Round 12: Hungarian Grand Prix

amacca

me@ucd wrote: »

RE the last bunch of posts and the back and forth:

Probably trolling, but in both incidents the car in front cuts off the one behind, for the life of me I find it hard to take you seriously, or its that you're trolling, carry on so :pac:

I suppose in fairness the post about the football/racing teams was a bit trolly...off topic, but was curious..wonder if someone setting up a series thought it would be a good way to finance and gain audience/marketshare....must have been a hell of a pitch to convince the boards of directors/chairmen of the football clubs to part with the money - cant see how it benefits them or cant understand how racing teams would pay to use football clubs names--but obviously it must work or it wouldnt be happening, thought someone would quickly help dispel my ignorance.


back on topic though and I was being serious and not attempting any sort of trolling with that post... I think the two incidents are different. in the accident video from brands hatch the car in front cuts the one behind off.....in the f1 video, it happens in a split second but it still looks to me as if schumacher leaves a car sized gap on his right side and rubens gets in there before schumacher squeezes him of track...that makes it more a dangerous mistake from schumacher than a wild lunge from barrichello in my book.

basically I think scumacher is doing way more than making one move to defend and it was even more dangerous given where they were on track....

keithoh

robinph wrote: »

You can defend you line, but I'm pretty sure that keeping on moving to either side such that if someone else is there they would be totally off the track isn't allowed. If it had been along another part of the track then he would have only pushed Rubens half onto the grass and would then have stopped. He pushed him totally off the track though which is what he got done for I expect, the fact it was along the side of the pit wall doesn't help MSC's case though.

I think that Kubica did the same to Alonso at Silverstone, Alonso got the drive through for passing while cutting the corner, (personally I think he should have given the position back), so maybe Kubica should have gotten a 10 place grid penalty for pushing Alonso off the track. I don't see where MSC pushed Barichello off the track, inside the whilte line of the pit lane is still the track

At the start of all the races, drivers squeeze other drivers to the pit wall, in fairness they're not doing the same speed as the MSC & Barichello incident.

I do think that what MSC did was a bit naughty, but this season there has been so much bashing of Schumacher in the press, it's like listening to a broken record.

vectra

At the end of the day and with Schumacher's expert driving skills he knew he left "just" enough room for Rubens so no harm done.. He got through after all did he not??

How many near accidents happen on our roads every day..
"Nearly never boiled the kettle" so to speak :pac:

Corben Dallas

the "most dangerous thing ever", I think not. Had they of touched wheels or the wall it would have been highly unlikely that any one would be injured bar a freak accident. A slap on the wrist might have been a more appropriate penalty.

Just think if anyone was exiting the pits when Schu was trying to nail Rubens to the pit wall, there would have been a serious major accident.

Also If they touched wheels somebody(Probably both drivers) would have been badly injured.(Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool)

Even with Safety systems on the cars now, if open wheel cars touch/interlock wheels both cars would have had a major accident.

Someone needs to put manners on Schumacher, at least they gave him a penalty for the next race, he should have got a warning+ suspended sentence that if he does anything like this again this season he gets banned.

Well done Rubens, ballsy move.

robinph

Corben Dallas wrote: »

Someone needs to put manners on Schumacher, at least they gave him a penalty for the next race, he should have got a warning+ suspended sentence that if he does anything like this again this season he gets banned.

Well done Rubens, ballsy move.

As they mentioned in the red button stuff after the race, the only driver to have ever got banned from a season is Schumacher. He didn't learn any manner then.

Ghost Train

I think this incident is a bit like webber and vettel in turkey in that it was on a straight. Once vettel was along side, webber held his line he didnt push vettel off the track like schumachdr did to rubens.
I thought wurz was very clear about it when interviewed after the race

amacca

keithoh wrote: »

this season there has been so much bashing of Schumacher in the press, it's like listening to a broken record.

agreed, car doesn't seem that great and doesn't suit his driving style, thats at least partially the reason for underperformance and dissapointment ----commentators taking it way to far.

