2014 British GP - Silverstone

[SectorOne]

Here´s a compilation of the overtakes. (with sound)



I can´t see how that defense is any different then Rosberg at the start of the Canadian GP.
Or Hamilton´s sharp marker in Bahrain. Tough racing, start over the next lap and do it properly.

Here´s Canada, 0:26

[turbof1]

We've seen this more then enough in the past. This is part of racing. Harsh, but fair since no rules were broken and there was no touching.

Alonso defended very well, and Vettel attacked very well.

[iotar__]

I don't know if it has been mentioned but Wolff confirmed they were on 2 stop strategies for both drivers. I'm not going to say which driver's winning this one without technical problems but his name starts with R, arguing about would be pointless, Hamilton would have had a small chance with pace advantage.

Alo-Vett: If it's normal and fair why did they give warnings for track limits the whole day?

[tomazy]

Interesting statistic from the race is ideal fastest lap from a driver. Data from :http://184.106.145.74/f1-championship/f ... es_V01.pdf

Hamilton: 1:37,119
Bottas: 1:37,411
Vettel:1:37,432
Button: 1:38,080
Alonso: 1:38,369

I only calculated the fastest drivers from the teams, if we calculate the ideal fastest time for the car, RBR would be 1:37,376 and McLaren would be: 1:37,977. but I think this is unfair, becouse the drivers could have difirent setup, and one could benefit in one sector and the other in other sectors.

+ we have to keep in mind, that Hamilton and Bottas probably didn't push as hard as the others did when the car was the fastest at the end of the race.

[turbof1]

I don't know if it has been mentioned but Wolff confirmed they were on 2 stop strategies for both drivers. I'm not going to say which driver's winning this one without technical problems but his name starts with R, arguing about would be pointless, Hamilton would have had a small chance with pace advantage.

Alo-Vett: If it's normal and fair why did they give warnings for track limits the whole day?

They gave warnings all day and after that did nothing about it. Both drivers went beyond the track limits, they fought with equal weapons. I think this certainly played a big role in the decision from the stewards not to investigate.

I am more of the opinion that the track itself allows it too much. Too flat kerbs, asphalt right next to it etc.

[jz11]

has anyone seen a clip with all the Alonso vs Vettel action including all radio messages (3 or 4 of them)?

[tok-tokkie]

I got the BBC feed (I prefer Sky but have to take what I can find). On it Lauda complained about the 1 hour delay while the Armco was replaced in an area where an accident would not happen again. Lauda said F1 was being reduced to absurd levels by the officials. Eddie Jordan responded by saying it was necessary because of safety & should anyone be injured there would be major consequences.

To me that was just cosmetic damage to the Armco - it was not functionally compromised. An hour delay to fix something cosmetic to a barrier that was almost definitely not going to see action again.

[PlatinumZealot]

I don't know if it has been mentioned but Wolff confirmed they were on 2 stop strategies for both drivers. I'm not going to say which driver's winning this one without technical problems but his name starts with R, arguing about would be pointless, Hamilton would have had a small chance with pace advantage.

Yeah, the original plan was two stop... but then Hamilton's side realized that they could get away with a one stop. Rosberg was dead in the water as he was only 5 seconds ahead and one stop down on the slower tyre at that stage in the race. He had no chance on wining if HAM one stopped.

[Shakeman]

I got the BBC feed (I prefer Sky but have to take what I can find). On it Lauda complained about the 1 hour delay while the Armco was replaced in an area where an accident would not happen again. Lauda said F1 was being reduced to absurd levels by the officials. Eddie Jordan responded by saying it was necessary because of safety & should anyone be injured there would be major consequences.

To me that was just cosmetic damage to the Armco - it was not functionally compromised. An hour delay to fix something cosmetic to a barrier that was almost definitely not going to see action again.

No one would've predicted the death of the Australian track marshal who was hit by the tyre that found its way through a gap in the fence, if an accident can happen it will happen.

You wouldn't really want to be Charlie Whiting if a car had hit the same spot and instead of bouncing off the barrier it penetrated it and decapitated the driver.

If you start making compromises due to TV schedules then the temptations is to not match the very highest standards of safety that we've become accustomed to, what other compromises might be made. I for one do not want to see another driver death in F1 and certainly not one that could've been presented by a delay of an hour in fixing crash barrier.

I would say that bump that unsettled RAI's car should not have been there and I would hope they fix it for future races. I don't think he had any right to expect that jolt to the car.

