2021 British Grand Prix - Silverstone, July 16 - 18

[Jolle]

You clearly didn't understand what the writer has written there. Do you?

You're quoting a high school level physics article, what do you expect?

51Gs is quite an impact, but not uncommon in motor-racing. In fact, Verstappen could step out of the car on his own power and, as the circuit doctor announced to the teams "had no initial signs of injuries".

Wasn't it necessary to quote an elementary article to someone writing pretty much lame stuff? You didn't pay attention to the other part in my original post. Selective outrage must be controlled, no matter the level of urge. I take it that you conclude that a driver walking off a 51g impact, is perfectly fine. That's why it is even more important to read the other part of that post that outlines the longer term impact of such a crash.

It’s the fact that 51Gs don’t say anything. Several parts of my body experienced much higher G’s today and it’s even my day off. Time is more important then anything with these kinds is forces. Like another poster said, 5G can kill you while you can be perfectly ok with 50.

Pointing to articles that go no further then what G forces are, holds no basis and is, quite frankly, high school level physics.

[NathanOlder]

Grosjean crash- 67g
Sainz in Sochi- 46g
Kubica in Canada- 75g
---
Bianchi's awful crash was 92g (will have to check that against what Dans' post says- very possible 92g was not his head)
David Purley- 180g
Kenny Brack- 214 g

Kimi hit 47G at this very track back in 2014

[101FlyingDutchman]

Can I just ask, what those that support HAM think about the stewards saying he was predominantly to blame? Why do you think this is?

I can see why VER had some part of the blame coming to him. Yes he did absolutely leave racing room but perhaps could have turned in slightly later (I wasn’t driving, I guess he wanted to try and make the corner side by side somehow and thought he had to turn in this hard). But perhaps he could have done it at less of a turn in ratio?

But where do you think HAM was actually at fault? I genuinely want to know.

[NathanOlder]

Can I just ask, what those that support HAM think about the stewards saying he was predominantly to blame? Why do you think this is?

I can see why VER had some part of the blame coming to him. Yes he did absolutely leave racing room but perhaps could have turned in slightly later (I wasn’t driving, I guess he wanted to try and make the corner side by side somehow and thought he had to turn in this hard). But perhaps he could have done it at less of a turn in ratio?

But where do you think HAM was actually at fault? I genuinely want to know.

I don't think either were at fault. It was simply 2 drivers not willing to back out and allow the other to win the race (both had a good chance to stay in the lead after lap 1)

Being on the inside has a smaller amount of risk, so it was a better tactical move not backing out from the outside.

If what James Allison said is true, about the FIA's internal rules on overtaking, then Max was at fault as it was Hamilton's corner. So Max then would have had to stay left and avoid Hamilton.

But over all I would have said a racing incident as I was unaware of these internal rules of overtaking.

[101FlyingDutchman]

Can I just ask, what those that support HAM think about the stewards saying he was predominantly to blame? Why do you think this is?

I can see why VER had some part of the blame coming to him. Yes he did absolutely leave racing room but perhaps could have turned in slightly later (I wasn’t driving, I guess he wanted to try and make the corner side by side somehow and thought he had to turn in this hard). But perhaps he could have done it at less of a turn in ratio?

But where do you think HAM was actually at fault? I genuinely want to know.

I don't think either were at fault. It was simply 2 drivers not willing to back out and allow the other to win the race (both had a good chance to stay in the lead after lap 1)

Being on the inside has a smaller amount of risk, so it was a better tactical move not backing out from the outside.

If what James Allison said is true, about the FIA's internal rules on overtaking, then Max was at fault as it was Hamilton's corner. So Max then would have had to stay left and avoid Hamilton.

But over all I would have said a racing incident as I was unaware of these internal rules of overtaking.

Thanks for your reply. So the follow up question for me then, is that you think the stewards were wrong with saying that he was predominantly to blame?

[ringo]

Secondly Lewis went wide after the contact, the contact caused him to go wider

Your understanding of basic physics is wrong. If you are accelerating forward and you make contact with a solid object, that will slow down your momentum, not speed you up.

