Jump to content


Photo

UnSafety Car


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#1 TheCustomer

TheCustomer
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 09:28

Here's a thought:

On Sunday afternoon, two guys lined up at a red light, in a Ferrari & a BMW - they were in a feisty, competitive mood. Let's imagine that the youngster in the powerful Mercedes lined up beside them.

We've now got a 3 lanes into 1 traffic light grand prix.
And three quick blokes in quick cars, in a flat out sprint.
D'ya think any of them are going to step aside, saying "After you - you were here first."?

The chances of all 3 cars making it to the main circuit - almost nil.
The chances of a 3 car pile up in about 150 metres - yup, pretty likely.

Never mind that the Safety car would have messed up another race - the Safety Car & the rules would have combined to make the pileup possible.

What are the chances of this happening again?
Pretty good, until the red light rule is changed.

What's wring with a rule that says "If you're rejoining the circuit from the pits, under safety car, and the safety car has reached the end of the pitlane blend white line, then you must drop back to the end of the line of cars.

The GP organisers should be thanking Lewis for saving them the embarrassment!

Whaddya think?

(oh, & Hi... newbie round these parts if you discount a lurking Atlas membership in the last millennium (or thereabouts))

Advertisement

#2 DiStefano

DiStefano
  • Member

  • 485 posts
  • Joined: April 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 09:32

Originally posted by TheCustomer

We've now got a 3 lanes into 1 traffic light grand prix.
And three quick blokes in quick cars, in a flat out sprint.
D'ya think any of them are going to step aside, saying "After you - you were here first."?





Watch again

Kimi had the right to be there, Lewis wouldn't have.


St. Lewis was a moron there, just let it go.

#3 Milt

Milt
  • Member

  • 1,723 posts
  • Joined: June 03

Posted 12 June 2008 - 09:36

for a 'newbie', (even one who has been 'lurking' for a millennium), I think you've done well!

I hope you find that you are welcome here... so, "Welcome!"

#4 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,738 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 June 2008 - 09:49

Originally posted by TheCustomer
Here's a thought:

On Sunday afternoon, two guys lined up at a red light, in a Ferrari & a BMW - they were in a feisty, competitive mood. Let's imagine that the youngster in the powerful Mercedes lined up beside them.

We've now got a 3 lanes into 1 traffic light grand prix.
And three quick blokes in quick cars, in a flat out sprint.
D'ya think any of them are going to step aside, saying "After you - you were here first."?

The chances of all 3 cars making it to the main circuit - almost nil.
The chances of a 3 car pile up in about 150 metres - yup, pretty likely.

Never mind that the Safety car would have messed up another race - the Safety Car & the rules would have combined to make the pileup possible.

What are the chances of this happening again?
Pretty good, until the red light rule is changed.

What's wring with a rule that says "If you're rejoining the circuit from the pits, under safety car, and the safety car has reached the end of the pitlane blend white line, then you must drop back to the end of the line of cars.

The GP organisers should be thanking Lewis for saving them the embarrassment!

Whaddya think?

(oh, & Hi... newbie round these parts if you discount a lurking Atlas membership in the last millennium (or thereabouts))


Welcome

Well the safety car rules are changing from the next race so hopfully there will be no more races ruined.

P.S. Id of liked to have seen a 3 way drag, would have been pretty cool...

#5 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,892 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 09:52

The safety car has nothing to do with safety. Hence it bunches up the field to cause more accidents, or cools off tyres so drivers spear off into walls and get killed. It is spin of Karl Rovesque mendacity to label it the safety car and one of Bernie's greatest triumphs to make people believe that an artificial device to make races closer and therefore appear more exciting to the brain-dead prats that gawp open-mouthed at the television screen.

#6 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 56,905 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:01

Is that supposed to be satire?

#7 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,912 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:06

Originally posted by ensign14
The safety car has nothing to do with safety. Hence it bunches up the field to cause more accidents, or cools off tyres so drivers spear off into walls and get killed. It is spin of Karl Rovesque mendacity to label it the safety car and one of Bernie's greatest triumphs to make people believe that an artificial device to make races closer and therefore appear more exciting to the brain-dead prats that gawp open-mouthed at the television screen.


i guess having cars blasting at full speed close to marshalls working on a crashed car is so much safer :rolleyes:

the problem is not the rules, the problem are the drivers, they feel too safe and think that anything goes, even racing in the pitlane.