If he sticks with it (and I hope he does) and they design the car around him he could be much more competitive next season. Would feel for Rosberg though as I thought hes done well this season and outperformed herr schumacher.

wonder how much mercedes want schumacher to be the main man and how much resources they are willing to put into him before they concentrate on other drivers/rosberg.

recyclebin

I can't see them Mercedes designing their car around Schumacher next year. If they did then it would be a huge mistake. Rosberg is a decent driver and and will be in formula 1 for a lot longer than the two years max that Scumacher has left in the sport.

In other news it looks like more stringent tests will be carried out on the front wings for the next grand prix. It's about time too. Formula one is becoming a bit like drug cheats in athletics/cycling. The tests can never keep up with those breaking the rules as the designers are always one step ahead of the tests.

http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?id=48997

vectra

recyclebin wrote: »

I can't see them Mercedes designing their car around Schumacher next year. If they did then it would be a huge mistake. Rosberg is a decent driver and and will be in formula 1 for a lot longer than the two years max that Scumacher has left in the sport.

If they design the car around

A) Rosberg

Schumacher

Who would you think would be the most likely driver to lift the crown for them??
which driver would give them the most useful feedback??

recyclebin wrote: »

In other news it looks like more stringent tests will be carried out on the front wings for the next grand prix. It's about time too. Formula one is becoming a bit like drug cheats in athletics/cycling. The tests can never keep up with those breaking the rules as the designers are always one step ahead of the tests.

http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?id=48997

Way overdue

I think there should be one chassis manufacturer and the Teams put their own Running gear on them

All chassis/Wings being equal equipment would make it more interesting.

frostie500

recyclebin wrote: »

In other news it looks like more stringent tests will be carried out on the front wings for the next grand prix. It's about time too. Formula one is becoming a bit like drug cheats in athletics/cycling. The tests can never keep up with those breaking the rules as the designers are always one step ahead of the tests

I was actually writing about this earlier for my blog but there's quite a difference from doping and the flexible wings/double deck diffusers/F-Duct/any other tech development. As things stand Red Bull and Ferrari found a way to ensure that their wing doesnt flex when a certain force is exerted on it but does at a greater force. It may be against the 'spirit' of the regs but its not against the wording of the regs.

recyclebin

I don't think Ross Brawn will design the car to favour either driver for next year. They will design the car around the new rules and will hope to get the jump on Red Bull, Ferrari and Mclaren who will be spending more of their efforts on this year.

Schumacher doesn't seem to be improving as the season has gone on so I would think Rosberg is likely to beat him again next year. The testing ban hasn't helped Schumacher and it's not likely to change. Therefore any useful feeback that Schumacher can give will be limited.

As for one chassis manufacturer. I think that is a terible idea. They just need to enforce the current regulations properly and stop changing the rules every year. With every new rule there seems to be a loophole that one team exploits and then the other teams just copy them.

recyclebin

frostie500 wrote: »

I was actually writing about this earlier for my blog but there's quite a difference from doping and the flexible wings/double deck diffusers/F-Duct/any other tech development. As things stand Red Bull and Ferrari found a way to ensure that their wing doesnt flex when a certain force is exerted on it but does at a greater force. It may be against the 'spirit' of the regs but its not against the wording of the regs.

If the wing flexes then it definitely breaks the rules. Just because it passed the test doesn't make it legal. The test doesn't reflect the real forces in actual racing and thats why they are now going to have to increase the loads when testinf the flexibility of the wings.

vectra

recyclebin wrote: »

As for one chassis manufacturer. I think that is a terible idea. They just need to enforce the current regulations properly and stop changing the rules every year. With every new rule there seems to be a loophole that one team exploits and then the other teams just copy them.

It is the only way to stop it..
isnt that exactly why McLaren got the contract for the "One supplier" of the ECU on all cars??

recyclebin

Yeah the one ECU was brought in to stop teams cheating with traction control and hidden software. The traction control problem was a lot harder to police so they went for one ECU for everyone.

