Jump to content


Photo

Was Lewis Hamilton sabotaged in 2007?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
162 replies to this topic

#1 Gordon McCabe

Gordon McCabe
  • New Member

  • 29 posts
  • Joined: December 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 13:52

Now that the FIA have (partially) cleared up what happened at Singapore in 2008, perhaps they might like to re-open the book on another controversial day in Formula One's recent history.

In the moments before the 2007 Brazilian Grand Prix, the finale to that year's World Championship, Martin Brundle intercepted Bernie Ecclestone on the grid at Interlagos, and asked him who he thought would win the championship. Surprisingly, Ecclestone predicted that, against the odds, it would be Kimi Raikkonen, rather than championship-leader Lewis Hamilton.

Two hours later, Kimi was celebrating his first World Championship, whilst Hamilton was left ruing a gearbox glitch which had dropped him out of a championship-winning position.

Ever since that day, the gearbox malfunction has been referred to as 'unexplained' glitch. There were initial claims that Lewis had caused the problem himself, by pressing the wrong button on the steering wheel. McLaren, however, denied this, and issued the following account:

"We can confirm that the temporary gear shifting problem Lewis suffered on lap eight of the Brazilian Grand Prix was due to a default in the gearbox that selected neutral for a period of time. It was not as a result of Lewis pressing an incorrect button on his steering wheel. It was a gearbox problem, and it went into forced-neutral and changing down seemed to rectify it – it might be mechanical, but we doubt it. If it was something mechanical, they usually don’t fix themselves. It could be electronics software – but there’s no evidence in the analysis to support that. Could be a sensor – but again, there’s no evidence in the data recordings.

"So it would appear that the barrels that change gear went out of control – and out of control of the driver – and that’s probably hydraulic. That could be either a very small Moog servo control valves that were interfered with by a tiny piece of debris or they are sensitive to magnetic interference – something generated a magnetic field which caused the valve to misbehave."

McLaren, of course, were well-known at this time for their desire to over-control things, including the flow of information about their drivers. They may simply have elected to lie in order to protect Hamilton from the volley of criticism he would otherwise have faced.

Let us assume, however, that Hamilton's gearbox genuinely suffered a glitch which was out of the control of the driver. Are there any possible explanations for this, if it wasn't, as McLaren seem to imply, anything internal to the gearbox and its software?

Well, it's worth recalling that at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, the gearbox in Mark Webber's Red Bull was disabled by electromagnetic interference from a subway train passing under the track. McLaren, of course, specifically refer to the possibility of magnetic interference in their account, but without explicitly suggesting that the source of this interference might have been external.

There are no subway trains passing under the track at Interlagos, so what type of device could have interfered with the electronics in Hamilton's gearbox? Well, how about an electromagnetic pulse generator? Such devices have existed for some decades, have received considerable research attention from the military, and can be relatively easily obtained. It is noticeable that Hamilton's McLaren slows immediately after passing the grandstands in close proximity to the track at the end of the back straight...

http://www.amazing1.com/emp.htm

Advertisement

#2 917k

917k
  • Member

  • 2,584 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:24

sure, why not......... :rolleyes:

#3 MegaManson

MegaManson
  • Member

  • 2,102 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:29

One of the most ludicrous conspiracy theories I have ever heard

#4 plastik2k9

plastik2k9
  • Member

  • 507 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:31

Well, as far as conspiracies in F1 go, an EMP attack would certainly be something new. Really though, if you were to look back at every technical issue that has ever occurred in F1, not just the ones that resulted in retirement, there are a significant number which probably can never be explained. This is one of those. I personally think an EMP attack is unlikely.

#5 raiseyourfistfor

raiseyourfistfor
  • Member

  • 2,177 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:35

Yea, it is pretty much a given, there was a topic about this a few weeks ago, and it makes a lot of sense. The FIA - Ferrari connection would not have allowed a McLaren driver to become WDC in 2007 after the so called "spygate"

#6 Jazza

Jazza
  • Member

  • 1,012 posts
  • Joined: November 99

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:39

Can you even direct an EMP? Surely it would knock out every car within the radius of the device?

(Also, I don't believe this for a second! But I thought I would play along anyway.)