#8 Perigee

Perigee
  • Member

  • 895 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:08

It's pretty simple - if you're getting to a position where you have to life or go over the white line, you're going to lift. No need to be a drama queen about it.

#9 CaptnMark

CaptnMark
  • Member

  • 1,011 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:11

Kimi should have yielded to Kubica.

There should not be racing in pitlane.

#10 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,425 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:13

It would've been nice to find out how the scenario would have panned out. We might have been robbed of a classic 3 way duel there.
Oh well. Hopefully Lewis has learned from the whole episode.

#11 Perigee

Perigee
  • Member

  • 895 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:15

Originally posted by Owen
It would've been nice to find out how the scenario would have panned out. We might have been robbed of a classic 3 way duel there.
Oh well. Hopefully Lewis has learned from the whole episode.

Erm, how can a dual be 3-way?:)

Wouldn't it be a tri-al / trial?

#12 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,892 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:21

Originally posted by Lontano


i guess having cars blasting at full speed close to marshalls working on a crashed car is so much safer :rolleyes:

This is why Jesus invented the Red Flag. Which means that marshalls are NOT bothered by cars at full speed.

#13 Racer Joe

Racer Joe
  • Member

  • 2,881 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:23

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Is that supposed to be satire?


:lol:

You would have thought they are the best in the world, being paid millions of dollars to race one another at close quarters.

But nooooo ..... let's blame it on the SC because it allows volunteering track marshals to work safely, but bunches up those forementioned drivers and forces them to demonstrate some ineptitudes.

#14 Racer Joe

Racer Joe
  • Member

  • 2,881 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:30

Originally posted by ensign14

This is why Jesus invented the Red Flag. Which means that marshalls are NOT bothered by cars at full speed.


Jesus? Really?

It is a fact of life that F1 needs a commercially viable TV coverage. Red flags interrupt the race for too long to be workable. We can rail against this as much as we want to, but it is a huge factor and there is no getting away from it.

That would leave us with the situation where the clerk of course would do his utmost best not to stop a race and be forced to constantly weigh the safety of all participants and track workers against commercial consideration.

Besides how many times can you red flag the race in one afternoon?

#15 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,912 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:34

Originally posted by ensign14

This is why Jesus invented the Red Flag. Which means that marshalls are NOT bothered by cars at full speed.


yes because everybody knows that the safer moment of a GP is the start :rolleyes:

#16 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,892 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:35

Originally posted by Lontano


yes because everybody knows that the safer moment of a GP is the start :rolleyes:

Safer to have a start after a red flag than to have a start after lots of laps with marshals working close by.

#17 glorius&victorius

glorius&victorius
  • Member

  • 4,327 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:40

Kimi's reaction to Lewis: Look there is a light! :lol:

#18 Peter

Peter
  • Member

  • 1,392 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:43

Originally posted by Perigee

Erm, how can a dual be 3-way?:)

Wouldn't it be a tri-al / trial?


It is a DUEL, not a DUAL!

#19 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,425 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:48

Originally posted by Perigee

Erm, how can a dual be 3-way?:)

Wouldn't it be a tri-al / trial?


ok, 3 way battle. :rolleyes:

Advertisement

#20 Dragonfly

Dragonfly
  • Member

  • 4,496 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:56

Last year we had a similar situation. Kubica was stationary at the exit having stopped at the red light. Massa and Fisichella went by ignoring the red and got black flagged. Trulli approached from behind just the moment the light went green and overtook Kubica.
The latter IMO made the Pole push hard to regain his position and played role in the heavy crash.
Trulli was not punished for overtaking in the pit lane.
Actually if it wasn't for the red light Kubica would be in front of Raikkonen when rejoining the track.

#21 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,912 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 10:57

Originally posted by ensign14

Safer to have a start after a red flag than to have a start after lots of laps with marshals working close by.


Is it? how many incidents we've had during and after a SC, and how many after or during the start of a GP? :confused:

#22 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,717 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:01

Originally posted by CaptnMark
Kimi should have yielded to Kubica.