The flexing wings should have been a lot easier to detect if they had used realistic loading for their tests.

Red Bull and Ferrari exploited this and I have no problem with that. Their engineers out smarted the FIA but the FIA should have reacted faster and increased the loading for the tests.

amacachi

Ficus wrote: »

Back to the schumacher incident, i think the move was highly dangerous and deserved to be punished, but what i think is unfair is that this incident is nearly identical to the Fuji race of 2008 where massa passed webber on the main straight in almost the same circumstances, yet webber never got a penalty.

:

Also in the last couple of years Webber and Vettel have been two of the biggest offenders when it comes to veering massively off the line, and not just running people towards the wall.

robinph

The Webber v Massa move was similar, but Webber didn't move any further right once Massa was beside him.

amacachi

robinph wrote: »

The Webber v Massa move was similar, but Webber didn't move any further right once Massa was beside him.

You serious? He makes one nudge before the wall runs out and another bigger one just past the wall.

IM0

It would be better to know who are the Schumacher fans and who are not, thats 3/4 of the reason for the skewedviews on show here :pac:

As I said before when younger I was a Schumacher fan for a while, either way Im not using Bias in these posts just the way an unbiased viewer/fan would see it.

Woden

From Humphrey's twitter. Great picture

http://twitpic.com/2aq2l4/full

cooker3

Woden wrote: »

From Humphrey's twitter. Great picture

http://twitpic.com/2aq2l4/full

Yeah, really shows how dangerous it was.
I'd love his "apology" He is not apologising because he drove dangerously, he is saying sorry if Barrichello thinks he drove dangerously. He has a good future in politics.

amacca

Woden wrote: »

From Humphrey's twitter. Great picture

http://twitpic.com/2aq2l4/full

wow! centimeters if not millimeters between barrichellos wheels and the pit wall...... didn't realise it was that close, unless the camera angle is making it look a little closer than it was.

barrichello looking straight forward over the nose praying he can get through and schumacher looking to the right wondering if he can squeeze him anymore

RayM

Eddie Irvine has called Schumacher "an idiot" and described the incident as one of the worst manoeuvres he's ever seen.

Edmund Irvine, ladies and gentlemen...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAnpQvu794o

Mitch Connor

LIGHTNING wrote: »

If the wing passes the test that the rest of the teams go through then its legal. End of discussion simple as that, if the tests are stringent enough then its the FIA`s problem not Red Bulls.

it really isn't that simple though - something can pass a test without being legal - it just hasn't been found to be illegal. There is a difference. same with athletes and performance enhancing drugs. We have had plenty of stories or runners etc being o stuff that couldn't be detected by the testing at the time, such as EPO for a time. It was still illegal to be using it to boost your performance - regardless of whether the tests were able to detect it or not.

If the wings are supposed to be a minimal distance from the ground, but have been designed to flex below that to improve performance while avoiding showing that in the current tests, they are still illegal, whether they can be proven to be so by the tests are not.

ando

I don’t know what all the fuss is about with Schumacher and his move, yes it was a dangerous move, but it’s Formula One for god’s sake, stop with the moaning!!! Schumacher should not have apologized IMO and it’s a dark day in F1 for such a driver to have to apologize for defending his position, albeit strongly but that’s just how the guy is.. Jesus remember Hakkinen overtaking Schumacher in Spa few years ago, and Zonta right in the middle of them... If we're all safety conscious why wasn’t Hakkinen beaten around the head by the FIA??

If you are trying to overtake a car infront, and you know he can be pushed to a certain degree and then give way, then you are going to continue to push him knowing he will give up. Ie a weak driver. And you will do it over and over every time you find yourself behind that driver. Schumacher's a hard driver and I find nothing wrong with what he did. I'm sure Barrichello won’t be as confident if he finds himself in similar scenario in the future, and that hesitation could be the difference between 1st and 2nd in another race

And as for Irvine, him calling someone else an idiot had me laughing out loud!!!