#7 MegaManson

MegaManson
  • Member

  • 2,102 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:40

Yea, it is pretty much a given, there was a topic about this a few weeks ago, and it makes a lot of sense. The FIA - Ferrari connection would not have allowed a McLaren driver to become WDC in 2007 after the so called "spygate"


Advising Ron that it would be in McLaren's best interests if they threw the title is one thing, the idea of some man standing in the stands with a device being able to nobble a car doing 200mph is pure tin foil hats and black helicopters bullshit am sure the FIA had much easier ways than that

#8 fastdriver

fastdriver
  • Member

  • 575 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:42

Now that the FIA have (partially) cleared up what happened at Singapore in 2008, perhaps they might like to re-open the book on another controversial day in Formula One's recent history.

... after passing the grandstands in close proximity to the track at the end of the back straight...

http://www.amazing1.com/emp.htm


+10 :up:
and who do plan to cast in this fiction movie of yours?

Edited by fastdriver, 09 October 2009 - 15:26.


#9 hulmerist

hulmerist
  • Member

  • 1,026 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:43

why would you even both typing all that out?

just an unbelievably massive pile of tripe

#10 Don_Humpador

Don_Humpador
  • Member

  • 2,223 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:43

Can you even direct an EMP? Surely it would knock out every car within the radius of the device?

(Also, I don't believe this for a second! But I thought I would play along anyway.)


Exactly my train of thought, I wouldn't have considered you could "direct" an EMP at one specific car. It's not like Hamilton was on his own at that bit of the circuit, either.


At the time I thought it was a bit strange but hey, we'll probably never know and it's not worth debating over. All history now.

#11 benn5325

benn5325
  • Member

  • 1,584 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:44

An EMP, that is the most ridiculous suggestion ever :rolleyes:
Everyone knows it was a faulty Flux Capacitor :drunk:

Edited by benn5325, 09 October 2009 - 14:46.


#12 fastdriver

fastdriver
  • Member

  • 575 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:45

Advising Ron that it would be in McLaren's best interests if they threw the title is one thing, the idea of some man standing in the stands with a device being able to nobble a car doing 200mph is pure tin foil hats and black helicopters bullshit am sure the FIA had much easier ways than that

:clap:

#13 Guizotia

Guizotia
  • Member

  • 1,384 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:53

Maybe the dark shadowy figures who fired EMP at Lewis's car in 2007 felt bad, so they employed a tractor beam in 2008 to slow Timo Glock down and make up for it?

#14 pgj

pgj
  • Member

  • 1,691 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:54

I don't think so.


OT

I would like to raise another conspiracy theory though. In 1986 it was reported that rubber eating worms were released onto the track in Adelaide and that cost Mansell the WDC. Spooky. :drunk:

/OT

#15 sreevishnu

sreevishnu
  • Member

  • 1,514 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:55

An EMP, that is the most ridiculous suggestion ever :rolleyes:
Everyone knows it was a faulty Flux Capacitor :drunk:


The flux capacitor was blown off by a circuit failure in the flying discs, caused when Einstein when he was send to the future... and the Real Lewis is in the Future now, winning all the WDC there :rotfl:
Well its time now to go "Back to the future" :rotfl:

#16 Kenaltgr

Kenaltgr
  • Member

  • 892 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:55

Now that the FIA have (partially) cleared up what happened at Singapore in 2008, perhaps they might like to re-open the book on another controversial day in Formula One's recent history.

In the moments before the 2007 Brazilian Grand Prix, the finale to that year's World Championship, Martin Brundle intercepted Bernie Ecclestone on the grid at Interlagos, and asked him who he thought would win the championship. Surprisingly, Ecclestone predicted that, against the odds, it would be Kimi Raikkonen, rather than championship-leader Lewis Hamilton.


Bernie actually told Brundle he thought Alonso would win, he also had the CEO of santander with him. So that shoots downs the whole story, Bernie didn't mention Kimi to Brundle.

#17 sreevishnu

sreevishnu
  • Member

  • 1,514 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 14:55

I don't think so.


OT

I would like to raise another conspiracy theory though. In 1986 it was reported that rubber eating worms were released onto the track in Adelaide and that cost Mansell the WDC. Spooky. :drunk:

/OT

that could be true you see :rotfl:

#18 kong

kong
  • Member

  • 264 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:05

Exactly my train of thought, I wouldn't have considered you could "direct" an EMP at one specific car. It's not like Hamilton was on his own at that bit of the circuit, either.


At the time I thought it was a bit strange but hey, we'll probably never know and it's not worth debating over. All history now.