The fact that Hamilton went slightly wide despite hitting Verstappen shows that he would have gone well wide if Verstappen’s car ghosted. He was never going to make the corner at that speed from that angle. It was a reckless manoeuvre.

Not really. Not with downforce cars. You cannot predict what happens when their loading is disturbed.

[Ryar]

You're quoting a high school level physics article, what do you expect?

51Gs is quite an impact, but not uncommon in motor-racing. In fact, Verstappen could step out of the car on his own power and, as the circuit doctor announced to the teams "had no initial signs of injuries".

Wasn't it necessary to quote an elementary article to someone writing pretty much lame stuff? You didn't pay attention to the other part in my original post. Selective outrage must be controlled, no matter the level of urge. I take it that you conclude that a driver walking off a 51g impact, is perfectly fine. That's why it is even more important to read the other part of that post that outlines the longer term impact of such a crash.

It’s the fact that 51Gs don’t say anything. Several parts of my body experienced much higher G’s today and it’s even my day off. Time is more important then anything with these kinds is forces. Like another poster said, 5G can kill you while you can be perfectly ok with 50.

Pointing to articles that go no further then what G forces are, holds no basis and is, quite frankly, high school level physics.

More than enough for debates here i think. Especially when all that folks do is find a way to deny it. I am sure the outcome isn't going to be different even if post Phd thesis as people have taken position in this argument.

[dans79]

Thanks for your reply. So the follow up question for me then, is that you think the stewards were wrong with saying that he was predominantly to blame?

They are doing what they have always done, not following the rules as have been laid out. They were responding to the outrage expressed by many. That's the fundamental issue with stewarding now imo, they are 75% about appeasing various fanbases. If they followed the rules as written, we'd see a lot more racing incidents, and a lot less penalties.

[PlatinumZealot]

Montoya speaks

https://www.planetf1.com/news/juan-pabl ... -hamilton/

Important because he is 95% of the time a Hamilton critic. He said Max cut in too early.

So we have real racers saying Max is equally to blame. Alonso, Montoya, Hakkinen, Charles.

[PlatinumZealot]

More than enough for debates here i think. Especially when all that folks do is find a way to deny it. I am sure the outcome isn't going to be different even if post Phd thesis as people have taken position in this argument.

Why do you care about the 51G so much?

What does that have to do with the incident on track?

Max caused it on himself. Should have backed out. If it were Maldonado on the inside he would have thought twice about cutting across. God I miss Maldonado.

[dans79]

Why do you care about the 51G so much?

It's a piece of data that your average fan doesn't understand, hence why a lot of people are using it to stoke the fires of outrage. We had one member here refer to Lewis as homocidal, and that's a good indication of how ridiculous some people are about it!

[the EDGE]

They are doing what they have always done, not following the rules as have been laid out. They were responding to the outrage expressed by many. That's the fundamental issue with stewarding now imo, they are 75% about appeasing various fanbases. If they followed the rules as written, we'd see a lot more racing incidents, and a lot less penalties.

Sorry but this is nothing but made up narrative to try to justify a point

The stewards decision was published at 16:17 on Sunday clearly stating Lewis was predominantly to blame… long before the furore of fans

Here… see for your self

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files ... r%2033.pdf

[PlatinumZealot]

The anticiapted outrage. The stewards arent fools. They are humans and want to leave Zandvoort in one peice. Lol.

I pray to Poseidon that Lewis leaves unharmed after Zandvoort.

[Ryar]

More than enough for debates here i think. Especially when all that folks do is find a way to deny it. I am sure the outcome isn't going to be different even if post Phd thesis as people have taken position in this argument.

Why do you care about the 51G so much?

What does that have to do with the incident on track?

Max caused it on himself. Should have backed out. If it were Maldonado on the inside he would have thought twice about cutting across. God I miss Maldonado.

What garbage is this?

[Mattchu]

This thread