Screw the FIA too

[ioan]

And their stupid SC rules that destroy the chances of those who are doing all they can to win a race (i.e Rosberg, Kubica).

[MrJan]

Well Niko came out of it alright.

I don't like the rule and think that there is a much simpler way of solving the problem by just making teams nominate their fuel loads at the start of QP3.

[janneppi]

It is interesting that Rosberg managed to get second despite the penalty, in the future we might see cars take a similar approach on purpose. For example someone in Kimi's position/(behind his team mate to the pits) today could have faired better if he'd just pitted few laps earlier. Now he just lost 13 places.

[markabilly]

And their stupid SC rules that destroy the chances of those who are doing all they can to win a race (i.e Rosberg, Kubica).


Well, Nico, Ferando and Timo might agree, but, without the SC being deployed today, none of them would have ended up where they did. And it appears that Nico actually may have profited overall.

[ShiftingGears]

It is interesting that Rosberg managed to get second despite the penalty, in the future we might see cars take a similar approach on purpose.

I doubt it. If the stewards enforced it properly they would've forced him to serve a stop-go penalty sooner than they did, Rosberg would've been screwed.

[philipbain]

I doubt it. If the stewards enforced it properly they would've forced him to serve a stop-go penalty sooner than they did, Rosberg would've been screwed.

Thats true, in US racing they would have to serve the penalty as soon as they went back to green flag conditions. In IRL if a car will run out of fuel before the pits open they can come in and take on a splash of fuel as long as they then come in for a full stop when the pits open, I think the FIA ought to look into this as the current situation penalises drivers for circumstances beyond thier control, unless you are Nico Rosberg when a freak set of circumstances, including leading mobile roadblocks Fisi and Trulli, meant that it worked out quite nicely! Also closing the pits in F1 is problematic as a 2 car team only have one pit stall, whereas in the US each car has it's own stall and crew which simplifies pitting both cars, this causes queuing and ultimately disadvantages one of the team's cars in most cases, again due to circumstances beyond their control.

[fizzicist]

They really do need to address the pit lane closure issue for safety car deployments. Kovalainen got screwed earlier in the year for exactly the same thing.

Essentially they're trying to avoid someone exiting the pits and then travelling at full race speed through an accident scene. What would be wrong with having a second safety car at pit exit that queues up those who have had to pit in this scenario and then releases them to catch the field when the accident scene is cleared? This would be less severe than a stop go.

[aryan]

Well Niko came out of it alright.



The only reason Nico came out alright was because it took the stewards 10 laps to enforce the penalty, and he had Fisico and Truli all those laps behind him, who were 4 sec a lap off everyone's else.

If the stewards had handed the penalty right when they should have, then he would have been screwed too, just like Kubica.

Still, yes the regulation is a farce. I think they should leave the pits open and just enforce a speed limit during SC. I don't think nominating pit stop and giving it to stewards would work, because drivers can sometimes pit a lap or two later, if for example they get stuck in traffic and save some fuel.

[Miatanut]

Essentially they're trying to avoid someone exiting the pits and then travelling at full race speed through an accident scene. What would be wrong with having a second safety car at pit exit that queues up those who have had to pit in this scenario and then releases them to catch the field when the accident scene is cleared? This would be less severe than a stop go.

Why not just invest in a few radar guns and bust anybody speeding between two corners before and one corner after an incident?

[CNR]

why not just have the cars do 1 lap behind the safty car with pitlane closed then as the safty car comes past pit entrance open it so the cars can enter
that way they would join at the back of the cars behind the safty car.

[nigelred5]

First of all, what they really need to get rid of is the stupid single pit crew rule. There's 18 guys servicing one vehicle. They have two fuel rigs as we saw with Massa's incident and even the smallest teams get two garages on the smallest pit lanes. Split the crews in half and get rid of the other 20 people watching. Just halving the crews will slow the pit stops and make them safer. It's not like having a single crew is saving a single penny if they are going to allow that many people on a crew. 9 crew members is plenty. one per wheel, two jackmen, one refueller, one for the lollopop and one extra for giving the all clear to leave the pit.

Then they can simply use a rule as in american racing. Throw the yellow, gather the field, then open the pits on the following lap. For safety reasons, drop the pit lane speed limit under safety car periods by an additional 30 or even 50%.

Safety cars/ full course yellows are just the nature of the beast with street courses. I imagine all of that over-engineered lighting rigging in Singapore makes it kinda difficult to crane a car out, so it's going to require emergency vehicles and workers on course which is just plain too dangerous for local yellows.

[nigelred5]

why not just have the cars do 1 lap behind the safty car with pitlane closed then as the safty car comes past pit entrance open it so the cars can enter
that way they would join at the back of the cars behind the safty car.


Because that's the simple thing to do and the way 99% of the racing series that use a safety car operate. Doing the same thing as everyone wouldn't be F1. They couldn't dare be seen copying anyone else. :rolleyes:

[ShiftingGears]

Why not just invest in a few radar guns and bust anybody speeding between two corners before and one corner after an incident?