Oh yes, You can direct EMP. But where to get all the power and where to hide the machine? And usually the very powerfull EMP destroys the elecronics permanently, burns the FET:s.

#19 fastdriver

fastdriver
  • Member

  • 575 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:16

Bernie actually told Brundle he thought Alonso would win, he also had the CEO of santander with him. So that shoots downs the whole story, Bernie didn't mention Kimi to Brundle.


just to keep this going, lets pretend he did...
:smoking:

Advertisement

#20 sreevishnu

sreevishnu
  • Member

  • 1,514 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:16

Oh yes, You can direct EMP. But where to get all the power and where to hide the machine? And usually the very powerfull EMP destroys the elecronics permanently, burns the FET:s.


FIA crashed the Nebukanessa(something like that) from the top, with the help of Mr. Anderson
And sources say, it was Morpheus who switched on the EMP :rotfl: :rotfl:

#21 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,797 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:18

The EMP thing is bollocks, whether McLaren were advised to throw the Championship by the FIA is another matter entirely and one that's not without some degree of feasibility.

#22 fastdriver

fastdriver
  • Member

  • 575 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:21

The EMP thing is bollocks, whether McLaren were advised to throw the Championship by the FIA is another matter entirely and one that's not without some degree of feasibility.


maybe the FIA can get Piquet Duo to do some investigations for us..hey?
:rotfl:

#23 DanDectis

DanDectis
  • Member

  • 152 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:21

+10 :up:
and who do plan to cast in this fiction movie of yours?


hopefully someone who knows better than to quote the whole godamn post.... :rolleyes:

#24 Henrytheeigth

Henrytheeigth
  • Member

  • 4,655 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:23

Posted Image

#25 fastdriver

fastdriver
  • Member

  • 575 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:24

hopefully someone who knows better than to quote the whole godamn post.... :rolleyes:

easy bro, no need to get pissy with me! my mistake. :up:

#26 Pharazon

Pharazon
  • Member

  • 1,125 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:25

i love this thread with a passion...

it's like f1 and sci-fi all rolled into one

#27 ForeverF1

ForeverF1
  • RC Forum Host

  • 6,577 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:27

i love this thread with a passion...

it's like f1 and sci-fi all rolled into one


Surely that would be Sci-f1.  ;) :)

#28 Odvan

Odvan
  • Member

  • 2,074 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:27

Of course. Max Mosley will be DSQ from work with F1 for rest of his life. And yeah it's called in the paddock "FIA President election".

#29 fastdriver

fastdriver
  • Member

  • 575 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:30

Surely that would be Sci-f1.  ;) :)

:rotfl:

#30 DePortago

DePortago
  • Member

  • 189 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:38

I will never believe anything coming from people like Ron Dennis, the "gentleman" who firstly lied to the FIA and later lied to everybody. But to lie is one of the keys in this sport, it´s part of it and we have to admit it.

#31 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:39

well of course this is what happened. much more likely than LH pushing the neutral button in front of him on the steering wheel or not remembering how to quickly reset a malfunctioning gearbox. we all knew at that time that LH didn't make mistakes.

but generally if i recall correctly it was Hamilton driving off the course that really cost him the title. maybe bernie set it up with hamilton directly - throw this title and we will make sure you win the next one. all for the good of f1 of course.

personally i think Hamilton just effed up because he couldn't handle the pressure.

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 09 October 2009 - 15:41.


#32 Regiotap

Regiotap
  • Member

  • 126 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:41

Funny. Last year, the Brazilian journalist (who also brought the Piquet-story) already told the Brazilian GP 2007 was fixed.

I don't say I believe this story, but I was surprised no one at McLaren was angry or sad of losing the title that day.

#33 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:49

One of the most ludicrous conspiracy theories I have ever heard


that's what most people thought about crashgate when someone brought it up last year.

#34 pRy

pRy
  • Member

  • 10,997 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:51

This actually came into my mind during the Singapore GP. They mentioned that Redbull suffered an unexplained gearbox issue last year, I think with Webber.. and they finally discovered it was caused by an underground tube train that interfered with the gearbox. Not saying this has anything to do with Hamilton but it does go to show external forces can cause problems internally to F1 cars.

Oh and for the "he pushed the button!" crowd:



The audio there suggests the failure happened as he downshifted and before any button was pressed on the wheel.