There should not be racing in pitlane.

it's impossible not to have racing there as long as you have cars
-cruising at the pit limit speed
-braking to stop
-accelerating out
-stopped
you have cars at different speeds, you will have cars racing. nothing to do about it

#23 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,892 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:03

Well, there's Senna's death, Kimi's shunt at Monaco, Vettel at Japan, Button at Monza, JPM/MS at Monaco and the Kubica crash last year, that I can immediately remember. All of those at least encouraged by "safety" car involvement.

That's quite a lot given that every GP has a start.

And even other incidents with bunched cars - the deaths of Messrs Ghislimberti and Berridge - came from conditions that are indistinguishable from the start of a race or a post-safety car start.

#24 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,912 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:08

Originally posted by ensign14
Well, there's Senna's death, Kimi's shunt at Monaco, Vettel at Japan, Button at Monza, JPM/MS at Monaco and the Kubica crash last year, that I can immediately remember. All of those at least encouraged by "safety" car involvement.

That's quite a lot given that every GP has a start.

And even other incidents with bunched cars - the deaths of Messrs Ghislimberti and Berridge - came from conditions that are indistinguishable from the start of a race or a post-safety car start.


from all those, the only ones i can see SC related would be Vettel at Japan, Button at Monza and JPM at Monaco. The other ones would have been no different if instead of a SC would have come after a GP start. How many DNF have we had in a first lap and how many during a SC? you can't be serious..

#25 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 10,425 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:14

Here's another thought:
Ferrari were a bit naughty releasing Kimi into the path of Kubica and then overtaking the BMW in the pit lane (which you’re not allowed to do) and while under the safety car (which also means no overtaking).

From Ted Kravitz itv-f1.com

#26 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,912 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:16

Originally posted by Owen
Here's another thought:
Ferrari were a bit naughty releasing Kimi into the path of Kubica and then overtaking the BMW in the pit lane (which you’re not allowed to do) and while under the safety car (which also means no overtaking).

From Ted Kravitz itv-f1.com


so it may have been all Ferrari's fault

#27 tifosi

tifosi
  • Member

  • 13,227 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:18

Originally posted by CaptnMark
Kubica should have yielded to Kimi.

There should not be racing in pitlane.


Yep :up: :up: :up:

#28 TheCustomer

TheCustomer
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:28

hey, thanks for your replies, especially the ones that were on (or close to) the topic :clap:

I guess that what *should* have happened was that Kubica, Kimi & Lewis took off in that order, in an orderly manner.
If any of them passed others, they'd be black flagged (per last year's incident)

But I'd expect 3 racing drivers - when the light goes green - to sprint start, and then (maybe) lift off if they'd put themselves in an illegal position.
Which in this case is probably alongside one of the other guys, when they should be behind.
If one car got ahead of the others, I wonder how far ahead they'd have to be before claiming that "the other guy was slow off the line/let me past/ {& in Kimi's case} I was protecting my position from the fella behind me"

Trouble is, in that short pit exit area, there isn't room for politeness, or for racing.

The only solution is not to close the pit lane
Or to give the drivers a brain transplant, to stop them racing past red lights.

To avoid the problem...
Kimi should've formed up behind Kubica (that's probably in the rules - anybody know for sure?)
So Lewis would've hit Kimi , who would've hit Kubica :kiss: :kiss:

And Nick Heidfeld would've won the race
Lewis would've got a 10 place penalty at the next race for driving without due care & attention
& no penalty for Kimi, the innocent victim of a racing incident

#29 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,912 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:33

Originally posted by TheCustomer
hey, thanks for your replies, especially the ones that were on (or close to) the topic :clap:

I guess that what *should* have happened was that Kubica, Kimi & Lewis took off in that order, in an orderly manner.
If any of them passed others, they'd be black flagged (per last year's incident)

But I'd expect 3 racing drivers - when the light goes green - to sprint start, and then (maybe) lift off if they'd put themselves in an illegal position.
Which in this case is probably alongside one of the other guys, when they should be behind.
If one car got ahead of the others, I wonder how far ahead they'd have to be before claiming that "the other guy was slow off the line/let me past/ {& in Kimi's case} I was protecting my position from the fella behind me"

Trouble is, in that short pit exit area, there isn't room for politeness, or for racing.

