Formula 1 2021

[mozzer models]

1 hour ago, Reorte said:

Wondered why people were saying that, just a few childish insults (enough to get rapped on the knuckles by the team, maybe kicked out as a liability), but scrolling through the comments I saw that he was the guy who passed a load under the safety car to crash in to someone a few years ago. Sounds like someone who shouldn't be on the road let alone the racetrack.

I think he meant for this not what he said about a driver

( back in 2015 for overtaking numerous cars behind a safety car to intentionally crash into a rival. )

[Pete the Elaner]

I thought the re-start at Hungary was a farce. Having just 1 car on the grid seemed wrong, 

& it seems it was wrong.

 

Someone on FB quoted a rule. They are freely available on the 'net so I looked it up to confirm & sure enough, article 42.11 of the sporting regulations states:

 

42.11 When the clerk of the course decides it is safe to call in the safety car a message “STANDING START” will be sent to all teams Competitors via the official messaging system, all FIA light panels will display “SS” and the car's orange lights will be extinguished. This will be the signal to the teams Competitors and drivers that it will be entering the pit lane at the end of that lap. At this point the first car in line behind the safety car may dictate the pace and, if necessary, fall more than ten car lengths behind it. Once the safety car has entered the pit lane all cars, with the exception of those that were in their garage at the time the race was suspended (see Article 41.3), must return to the grid, take up their grid positions and follow the procedures set out in Article 36.9 to 36.13.

 

Hamilton got this right but by luck (otherwise he would have mentioned to his team).

All others failed to comply with this rule.

The stewards failed by not applying it.

Mercedes failed by not drawing Masi's attention to the rule.

 

I really don't care which drivers or cars were involved but rules are they for everybody & should be applied or they are not worth having.

Sometimes rules don't make sense, but these should not exist & where loopholes are found, they should be changed, not simply ignored.

 

[Darius43]

The second start followed a red flag so all the cars were in the pit lane when the red flag ended. The cars then did a formation lap to the grid for a standing start without a safety car having set off from the pit lane.  It is the driver’s choice to re-enter the pit lane at the end of the formation lap (teams can’t speak to them).  Lewis went to the grid, everyone else went in the pit lane to change tyres.

 

As there was no safety car for the above formation lap there was no breaking of the rules you mention.

 

For sure it was a surreal start but it was within the rules.

 

Cheers

 

Darius

 

 

Edited August 6, 2021 by Darius43

[rocor]

Mattia Binotto has expressed his opinion on who should be responsible for the cost incurred due to crash damage.

 

https://www.planetf1.com/news/mattia-binotto-crash-damage-idea/

[Hobby]

The lawyers would love any rule which allocates who was responsible and how much... 

[Darius43]

2 minutes ago, Hobby said:

The lawyers would love any rule which allocates who was responsible and how much... 

 

Glass houses and stones spring to mind…

 

Cheers

 

Darius

[Oldddudders]

Nice try. Of course everyone is pissed off with Mercedes demolition Derby, only a fortnight since Max and Lewis had their event. And to play the cost-cap card just makes it even more of a game. There have always been accidents that caused damage. Was it '73 when Scheckter wiped out the 3-car Surtees team at the start? And of the ten teams, how many are affected by the cost-cap? I was under the impression that apart from RB, Merc and Ferrari, none of the others had a budget big enough to reach the cap threshold. 

[friscopete]

 Might be  some races lost down the road when grid position drops  are  enforced  because  replacement bits and pieces are used .This is what Red Bull are worried about  maybe .Merc havnt had to replace much so are in the clear but  replacing engines ,gearboxes etc ,monocoques ,Max's ego etc ,all cost grid places and    may well penalise them .The championship was looking good for Max  but maybe RB know they have lost it already . Maybe Max will have to reign in as any more damage will wipe out their chances as Merc can hold the line .  Poor old Christine won be able to keep his wife in union jack nighties at this rate.

[Pete the Elaner]

7 hours ago, Darius43 said:

The second start followed a red flag so all the cars were in the pit lane when the red flag ended. The cars then did a formation lap to the grid for a standing start without a safety car having set off from the pit lane.  It is the driver’s choice to re-enter the pit lane at the end of the formation lap (teams can’t speak to them).  Lewis went to the grid, everyone else went in the pit lane to change tyres.

 

As there was no safety car for the above formation lap there was no breaking of the rules you mention.

 

For sure it was a surreal start but it was within the rules.

 

Cheers

 

Darius

 

 

Part of the text I highlighted mentions "at the time the race was suspended" so this is not a rule which refers to an initial start after several laps to clear water away. It refers to a restart. Cars are normally parked in the pit lane before a restart.

It only mentions pit lane for the safety car. The garages are not part of the pit lane & the only cars in their garages had retired, so all cars are required to start from the grid.

 

The stewards & all the teams got it wrong. Bad form 

[Darius43]

2 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Part of the text I highlighted mentions "at the time the race was suspended" so this is not a rule which refers to an initial start after several laps to clear water away. It refers to a restart. Cars are normally parked in the pit lane before a restart.