Way too intelligent, and not gimmicky enough.

[ioan]

Sadly F1 operates in the interest of the show nowadays, not in the interest of the fairness of the "sport".

Rules are being made in order to create artificial racing, because they destroyed what racing was before.

Now we get night races in order to spice things up. If people are watching F1 because it's run during the night rather than for the racing than we (real F1 fans) are in a sad situation.

[SGWilko]

Now we get night races in order to spice things up. If people are watching F1 because it's run during the night rather than for the racing than we (real F1 fans) are in a sad situation.

See, what I don't get is this. If F1 is so Europe orientated that we need night races to fit in with European schedules, why is Bernard putting pressure on European tracks.

I know it is money money money, but heck, look at the current global financial market - it will soon be on its knees. It certainly is Stateside (and will get a lot worse with the $700bn burden about to be lumped on Jo public who can't already afford to pay the mortgage which started this whole thing off in the first place....) and soon will be over here in the UK. [/RANT OVER] :)

[ArrowsFA1]

See, what I don't get is this. If F1 is so Europe orientated that we need night races to fit in with European schedules, why is Bernard putting pressure on European tracks.
In Singapore the government was very prominent and saw a GP as a means to promote their country. Therefore government money was available, and planners were flexible, to ensure Singapore secured a race on Bernie's terms.

European circuits appear to be less willing, or able, to make the kind of financial commitment that Bernie requires. While the continent may have the 'traditional' venues it does not have the wherewithall to 'compete' with emerging nations who see hosting a GP as being of huge benefit to them.

Broadcasters don't care where a race takes place or, as we saw on Sunday, when it takes place. Individual TV viewers have no voice and generally would prefer to be able to watch F1 than not.

As long as that continues we will see more and more GP's at new venues

[PolePosition_1]

And their stupid SC rules that destroy the chances of those who are doing all they can to win a race (i.e Rosberg, Kubica).

One second, I go a topic bashing the FIA and Stewards, and you have a go at me, when you've done one as well? Shocking mate.

[ioan]

One second, I go a topic bashing the FIA and Stewards, and you have a go at me, when you've done one as well? Shocking mate.

I have a problem with a stupid rule, you got a problem with how the rules are implemented!

There is a difference, especially that you have no foot to stand on when accusing them of inconsistency between 2 different cases.

[PolePosition_1]

There is a difference, especially that you have no foot to stand on when accusing them of inconsistency between 2 different cases.

Are you claiming that the enforcement of rules is consistant?

[Hawkmoon]

I like the way Charlie Whiting says that teams should just carry an extra two laps worth of fuel like it's as simple as that.

Hypothetically speaking, what if Hamilton is running behind Massa and is 3 seconds behind when Massa stops. Hamilton has three laps worth of fuel in order to make up that time and jump Massa in the pits. But, according to Whiting, he should keep two laps worth of fuel in reserve, so that's really only 1 lap. Does anybody really expect McLaren to pit Hamilton 2 laps early and throw away the chance to pass just in case a safety car is needed in the next three laps?

So McLaren don't call Hamilton in and 2 laps later a safety car is needed and the pits are closed. Hamilton either takes a penalty or runs out of fuel. Either way, championship over. Even if they do call him in with 2 laps in reserve he loses the oppotunity to pass.

Does anybody really expect F1 teams to handicap themselves in this way to try and cover a situation that they have no control over? It's an absurd notion and the FIA needs to get their head out of their arse and get rid of this stupid rule.

Either ban refuelling or slow the cars down at the site of the accident. They don't need to slow the cars down over the entire circuit.

[Garry Walker]

I like the way Charlie Whiting says that teams should just carry an extra two laps worth of fuel like it's as simple as that.

Hypothetically speaking, what if Hamilton is running behind Massa and is 3 seconds behind when Massa stops. Hamilton has three laps worth of fuel in order to make up that time and jump Massa in the pits. But, according to Whiting, he should keep two laps worth of fuel in reserve, so that's really only 1 lap. Does anybody really expect McLaren to pit Hamilton 2 laps early and throw away the chance to pass just in case a safety car is needed in the next three laps?

So McLaren don't call Hamilton in and 2 laps later a safety car is needed and the pits are closed. Hamilton either takes a penalty or runs out of fuel. Either way, championship over. Even if they do call him in with 2 laps in reserve he loses the oppotunity to pass.

Does anybody really expect F1 teams to handicap themselves in this way to try and cover a situation that they have no control over? It's an absurd notion and the FIA needs to get their head out of their arse and get rid of this stupid rule.

Either ban refuelling or slow the cars down at the site of the accident. They don't need to slow the cars down over the entire circuit.

indeed. Whiting has shown himself to be an idiot in the last few weeks.

[Knock-on]

indeed. Whiting has shown himself to be an idiot in the last few weeks.


I would go a bit further than that.

CW was someone that I admired at the FIA and I figured he was pretty straight.

Now, I have lost all respect after his recent antics. Misleading teams, sabotaging results, lying and concocting "new" clarification of rules.

Very sad :(