[iotar__]

What has bump got to do with anything? (there goes the idea of high kerbs to stop going off - it' dangerous, see) Next thing we'll hear that crash was caused by kerbs that destabilized the car, bump that lifted it and wall that maliciously deflected it. Instead of a driver that went wide, came back too fast on track and lost control of a car. Cause -> effect, there was noting unfortunate about it - on the contrary.

[Waywardism]

Shakeman has a point. It's not the fact that there's a bump there, it's that you wouldn't expect such a bump there. Remember Petrov in Malaysia? That could've been very nasty had it been on the first lap. Yet we see drivers going from tarmac to grass and back to tarmac at speed all the time.

[De Jokke]

Rosberg looks gutted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbatumJdl4E

Lewis clearly more positive about Lowe than Wolff (2.17), I wonder why : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OT8Nb2Aruts

[Phil]

You are. That looks like a pretty accurate summation of what I'm proposing.

So why does Rosberg suck so much at keeping below his fuel usage Delta that he is warned almost every race to get his stompers off the pedal?

That's a really good question. I think one possible explanation is above. Rosberg tends to get the "you're bingo fuel" warning in races he's leading - it could very well be that he puts his boot in to make sure he's ahead of DRS.

My suspicion is that the difference between Hamilton pushing and not pushing is that he tries to carry more speed through corners, and push the limits of the track, while the difference between Rosberg pushing and not pushing is that he tries to get his boot down on the accelerator earlier, and to brake later.

Bob,

I'd be surprised if Hamilton is fueled less for a simple reason: Watching how Mercedes likes to manage these two drivers - identical engine maps, using overtake-button during the same time (when racing each other), even down to the strategy or data sharing - it all points to me that the team or management of Mercedes wants to give the two drivers a level playing field. A level playing field in the sense that at least, the cars perform identically. This would suggest identical fuel loads. It doesn't make much sense, I agree, but as I said, I'd be very surprised if Lewis indeed is starting with less fuel. At least in the past, it doesn't seem as if the fuel difference was high enough to warrant differing fuel loads.

Considering this, personally, I'm not sure I'd feel comfortable in claiming differing fuel loads as fact when it isn't certain. To be honest, I'm surprised no one of the official press has picked up on this and asked a direct question to either Totto or Loewe.

Perhaps there's a difference in fuel load when one car is starting at the back of the grid and one at the front and there's no realistic chance that these two would be battling each other, but surely, if they are starting on the same row and are facing a similar race, I'd expect them to be carrying more or less the same amount of fuel. If you are correct and they aren't, then the whole discussion about Lewis using less fuel is slightly exaggerated due to the fact that a lighter car will use less fuel by the nature of being lighter. Perhaps we should be looking at earlier races to determin what kind of a fuel usage difference there was. If it is similar, then I see no reason to believe different fuel loads.


Note to the mods; it's a pitty the Hamilton / Rosberg topic is locked (I'm sure it was locked for the right reasons though). I think the whole fuel load analysis would be a perfect discussion point over there, since it's something that isn't exclusive to this particular race

[SectorOne]

It wasn't the tyres. If me memory serves me correct, Rosberg gave the first hint of his gearbox trouble by radioing in that some of his downshifts were problematic - this radio message which i speak of was played on live feed as early as right when Hamilton started closing the gap or just after (in the first stint).

If someone can watch the rewind of the race it can be confirmed. This message was played no later than lap 14-15 and quite possibly as early as lap 10-11. That's the window to look at if me memory is not deceiving me.

Listening to the Sky Sports pitlane radio right now.


Lap 7 - "so Nico you are in your safety car window"
Lap 9 - "ok so try and earlier and faster apex in turn 15" (this is the lap where Hamilton started reeling him in)
Lap 13 - "Still yellow-yellow, Turn 1-2, be more progressive on steering turns one and two"
Lap 13 - "And be aware, fuel is to target but you do not have excess, ok we´re just safe at the moment"
Lap 15 - "Tires are good" "Copy we´re gonna go one more lap"
Lap 18 - "So push hard now Nico, push hard now, won´t be long"
Lap 20 - "Uh gearbox problem on the downshift" "copy, copy, we´ll advise"
Lap 21 - "So we´re continuing to look at the problem Nico, no information at the moment"

From lap 9 to 17 the gap went from 5.7s to 2.8s but we could still try and get more radio broadcasts.
This might be all Rosberg´s radio transmissions but we can´t say for sure, i don´t know how much drivers really talk to to the team over the laps.

[strad]

I have no problem with the racing but I do wonder where the promised enforcement of all four off is. In qualifying it cost you that lap so the way I see it, Seb should have finished at least 4 laps down, the Hulk at leas 2 or 3.