Drivers and team will always take risk.marcush. wrote:A driver cannot decide this.I still cannot understand this .I cannot understand how Mercedes back then decided to let the silver arrows start in LeMans after 2 flips of their cars in practise and warmup. and hoping for two diveplanes doing the trick..simieski wrote:I always considered that as a bit of a teflon shoulders cop out. They knew it was outside of normal operating safety margins and they also knew neither driver would ever refuse to race how it was. Nice cowardly way of paying lip service to your duty of care to the drivers.Chuckjr wrote: RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.
You have responsibility for the safety of your drivers and spectators ..you just had to watch Newey (the guy in whos car Senna died )was completely derailled come race start...it took away a lot of respect i had for him .Racing is also about taking risks ..but especially on a track like Spa you should avoid taking risks you feel unable to calculate.
See Michelin in 2005 USA GrandPrix..they had doubts and evidence it was too big a risk and stood up for it.
That's the point: you obviously can't trust the teams on that. Spa 2010 AND 2011 were a clear example of that. Don't get me wrong: when there is something technically wrong with car that could be harmfull to the driver they will let him pull over, but if the car is technically without flaws but has elements that could put the driver in danger anyhow they will not act, even when there are events where that system proved to be harmfull. Remember the Renault Lotus of last year from which the sidepod exploded just outside the pitstraight? They didn't removed or even changed their front exit exhaust approach at all, only some more heat protection. Biggest example of all would be ground effect: teams never made sure the car was enough protected to make sure the driver would be ok when he lost control at the amazing cornering speeds they got. Even the exception confirms the rule: the introduction of carbon fibre chassis was hailed as a great improvement of safety for the drivers, but at the same time made the car much lighter and thus faster.MikeFromCanada wrote:I agree 100% with marcush. It is up to the teams to be trusted to provide their drivers with a safe vehicle to race in. It was very well known that running the tyres at that camber provided a significant safety risk, yet they still went ahead and let them race as is.
Sure you may say F1 is a dangerous sport and that you can never be 100% safe, but knowing full well that an area on the car is compromised and not doing anything about it is just being negligent. It is similar to having a hairline leak in the fuel lines and then coming on the radio saying "keep running, it's only 1 more lap to the finish, we should be okay". There should be no doubt when you are dealing with people's lives.
Again given the competitive state of F1, the teams WILL take that tenth anyday! A half too, especially in a year like this were half a tenth could easily mean 3 places on the starting grid. Pirelli tyres are relative safe you know; tyres will not just blow up b/c the camber is set too extreme. They will blister alot, taking away a lot of tyre performance. Could end up wrong though at a corner like eay rouge.marcush. wrote:I can tell you ...as long as the car moves a real driver will go on ...Mansell started a grandprix with fuel leaking into the cockpit he actually took a bath in in ...and paid a huge price in his latewr life for it...You just cannot rely on the clear state of mind when a driver is in race mode..but i do not even think about this little fact ..It´s a matter of judgement on the side of the team what is safe and what is not.
Todays a not properly fixed wheel is a reason to fine the team for a unsafe realease but you tell me a team that does not even understand the tyre they are using -testemony this years races -would decide if the blistering that is obviously is happening is dangerous or not .The fact they did not suffer blowouts is not a proof they were right ,it´s a proof they were lucky .
The question is how much in terms of absolute laptime will you gain with additional cambers ? I´m rather sure it´s not a world maybe a tenth ?
Which was what they were fearing could happen.turbof1 wrote: Could end up wrong though at a corner like eay rouge.
Yes indeed. Well this year the risk should be reduced anyhow, given the medium and hard tyres are being used.zyphro wrote:Which was what they were fearing could happen.turbof1 wrote: Could end up wrong though at a corner like eay rouge.
http://forums.autosport.com/index.php?s ... =snow&st=0bhallg2k wrote:Has there ever been a snow race?