#35 saudoso

saudoso
  • Member

  • 4,707 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 09 October 2009 - 15:56

We have a secret particle accelerator under the track. I know, I helped building it. Bernie had the remote, but I can't tell for sure if it was used.

Edited by saudoso, 09 October 2009 - 15:57.


#36 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:04

Now that the FIA have (partially) cleared up what happened at Singapore in 2008, perhaps they might like to re-open the book on another controversial day in Formula One's recent history.

In the moments before the 2007 Brazilian Grand Prix, the finale to that year's World Championship, Martin Brundle intercepted Bernie Ecclestone on the grid at Interlagos, and asked him who he thought would win the championship. Surprisingly, Ecclestone predicted that, against the odds, it would be Kimi Raikkonen, rather than championship-leader Lewis Hamilton.

Two hours later, Kimi was celebrating his first World Championship, whilst Hamilton was left ruing a gearbox glitch which had dropped him out of a championship-winning position.

Ever since that day, the gearbox malfunction has been referred to as 'unexplained' glitch. There were initial claims that Lewis had caused the problem himself, by pressing the wrong button on the steering wheel. McLaren, however, denied this, and issued the following account:

"We can confirm that the temporary gear shifting problem Lewis suffered on lap eight of the Brazilian Grand Prix was due to a default in the gearbox that selected neutral for a period of time. It was not as a result of Lewis pressing an incorrect button on his steering wheel. It was a gearbox problem, and it went into forced-neutral and changing down seemed to rectify it – it might be mechanical, but we doubt it. If it was something mechanical, they usually don't fix themselves. It could be electronics software – but there's no evidence in the analysis to support that. Could be a sensor – but again, there's no evidence in the data recordings.

"So it would appear that the barrels that change gear went out of control – and out of control of the driver – and that's probably hydraulic. That could be either a very small Moog servo control valves that were interfered with by a tiny piece of debris or they are sensitive to magnetic interference – something generated a magnetic field which caused the valve to misbehave."

McLaren, of course, were well-known at this time for their desire to over-control things, including the flow of information about their drivers. They may simply have elected to lie in order to protect Hamilton from the volley of criticism he would otherwise have faced.

Let us assume, however, that Hamilton's gearbox genuinely suffered a glitch which was out of the control of the driver. Are there any possible explanations for this, if it wasn't, as McLaren seem to imply, anything internal to the gearbox and its software?

Well, it's worth recalling that at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, the gearbox in Mark Webber's Red Bull was disabled by electromagnetic interference from a subway train passing under the track. McLaren, of course, specifically refer to the possibility of magnetic interference in their account, but without explicitly suggesting that the source of this interference might have been external.

There are no subway trains passing under the track at Interlagos, so what type of device could have interfered with the electronics in Hamilton's gearbox? Well, how about an electromagnetic pulse generator? Such devices have existed for some decades, have received considerable research attention from the military, and can be relatively easily obtained. It is noticeable that Hamilton's McLaren slows immediately after passing the grandstands in close proximity to the track at the end of the back straight...

http://www.amazing1.com/emp.htm

I thought that I had a suspicious mind, but in no way I can compete with this.

#37 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:06

Funny. Last year, the Brazilian journalist (who also brought the Piquet-story) already told the Brazilian GP 2007 was fixed.

I don't say I believe this story, but I was surprised no one at McLaren was angry or sad of losing the title that day.

Can you check if Seb wins?

#38 Fortymark

Fortymark
  • Member

  • 5,802 posts
  • Joined: April 03

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:07

Totally BS!

What about Alonso? He could still have won the the WDC if Kimi or Massa
had DNF.

#39 BMW_F1

BMW_F1
  • Member

  • 7,670 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:13

Totally BS!

What about Alonso? He could still have won the the WDC if Kimi or Massa
had DNF.


there were also lots of things that could have gone wrong in Singapore preventing Alonso from winning the race after their crash plan had been executed however that did not stop them going forward with it. I can expect anything from F1 really.. its a circus manipulated from a conference table.. allowing Mclaren to continue racing that year and only exclude their WCC points simply for commercial reasons is the proof of this.

Edited by BMW_F1, 09 October 2009 - 16:15.


Advertisement

#40 kong

kong
  • Member

  • 264 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:15

This actually came into my mind during the Singapore GP. They mentioned that Redbull suffered an unexplained gearbox issue last year, I think with Webber.. and they finally discovered it was caused by an underground tube train that interfered with the gearbox. Not saying this has anything to do with Hamilton but it does go to show external forces can cause problems internally to F1 cars.

