Safety Car
#1
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:24
To take thems to the extreme, imaging a situation whereby a backmarker unlaps himself in the first safety car period, then pits and refuels, extra heavy, to make it to end of the race and manages to rejoin the train. (Assume the leaders do not pit), 1 laps before the leaders are due to pit, a 2nd safety car period; by this time, backmarker (who was lapped 20 laps prior), files past when the other pit under safety car, takes the lead and wins the race. I know this in highly unlikely, but illustrates the ludicrousy of the safety car on the racing / sport aspect (as opposed to the "motortainment" aspect) of F1.
In my view, the fairest, and problably most sporting way of dealing with safety car situations, is to remotely activate a maximum speed limit on all cars (say 150km/h) for the period in which the safety car would be out. In this way, all cars maintain the same "gaps" that were built up prior to the safety car, and the primary objective of maintaining "safety" and allowing the marshals to clear up debris is met. Taking things further, the speed limit could be activated for only the parts of the track where there is a hazard. The race could then continue as normal, once the debris was cleared up! This would easily be achievable with GPS technology and the like. (Alternatively, instead of remote activation, once the safety boards come out, the drivers would have to activate a speed limiter, and they would then be held accountable (by means of a drive through or other penalty), if they exceed the limit - which can be monitored centrally via GPS)
#3
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:27
#4
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:28
#5
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:28
#6
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:29
#7
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:31
Originally posted by Keffo
Question about the first SC: the Dutch commentator, not always that reliable, mentioned that there wasn't any announcement made on the computer that the SC would come in (lap 2?). Further, the gaps between the drivers were really big, like they weren't paying attention. Did they know the SC was coming in?
Euh ... isn't it so that lights go of on SC in last lap before it comes in?
#8
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:32
They could just leave the pits closed during safety car or double yellows and it would cure all randomness we see at the moment.
#9
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:33
The worst thing is that SC puts all pitting drivers behind all those unpitting. It's quite a risk these days to try win race with a heavy car.Originally posted by fnz
refueling under SC ain't allowed
I dont think this safety car mixing the pack brings the destined excitement. Mixed packs isnt exciting if overtaking isnt psosible.
It's good that this year will see more driver mistakes, but more safety car I despise that.
#10
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:33
#11
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:35
Yes, but a midfield runner wasn't in the position to see it.Originally posted by fnz
Euh ... isn't it so that lights go of on SC in last lap before it comes in?
But I just think it's a strange story, that's why I asked.
#12
Posted 16 March 2008 - 08:36
Originally posted by Keffo
Yes, but a midfield runner wasn't in the position to see it.
But I just think it's a strange story, that's why I asked.
No but teams have video stream, so even it wasn't clearly comunicated by CW, they could have seen it on the stream and radio their drivers.
#13
Posted 16 March 2008 - 09:16
Originally posted by GStephen
I personalise despise the use of the safety car in racing -
It's called a SAFETY car for a reason.
#14
Posted 16 March 2008 - 09:28
#15
Posted 16 March 2008 - 10:34
_______________________________
It's called a SAFETY car for a reason.
_______________________________
If you read further, you would see i'm not disputing this point - Safety is paramount.
I think that my proposal would be just a safe as a having a safety car (in fact safer because the cars wouldn't bunch up again, creating more opportunity for chaos), but without negating racing "gaps" that are built up prior to the safety period.
#16
Posted 16 March 2008 - 10:48
Since the drivers press on at 200 kph despite double waved yellows, then the safety car must be deployed.
Simple, yes, simple.
#17
Posted 16 March 2008 - 10:50
Originally posted by GStephen
Ross Stonefeld quote:
_______________________________
It's called a SAFETY car for a reason.
_______________________________
If you read further, you would see i'm not disputing this point - Safety is paramount.
I think that my proposal would be just a safe as a having a safety car (in fact safer because the cars wouldn't bunch up again, creating more opportunity for chaos), but without negating racing "gaps" that are built up prior to the safety period.
It has been discussed that you can't exactly jam a speed limiter on every car without warning, some of them will spear off the track depending which part of cornering they are undertaking....
A safety car is deployed within 1-2 seconds of a major incident, whilst the other driver's are circling other parts of the track, and not all the drivers will have an eye on the big screens to notice the Glock wreck for example.
#18
Posted 16 March 2008 - 13:32
Originally posted by GStephen
In my view, the fairest, and problably most sporting way of dealing with safety car situations, is to remotely activate a maximum speed limit on all cars (say 150km/h) for the period in which the safety car would be out. In this way, all cars maintain the same "gaps" that were built up prior to the safety car, and the primary objective of maintaining "safety" and allowing the marshals to clear up debris is met.
I don't think this can work. Others have already mentioned that you can't force a car into a greatly reduced speed without warning. Imagine the resulting load change (and consequently accident) in Blanchimont or other fast corners.
But I think you also overlook that the SC is actually supposed to bunch up the cars. This creates a short train of cars followed by two minutes or so of free track, which allows the marshalls and their gear to move in and do some useful work. This would be impossible if the cars maintained their gap, even at reduced speeds. You can't send out marshalls and gear when every few seconds a car drives by even with "just" 150 mp/h.