It only mentions pit lane for the safety car. The garages are not part of the pit lane & the only cars in their garages had retired, so all cars are required to start from the grid.

 

The stewards & all the teams got it wrong. Bad form 

Looks like nobody but you has spotted this calamity.  You had better put the FIA straight before things get out of hand.

Cheers

 

Darius

“Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.”  Harry Day RFC , and Douglas Bader RAF.

 

 

Edited August 6, 2021 by Darius43

[rocor]

It occurs to me that the area, in which a team has the most scope to circumvent a budget cap, would be in development. Much of this, these days is done within the heart of supercomputers rather than out on the racetrack. Anything that involves hardware can have the FIA forensic accountants crawling all over it, to determine if the costings are credible. Whereas fundamental development work, which can take up a large chunk of a teams resources, could be undertaken within a separate company/division. Once the necessary design conclusions had been reached, they would be leaked to the team, and then run again on the teams computers to establish a credible audit trail. The advantage would be that only a fraction of supercomputer and designer time would end up being logged.

[RJS1977]

However there would almost certainly be some sort of financial trail. The separate company would not do the work for free, so there would need to be some payment from the team to the company, which would be traceable. 

Alternatively, one or more of the team's sponsors could give part of their sponsorship money to the company directly rather than to the team, but even then the FIA might get suspicious of why the sponsors are paying less than might be expected for their sponsorship.

 

So this would only really work if the team owner was prepared to sink his own money into the development company, although I suppose the drivers and team principal could also put money into the company, effectively burying the transfer from team to company in their salaries.

 

However, sooner or later, someone would find out (disgruntled employee?)....

[PaulRhB]

F1 relying on devious interpretations of rules and trying to hide those that maybe bend a few a bit far? Well there’s a concept we haven’t seen much of . . . . 

 

As the McLaren / Ferrari dossier proved the simplest thing can catch them out when that computer or paper file is seen by someone externally with enough knowledge to think what’s that doing there?   I very much doubt anyone external would be contracted it’s more about the secrets kept because you might need a job elsewhere one day and they want to know you can keep things quiet so being known as a whistleblower probably isn’t going to put you at the top of the interview list. 
 

[Andrew P]

[Andrew P]

[Pete the Elaner]

5 hours ago, Darius43 said:

Looks like nobody but you has spotted this calamity.  You had better put the FIA straight before things get out of hand.

Cheers

 

Darius

“Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.”  Harry Day RFC , and Douglas Bader RAF.

 

 

 

Someone pointed it out on a FB discussion. I take everything on there with a pinch of salt, but when they actually quote a rule it suggests they have done their research.

I looked it up to confirm for myself & sure enough, there it was.

[57xx]

They/you are quoting that article and line out of context though.

[Andrew P]

FIA rejects Aston Martin’s request for review of Vettel’s Hungarian GP disqualification.

https://www.racefans.net/2021/08/09/fia-rejects-aston-martins-request-for-review-of-vettels-hungarian-gp-disqualification/

[Hobby]

Rules are rules and this one is quite clear. Had they told the Vet to ease off they could probably have saved enough to get through. I feel sorry for Seb but not for AM. 

[mozzer models]

So the Data AM said showed there was more fuel left was Wrong

[njee20]

On 06/08/2021 at 23:59, Pete the Elaner said:

 

Someone pointed it out on a FB discussion. I take everything on there with a pinch of salt, but when they actually quote a rule it suggests they have done their research.

I looked it up to confirm for myself & sure enough, there it was.

But the rule doesn’t appear to apply to the situation in which the restart occurred. 
 

it’s possible your man on Facebook is right, and every single person at the race was wrong. But given it doesn’t even read as being relevant to the situation I know where I’m putting my money…

[Andrew P]

Another candidate for Red Bull seat? 'He's already at the factory'

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/91072/another-candidate-for-red-bull-seat-he-s-already-at-the-factory.html?fbclid=IwAR01-VrpFonmLFb8d18FPRGTt2XOxMVWtBbSknbDkHeRbjfAhtNnhHwTjzk

[RJS1977]

51 minutes ago, mozzer models said:

So the Data AM said showed there was more fuel left was Wrong

 

I think the AM data was based on how much was in the tank to start off with, and how much had been fed to the engine. In theory, subtracting the latter from the former would have given the amount of fuel still in the tank.

 

However, if there was a leak between the tank and the flow meter, then there would be an unaccounted-for loss of fuel.

 

So nothing wrong with the original data as such, the error is in the assumption made in the calculation/

[EddieB]

Or the car was short fuelled to begin with?

 

Rather strange given the way the race unfolded (though, to be fair, it was red-flagged and not subject to numerous laps behind a safety car).

[didcot]

Didn't Seb pull up a bit smartish after the chequered flag. That's assuming my memory is correct. Which would indicate a potential problem.