Maybe! it was the train. Maybe not! Maybe it was something else. Maybe it just broke. It is a fine excuse anyway.
And sure, external forces can cause all kinds of things. Can, but it does not have to be so.
Think of lightning or a very powerful laser. Rontgen, so you do not see the beam. Or maybe Bernie had fixed the timing loop under the track so that it gave extremely powerful pulses and sabotaged Hammys computer.

The damage would have been permanent. Hammys car did work completely OK after the problems, so?

Much easier would have been to put a simple receiver in every ECU and with a transmitter give instructions to the ECU.

Fully possible and it would be then the famous "Bernie button".

I do not believe in that either.

By the way, the car camera system does already have a receiver, so maybe there are other receivers too..... :cool:

#41 pgj

pgj
  • Member

  • 1,691 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:17

Posted Image



:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :clap:

#42 pacwest

pacwest
  • Member

  • 1,407 posts
  • Joined: September 04

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:18

This thread has me seriously wondering of there is a more serious forum elsewhere that would be more my speed.

#43 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:20

Funny. Last year, the Brazilian journalist (who also brought the Piquet-story) already told the Brazilian GP 2007 was fixed.

I don't say I believe this story, but I was surprised no one at McLaren was angry or sad of losing the title that day.


right, they were so happy RD came up with the 'cool fuel' bs to try and steal the championships off the track. sporting indeed. :stoned:

Edited by halifaxf1fan, 09 October 2009 - 16:25.


#44 Jay

Jay
  • Member

  • 957 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:23

Imagine if Hamilton simply made a rookie mistake?????..

::shock horror:: ?

He made many that year... but it sure makes the whole thing sound boring as hell doesn't it... so.. for the benefit of this thread, we shall ignore this, and all other rookie mistakes made by Hamilton when he was under pressure that he couldn't handle that year  ;)

J

#45 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,870 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:28

You'll all be sorry when this comes out as true. Better start baking humble pies and seasoning your hats.

#46 Hairpin

Hairpin
  • Member

  • 4,468 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:31

Oh yes, You can direct EMP. But where to get all the power and where to hide the machine? And usually the very powerfull EMP destroys the elecronics permanently, burns the FET:s.

A Bernievision camera, with a slightly modified "lens"?;)

As Murray Walker so famously said "Anything can happen in F1, and it usually does"
After the last few seasons, people should know better than to ridicule any conspiracy theory, no matter how wild it might sound.


#47 sreevishnu

sreevishnu
  • Member

  • 1,514 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:32

Now we know who did this!!!! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
Posted Image

#48 hunnylander

hunnylander
  • Member

  • 4,448 posts
  • Joined: February 08

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:37

Imagine if Hamilton simply made a rookie mistake?????..

::shock horror:: ?

He made many that year... but it sure makes the whole thing sound boring as hell doesn't it... so.. for the benefit of this thread, we shall ignore this, and all other rookie mistakes made by Hamilton when he was under pressure that he couldn't handle that year ;)

J


That's just your theory.

Hakkinen suffered from a similar gearbox glitch, in a McLaren, and AFAIK also in Interlagos.

Hitting buttons, neutral or speed limiter (e.g. Heikki Melbourne 2008) doesn't cause so long set back, what Hamilton experienced.

And for the record, on the very last GP, the Macca gearbox went neutral (onboard: without hitting its button), and the time loss was 1 second.

And for the Singapore GP teams have improved the shielding of their gearboxes against the subway 'electromagnetic spike' what they were able to detect.

Edited by hunnylander, 09 October 2009 - 16:40.


#49 Scudetto

Scudetto
  • Member

  • 8,049 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:38

I like the idea of Raikkonen winning the WDC due to the intervention of cosmic forces. It sounds biblical: "And, lo, His hand reached forth from Heaven and smote thy nemesis to impotence."

God is a Tifosi. :D

#50 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 09 October 2009 - 16:39

A Bernievision camera, with a slightly modified "lens"?;)

As Murray Walker so famously said "Anything can happen in F1, and it usually does"
After the last few seasons, people should know better than to ridicule any conspiracy theory, no matter how wild it might sound.

You mean we have been watching WWW all along and we didn't know about it?