Lando Norris 10second stop/go penalty - Qatar 2024

[mwillems]

The reason it seems harsh is because of the rather daft way that the debris was handled by the Race Control. It was double yellow flagged , the Yellow and Red, and then they stopped the flags and let someone run over it and a couple of cars suffer damage that will be in the six figures. Was it dangerous or not? If it was, provision should have been made to remove the debris through a VSC or SC. Then, because of the huge delay in dishing out the penalty which occurred after the next Safety Car, the punishment was scaled up. Had it of occurred before the safety car, the punishment might not appear so severe.

All in all, my issue is with the timing of the punishment, inconsistency of Race Controls attitude towards the "Danger" and the fact that there were double yellows in the first place and not VSC or SC to remove the debris. All thanks to the new Race Control team bedding in during an end of season WCC fight. Genius.

[chrisc90]

How long were the double yellows waved before Max and Lando passed? Given the mirror had been out on track for 1 lap.

[SiLo]

The penalty is consistent with other infringements of a similar manner. It doesn't matter how small the debris is, there were double waved yellows flying.

[mwillems]

I guess the other thing I'm confused about is that Max didn't brake much in that section. Still doing over 250kph there. I don't really see that as any safer than Lando who was doing 300kph at that point. Isn't the instruction to reduce speed significantly? Such a strange incident. 250kph doesn't seem like it is a safe reduction.

[TFSA]

No. There is a huge underreporting of these incidents. Usually we do not see them and without the spotlight here on the situation, the team radios following and the too clear gap reduction...most likely we would not have seen it if Norris would not have postet a green sector but as usual in many sectors in the race just a yellow one. Just a worse exit from the last corner, a different engine mode or a DRS in the last ~5-10laps would have been enough to not see it without the spotlight.

The pen is harsh by reason, because it is usually super hard to catch someone.

Let me rephrase it another way then: If you reduced the penalty from a 10 sec S&G to just 10 seconds, do you think we would see more drivers ignoring yellow flags?

My answer to that would be No. It doesn't get you any advantage that in any weigh outweighs even the reduced penalty. Even with just a 10 second penalty, you'll never see a driver try to abuse the yellow flag rule to gain an advantage, because there's no advantage to be gained that isn't far outweighed by the penalty. And also, drivers are humans too, and understand that marshalls have families they need to get home to.

As for catching people: You could easily make a computer algorithm, which checks when a car passes a yellow zone (including ~2-3 seconds before the zone is digitally activated), and compares racing telemetry to green running to see if they floored it through the zone - and then report it to race control, so they can send it to the stewards for investigation. That's not in any way an insurmountable technical challenge.

[TFSA]

I guess the other thing I'm confused about is that Max didn't brake much in that section. Still doing over 250kph there. I don't really see that as any safer than Lando who was doing 300kph at that point. Isn't the instruction to reduce speed significantly? Such a strange incident. 250kph doesn't seem like it is a safe reduction.

A reduction in speed from 300 to 250 Kph, while only a 16,67% speed reduction, is in reality a 30%+ reduction in kinetic energy. It gives drivers way more reaction time and way more control over the car.

[mwillems]

I guess the other thing I'm confused about is that Max didn't brake much in that section. Still doing over 250kph there. I don't really see that as any safer than Lando who was doing 300kph at that point. Isn't the instruction to reduce speed significantly? Such a strange incident. 250kph doesn't seem like it is a safe reduction.

A reduction in speed from 300 to 250 Kph, while only a 16,67% speed reduction, is in reality a 30%+ reduction in kinetic energy. It gives drivers way more reaction time and way more control over the car.

You've no control if your puncture at that speed causes you to spin or loses the ability to brake or stop safely. Nor is that speed preparing to stop or turn. Point of the speed is to minimise chances of an unsafe impact. Just showing you lifted your pedal like some others did, how is this in anyway making the situation safe?

Decent article here describing the situation well.

https://www.planetf1.com/features/new-q ... deployment

Again, not disputing the penalty, just the whole debacle and handling by race control.

[TFSA]

You've no control if your puncture at that speed causes you to spin or loses the ability to brake or stop safely. Not is that speed preparing to stop or turn. Point of the speed is to minimise chances of an unsafe impact. Just showing you lifted your pedal like some others did, how is this in anyway making the situation safe?

You severely underestimate the difference between 250 and 300 kph. Taking everything into account, included the increased reaction time drivers have, the reduced kinetic energy and the increased car control you get and the reduced braking distance, you probably cut chances of an accident by at least 2/3ths, if not by 75%, by going 250 rather than 300.

There's a reason the general conclusion of road safety is that "speed kills". The rule of thumb for just normal cars is that every 10 kph they increase their speed on a highway above the legal limit, they double the chances of a fatal accident. So a car doing 180 instead of 130 has a 32x chance of being involved in a fatal accident.

[basti313]

I guess the other thing I'm confused about is that Max didn't brake much in that section. Still doing over 250kph there.