The only solution is not to close the pit lane
Or to give the drivers a brain transplant, to stop them racing past red lights.


To avoid the problem...
Kimi should've formed up behind Kubica (that's probably in the rules - anybody know for sure?)
So Lewis would've hit Kimi , who would've hit Kubica :kiss: :kiss:

And Nick Heidfeld would've won the race
Lewis would've got a 10 place penalty at the next race for driving without due care & attention
& no penalty for Kimi, the innocent victim of a racing incident


You would have had the same scenario: Kimi and Kubica racing at the exit of the pitlane, but the result would have been less dramatic... We see every race drivers (and pitcrews) racing in the pits.

The red light at the end of the pitlane is there for a reason, not to make live difficult for drivers! The only solution to that would be to put a chicane at the entrance of the pitlane so it's slower to go throught it than follow the safety car through the start-finish straight. In such case, the light would turn red anyway (as it should), but we wouldn't notice because no driver would try to cross it.

#30 TheCustomer

TheCustomer
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:33

Originally posted by Lontano


so it may have been all Ferrari's fault


well, I depends on who got out of their pit box first... I can't find tv footage that shows conclusively whether it was Robert or Kimi.
It does look from the ITV footage as if Robert got to the red light first, so maybe Kimi was released into the side of Robert - and (iirc) should have yielded.

So shouldn't Kimi then have lined up *behind* the BMW, not alongside it?


:confused:


:rolleyes: )

#31 Lontano

Lontano
  • Member

  • 1,912 posts
  • Joined: January 04

Posted 12 June 2008 - 11:36

Originally posted by TheCustomer


well, I depends on who got out of their pit box first... I can't find tv footage that shows conclusively whether it was Robert or Kimi.
It does look from the ITV footage as if Robert got to the red light first, so maybe Kimi was released into the side of Robert - and (iirc) should have yielded.

So shouldn't Kimi then have lined up *behind* the BMW, not alongside it?


:confused:


i think kimi should have yielded the position, the problem is we will never know if that was what he intended to do

#32 Crazy Ninja

Crazy Ninja
  • Member

  • 1,370 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 12:29

Am i the only person who thinks Ferrari had every right to release Kimi?

If you look at the video Here be the link as if its needed Kubica isnt even completely out of his pit box when Kimis released from his.

Anyway, it would have been better if Hamilton had lined up next to Kimi + Robert. He ruined are chances of a drag race and a pile up :mad:

#33 TheCustomer

TheCustomer
  • Member

  • 35 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 12:48

Originally posted by Crazy Ninja
Am i the only person who thinks Ferrari had every right to release Kimi?

If you look at the video Here be the link as if its needed Kubica isnt even completely out of his pit box when Kimis released from his.

Anyway, it would have been better if Hamilton had lined up next to Kimi + Robert. He ruined are chances of a drag race and a pile up :mad:


I can't see Kimi/Robert release (tho would like to) what's the timing on your view of youtube?
I can see Nico/Lewis release...

& yeah, a 3 way pile up would make a nice change from a) blokes falling off the tack all on their own and b) blokes taking DC off :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

#34 Crazy Ninja

Crazy Ninja
  • Member

  • 1,370 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:06

Poor DC :lol: + its around 1min 48

#35 Perigee

Perigee
  • Member

  • 895 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:12

Originally posted by Owen
Here's another thought:
Ferrari were a bit naughty releasing Kimi into the path of Kubica and then overtaking the BMW in the pit lane (which you’re not allowed to do) and while under the safety car (which also means no overtaking).

From Ted Kravitz itv-f1.com

There was plenty of room for both - as demonstrated by the fact they did not collide, and neither had to take avoiding action.

Then again, if Ted Kravitz suggests something, you take it as a guarantee it's probably total bollocks! :)

#36 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,868 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:32

I made this exact point that potentially we could have a scenario where 4 or 5 cars lined up side by side ready to sprint into a one lane road. All the Hamilton bashers wanted to do is deflect a debate away from the implications of this for the future to 'he's an idiot' despite the fact we are no longer discussing Canada, specifically. I note one Tifosi has even laughably claimed here that 2 cars side by side is fine, but not 3, if its Lewis.