Mitch Connor

LIGHTNING wrote: »

In regard to your above post about athleteics, one is cheating and getting away with it the other is having a wing/device that is within accpeted tolerences. The wing has repeatedly passed inspection and scruinity. Red bull dont have to prove anything its up the FIA to prove that the wing is illegal.

do the regs not state (as well as the load test stuff) that the wing has to maintain a minimum distance from the ground? If the wing is designed to be flexible and drop lower under specific conditions that the load test can not reproduce, then it has been designed to cheat the regs while passing the load test. I see it as no different from taking undetectable performance enhancing drugs.

If the wings do not have to maintain a minimum distance and it is ONLY the load test it has to pass, then fine RB are in the clear

mickdw

Does anyone have the regs in relation to this. If the regs state that wing cannot run below 80mm in any circumstance then the fia are free to alter their tests etc but if they refer to 80mm as being the minimum design height in a stationary position & then detail the flex tests the wing must also pass to ensure no flexible sections, well there is little that can be done to redbull without altering the regs for everyone & why do that?

recyclebin

Straight from ITV and Pitpass website:

Article 3.17.8 says: “In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.15 are respected, the FIA reserves the right to introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of) moving whilst the car is in motion.”

The wing deflection issue is covered by Article 3.15, which stipulates that bodywork “must be rigidly secured to the entirely sprung part of the car” and “must remain immobile in relation to the sprung part of the car”.

The rule adds: “Any device or construction that is designed to bridge the gap between the sprung part of the car and the ground is prohibited under all circumstances.

“No part having an aerodynamic influence and no part of the bodywork, with the exception of the skid block in 3.13 above, may under any circumstances be located below the reference plane.”

At present, Article 3.15 is enforced through load tests designed to ensure that cars' aerodynamic parts do not flex by more than a stated maximum, but such static tests do not fully replicate the higher forces cars generate on the circuit, particularly in fast corners.

I rest my case

frostie500

Its easy to forget but Red Bull(and every team) develops their car in conjunction with the FIA. When a team are developing a new part they discuss it in great detail with the technical delegate, Charlie Whiting. They show detailed designs of the part and hold detailed discussions.

Upto this point Charlie Whiting and the FIA are satisfied that Red Bull and Ferrari's front wings meet the requirements set forth by the regulations

cooker3

ando wrote: »

I don’t know what all the fuss is about with Schumacher and his move, yes it was a dangerous move, but it’s Formula One for god’s sake, stop with the moaning!!! Schumacher should not have apologized IMO and it’s a dark day in F1 for such a driver to have to apologize for defending his position, albeit strongly but that’s just how the guy is.. Jesus remember Hakkinen overtaking Schumacher in Spa few years ago, and Zonta right in the middle of them... If we're all safety conscious why wasn’t Hakkinen beaten around the head by the FIA??

If you are trying to overtake a car infront, and you know he can be pushed to a certain degree and then give way, then you are going to continue to push him knowing he will give up. Ie a weak driver. And you will do it over and over every time you find yourself behind that driver. Schumacher's a hard driver and I find nothing wrong with what he did. I'm sure Barrichello won’t be as confident if he finds himself in similar scenario in the future, and that hesitation could be the difference between 1st and 2nd in another race

And as for Irvine, him calling someone else an idiot had me laughing out loud!!!

You don't see the difference between the Hakkinens overtake on track and Schumacher pushing Barrichello off track, note where the white lines are in that pic, and nearly into a concrete wall beside the pit road. You really don't see the difference and don't think that's in anyway dangerous?

BoardsRanger

cooker3 wrote: »

You don't see the difference between the Hakkinens overtake on track and Schumacher pushing Barrichello off track, note where the white lines are in that pic, and nearly into a concrete wall beside the pit road. You really don't see the difference and don't think that's in anyway dangerous?

Even Michael admits that the move was dangerous. But motorsport is dangerous. Its why i watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pc2k_WGm3U