Does not matter. The agreement is, that they are off the hook if they do a clear lift.
All discussion on safety is fine, but there is a clear rule and a clear agreement on the necessary behavior. So we need to split a bit on the past and the future.

Let me rephrase it another way then: If you reduced the penalty from a 10 sec S&G to just 10 seconds, do you think we would see more drivers ignoring yellow flags?

Yes, absolutely. They ignored double yellow in Q for years and tried to get away with it. Only since the pen is strict and the lap gets deleted this ended.

Why do you want to change the rule? The rule is fine, drivers only get the pen when they act stupid. It is easier for the drivers to stop acting stupid than changing rules every time a driver acts stupid.

[TFSA]

Yes, absolutely. They ignored double yellow in Q for years and tried to get away with it. Only since the pen is strict and the lap gets deleted this ended.

I'm talking race-session here. Qualifying is different, the potential gain is much larger, and it's an entirely different penalty all-together (grid drop).

Let's stick to discussing the penalty in a race session. I don't see any major gain there, which in any way would make a driver ignore a yellow flag willingly.

[Cs98]

I guess the other thing I'm confused about is that Max didn't brake much in that section. Still doing over 250kph there. I don't really see that as any safer than Lando who was doing 300kph at that point. Isn't the instruction to reduce speed significantly? Such a strange incident. 250kph doesn't seem like it is a safe reduction.

A reduction in speed from 300 to 250 Kph, while only a 16,67% speed reduction, is in reality a 30%+ reduction in kinetic energy. It gives drivers way more reaction time and way more control over the car.

You've no control if your puncture at that speed causes you to spin or loses the ability to brake or stop safely. Not is that speed preparing to stop or turn. Point of the speed is to minimise chances of an unsafe impact. Just showing you lifted your pedal like some others did, how is this in anyway making the situation safe?

Decent article here describing the situation well.

https://www.planetf1.com/features/new-q ... deployment

Again, not disputing the penalty, just the whole debacle and handling by race control.

I think it makes a big difference, you are entering an unknown but potentially dangerous situation in a double yellow zone, there could be a car on track up ahead. The difference between lifting completely and touching the brakes (which Max did), and keeping it pinned with DRS open (which Lando did), is pretty stark. Lando was doing 320 before the braking zone, Max 260. The stopping time between the two speeds is pretty big, Lando was carrying 50% more kinetic energy. Also, it's the principle, you are supposed to recognize double waved yellow and react in some way. Keeping it pinned sends the signal that you see double waved yellow as an opportunity to gain time (not saying Lando did this, I just think he missed it).

[mwillems]

You've no control if your puncture at that speed causes you to spin or loses the ability to brake or stop safely. Not is that speed preparing to stop or turn. Point of the speed is to minimise chances of an unsafe impact. Just showing you lifted your pedal like some others did, how is this in anyway making the situation safe?

You severely underestimate the difference between 250 and 300 kph. Taking everything into account, included the increased reaction time drivers have, the reduced kinetic energy and the increased car control you get and the reduced braking distance, you probably cut chances of an accident by at least 2/3ths, if not by 75%, by going 250 rather than 300.

There's a reason the general conclusion of road safety is that "speed kills". The rule of thumb for just normal cars is that every 10 kph they increase their speed on a highway above the legal limit, they double the chances of a fatal accident. So a car doing 180 instead of 130 has a 32x chance of being involved in a fatal accident.

OK, but then others just lifted and scrubbed a little speed. Re: Max, although I still don't think that is safe under double yellows. Whether it is more controllable is not the point. If the point is to ensure safety where there might be parts on track and a driver that is exposed, dropping to 250kph is not safe.

[basti313]

Yes, absolutely. They ignored double yellow in Q for years and tried to get away with it. Only since the pen is strict and the lap gets deleted this ended.

I'm talking race-session here. Qualifying is different, the potential gain is much larger, and it's an entirely different penalty all-together (grid drop).

Let's stick to discussing the penalty in a race session. I don't see any major gain there, which in any way would make a driver ignore a yellow flag willingly.

That makes it even worse!
We are talking about a rule that only the worst drivers like Mazepin and Latifi violated in the race before! Why change it?

[Partymood]

Ridiculous penalty!

We haven’t seen a 10 second stop/go since I don’t know when…Hamilton Fuji 2008?

It should have been a 5 second penalty! Nothing serious since it was just debris on the front straight!

Had it been double yellows with someone off the track I would understand the penalty…

Kimi Raikkonen, Spa 2017, for the same reason

[TFSA]

That makes it even worse!
We are talking about a rule that only the worst drivers like Mazepin and Latifi violated in the race before! Why change it?

No it doesn't.

The breaking of this rule in race sessions is the results of incompetence, not malice - hence two of the four drivers who have been done in by this in the last 10 years are two drivers who are generally considered to have been two of the most incompetent drivers on the grid.

Harsher punishments does not reduce incompetence. That's not how that works.

A penalty should generally never be harsher than until the point where it doesn't discourage/prevent transgression anymore. That's a healthy principle, whether you're talking F1, or society in general.