The fact is there are a whole load of issues that continue to be thrown up by each SC period, which are not fair, or safe, such as:

1. Cars loosing huge leads
2. Perfectly healthy cars that need fuel either retiring OR accepting an unfair penalty in order to refuel
3. Cars still passing the scene of the accident at close to FULL SPEED if they are running round to catch the SC train up
4. A dangerous 5 car drag race into a 1 lane pit exit road
5. The ludicrous notion of part of a race track being CLOSED during a race, which is as barmy as closing a goal during a football match, all because the FIA havn't figured out a simple and safe rule/way for cars to feed back onto the track into the SC train. Lets remember this is for safety reasons, apparently, despite the fact it is deemed perfectly SAFE for cars to rejoin the race at RACING SPEED when the SC is not in play!!!
6. Perfectly healthy cars crashing or being black flagged for needless red light infringments/caused shunts when there should be no need for the light to be on in the first place
7. The danger represented by the SC as an obstacle on the circuit - e.g cars almost hitting it at the European GP last year
8. The danger represented by the SC not reaching adequete speeds on the circuit, away from the accident, in order to allow the cars to keep tyre temp
9. The unfathomable and undesrved reward that lapped cars can unlap themselves? In what other sporting contest is a loosing player given such a free card? Oh, your 3-Nil down, have a goal.
10. The fact that the SC has regulalrly been called late, made a hash of picking up the leader and that race control have been inconsistent in their calls, their instuctions to swich off the SC lights, bring the SC in and switch off the red lights at the end of the pitlane at the correct moment. They were not 100% accurate with 2 or 3 of these points in Canada.

The whole thing smacks of artificial spicing, its like they've ripped the whole thing from NASCAR and made it 10 x more complicated.

Why they can't just have a new flag which is waved from 3 marshal points before and after the accident and in that phase you have to engage the pitlane speed limiter, is beyond me. No need for the SC at all.

#37 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:36

Originally posted by Racer Joe


Jesus? Really?

It is a fact of life that F1 needs a commercially viable TV coverage. Red flags interrupt the race for too long to be workable. We can rail against this as much as we want to, but it is a huge factor and there is no getting away from it.

That would leave us with the situation where the clerk of course would do his utmost best not to stop a race and be forced to constantly weigh the safety of all participants and track workers against commercial consideration.

Besides how many times can you red flag the race in one afternoon?


This is true, which is why the term Safety Car is absolute nonsense, it has bugger all to do with safety. Commercial considerations should never, ever outweigh safety.

#38 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:39

Originally posted by Crazy Ninja
Am i the only person who thinks Ferrari had every right to release Kimi?


Nope, your correct. If it had been at a track where there is only one lane then they would have had to have lined up, but as there is room for 2 cars they can use the extra space.

#39 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:42

Originally posted by Rinehart
Why they can't just have a new flag which is waved from 3 marshal points before and after the accident and in that phase you have to engage the pitlane speed limiter, is beyond me. No need for the SC at all.


How would that make it safe for the track workers? They would have too be constantly looking over their shoulders and dodging out of the way. At least with the SC the cars are bunched up and they only have to get out of the way once every couple of minutes.

Advertisement

#40 metz

metz
  • Member

  • 9,697 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:50

Originally posted by TheCustomer
Trouble is, in that short pit exit area, there isn't room for politeness, or for racing.

The only solution is not to close the pit lane
Or to give the drivers a brain transplant, to stop them racing past red lights.

To avoid the problem...
Kimi should've formed up behind Kubica (that's probably in the rules - anybody know for sure?)
So Lewis would've hit Kimi , who would've hit Kubica :kiss: :kiss:

No, the solution is to have the light change from red to yellow to off.

#41 Spunout

Spunout
  • Member

  • 12,351 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:52

Originally posted by metz

No, the sotution is to have the light change from red to yellow to off.


Doesn´t help if the drivers forget to check out the light.

#42 Rinehart

Rinehart
  • Member

  • 8,868 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:54

Originally posted by Clatter


How would that make it safe for the track workers? They would have too be constantly looking over their shoulders and dodging out of the way. At least with the SC the cars are bunched up and they only have to get out of the way once every couple of minutes.


