Agree with some of that- I'm not sure why Russell's car needed full SC (maybe it was harder/more time consuming to remove?) but there doesn't seem to be 100% consistency incident to incident and track to track- I suppose all tracks are different, though.izzy wrote: ↑30 Sep 2019, 14:52they could easily arrange things to remove stopped cars without putting a crane out, quite often. They could just winch them, a lot of the time, if only they had a rope!!El Scorchio wrote: ↑30 Sep 2019, 13:19I don't really like VSC, (they could refine it in some ways to keep the timings neutral or do it slightly differently) but we all know it's there to try and lessen the possibility of another Bianchi incident. And you have to ask yourself is it worse that X driver benefits over Y driver, or that someone else (be it driver or steward) maybe loses their life?
It really spoils it afaic when we see strategies being played out and we're sitting there waiting for tyres to last or not with the decisions teams have made and driving to preserve them or use them for pace, and then it all gets changed arbitrarily and the car that deserves the win doesn't get it. There is literally no point having a race if it's a lottery like this, and they could improve it so easily if they just tried. Not every time but quite a lot of the time.
why did Russel's car need a full SC? it was miles from the track, the exact situation a VSC was invented for. ok perhaps it was to make up a bit for the VSC for Seb's car, that they didn't need either
RE: Another Bianchi- It doesn't have to be only when cranes and recovery vehicles are involved. There can still be drivers and marshals running or walking around in run off areas and in danger of other cars which presents an inherent risk. The danger is not just to a crashing driver, but to any other persons in the area. The sport is right to take this incredibly seriously and eliminate as much risk as possible. I have zero problem with a race being stopped or neutralised under these circumstances. I do think maybe they are a little trigger happy these days and needn't always call for SC or VSC, but safety is paramount.
Stragegy being ruined etc? That's just good or bad luck, isn't it. Same as the weather. I'm ok with that. Besides which, at certain circuits planning for SC or VSC IS a valid part of strategy. It didn't work for Merc in Singapore, but it did in Russia- there's no question that they'd have factored that possibility in to their thinking when opting for mediums in qualifying. It's nowadays a valid tactic for teams to progress through the field, whether by design, or by happenstance.
Teams have been taking advantage of regular safety car periods for years and years. No-one ever moans about that. Why should VSC being taken advantage of in the same way be any different?