Your wrong, the cars are NOT all passing the accident in a train behind the SC car - some drop back to warm tyres, others might be catching up the depolyed SC in the first place, etc. And there is no MINIMUM speed behind the SC, there would be with a limiter...

#43 Spunout

Spunout
  • Member

  • 12,351 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 13:54

Originally posted by Clatter


This is true, which is why the term Safety Car is absolute nonsense, it has bugger all to do with safety. Commercial considerations should never, ever outweigh safety.


Commercial considerations outweigh safety in every single race.

Otherwise we´d have

- 0.2-litre engines
- closed cockpits
- 500m runoffs

Etc.



PS. I don´t agree with your conspiracy theory.

#44 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 June 2008 - 14:11

Originally posted by Rinehart


Your wrong, the cars are NOT all passing the accident in a train behind the SC car - some drop back to warm tyres, others might be catching up the depolyed SC in the first place, etc. And there is no MINIMUM speed behind the SC, there would be with a limiter...


True while cars are catching up to the SC, but once lined up they are all going by in a train, not one every 10 seconds or so which could happen under your scenario.

#45 Bloggsworth

Bloggsworth
  • Member

  • 7,438 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 12 June 2008 - 14:50

The problem is easily sorted; next time there is a safety car all the cars should immediately pit; then 10 laps later all come in and do a drive through at the same time - Probably safer than, though not as effective as, all the cars stopping on the circuit at the same time "Out of fuel"........ End of race!

#46 Peeko

Peeko
  • Member

  • 3,210 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 12 June 2008 - 15:05

Originally posted by Owen
Here's another thought:
Ferrari were a bit naughty releasing Kimi into the path of Kubica and then overtaking the BMW in the pit lane (which you’re not allowed to do) and while under the safety car (which also means no overtaking).

From Ted Kravitz itv-f1.com

Ted Kravitz is an idiot. When Kimi ran into Sutil in Monaco he said during the broadcast that Force India should march over to Ferrari and demand they pay their travel fees for costing them points. Didn't hear a whole lot from Ted Kravass in Montreal regarding Lewis costing Ferrari points, nevermind a possible victory.

#47 steelyman

steelyman
  • Member

  • 214 posts
  • Joined: March 07

Posted 12 June 2008 - 15:09

Originally posted by Crazy Ninja
Am i the only person who thinks Ferrari had every right to release Kimi?


absolutely not but who the hell wants to keep arguing with the fan boys.

nobody called to change all the rules when massa was screwed by safety car at monaco or red light at canada, or vettel/webber. where were all these people calling for rule changes then???

now that lewis has been invloved though we need to rewrite the whole goddamn book for him.

BTW we all know the safety car rules ARE being adjusted so relax

#48 LuckyStrike1

LuckyStrike1
  • Member

  • 5,507 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 12 June 2008 - 15:30

Originally posted by ensign14

This is why Jesus invented the Red Flag. Which means that marshalls are NOT bothered by cars at full speed.


So a Safety Car is "an artificial device to make races closer and therefore appear more exciting" but a red flag is not?

That's just one of so many funny things one can find in what you wrote :lol:

#49 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,211 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 June 2008 - 15:33

Originally posted by LuckyStrike1


So a Safety Car is "an artificial device to make races closer and therefore appear more exciting" but a red flag is not?

That's just one of so many funny things one can find in what you wrote :lol:


When the race was stopped the clock stopped as well and the gap between cars was added on to the final time after the restart. So at least no one lost out if they had built up a lead.

#50 Perigee

Perigee
  • Member

  • 895 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 12 June 2008 - 15:45

Originally posted by Peeko

Ted Kravitz is an idiot. When Kimi ran into Sutil in Monaco he said during the broadcast that Force India should march over to Ferrari and demand they pay their travel fees for costing them points. Didn't hear a whole lot from Ted Kravass in Montreal regarding Lewis costing Ferrari points, nevermind a possible victory.

Yup - welcome to 'balanced, impartial' reporting from ITV-F1!

Unfortunately Ofcom have no interest in the area, so ITV have a mandate to continue as they are. Let us *hope* BBC feel they have more of an obligation for impartiality, although no doubt all their research shows the public would prefer the Lewis wank-fest to continue.