Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

FIA emergency meeting on Wednesday


  • Please log in to reply
93 replies to this topic

#51 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:37

Nonsense, The FIA did no such thing. They said either there's a safety issue or their isn't, and if there isn't you must get unanimous agreement from the teams. Pirelli said there was no safety issue. Who's fault was that?

The FIA because they believed them and they also did not heed Pirelli's advice in that they need to change the tyre contruction.

FIA seem hell bent on letting Pirelli only change the tyre if Pirelli publically admit liability. I don't know why FIA are operating so stubbornly like this that there is more to it. Some sort of battle behind the scenes. Probably a contract battle with Ecclestone wanting Pirelli, FIA not signing an agreement and Todt wanting Michelin.

The FIA are playing a game of brinkmanship with the safety of the racing drivers purely for their own commercial greed.

Advertisement

#52 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:42

To an extent I agree, but theres the problem, they are far too concerned with keeping a perceived advantage or getting one over each other to actually sit down and sensibly work through the issues. They all have their own agenda.
FIA is meant to be ring master, so in this situation they need to tell the teams whats going to happen and make sure that whatever happens is fair to all teams. They are failing to do this. E.G. they have given their blessing to Ferrari to test a 2011 car that has 2013 wings and god knows what other bits.. isn't this pretty much what they just took Merc to a tribunal for ? Its stupid.

Pirelli for their part need to sort themselves out. Yes, what the FIA wanted from them is a bit dumb but I don't see why its not possible to make tyres to FIA spec nd not have them explode/delaminate. They do need some co-operation to help test the tyres though.

TO be honest the whole lot of them need their heads banging together.


No. But I take your point, You can't expect the teams to agree so the FIA must act, but Todt doesn't act until it is far too late, and even then he does far too little. And we're rather fortunate nobody has been hurt.

#53 Markn93

Markn93
  • Member

  • 4,621 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:44

What though, if anything, can be done for next week?

#54 Cyanide

Cyanide
  • Member

  • 5,299 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:46

While I agree they are incompetent morons, Pirelli really do have a point when they say they need testing to evaluate the tyres properly. So I guess that's what will be discussed on Wednesday.

#55 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:46

The same large chunks missing were there earlier in the season too, recall Hamilton's incidence that was so bad the tyre damaged the gearbox and they had to take a grid penalty.


I, personally, don't disagree with you. The letter from several drivers expressing concern together with the previous failures should have been enough for the FIA to at least consider whether the tyres were safe.

It would nonetheless have been a major step for the FIA to say that changes were needed on safety grounds whilst Pirelli were saying the opposite.

Edited by Dunder, 30 June 2013 - 17:47.


#56 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:47

They could hardly be held liable for accidents that don't happen because they are prevented. They would have been much more likely to be held liable for injuries sustained today (and they're very lucky there were no injuries today) after they denied there was a safety issue with their tyres, thus blocking the proposed safety improvements.

If their insurance policy prevents them from taking remedial action in relation to faults with their product, it's a pretty bad insurance policy, don't you think? One would imagine the insurer would want to decrease rather than increase the risk of having to pay out, no?

They way I see it in the commercial world is that Pirelli *would* only admit liability when they have an alternative product ready to take the flawed products place.

If Pirelli admit liability today there would be no F1 next week. After admitting liability there's a danger with a new product also - that wouldn't be thoroughly tested either. Think back to when Newey, Head, Williams were being sued for the death of Senna.
The same will happen to Pirelli if they admit liability and still go racing and theres a big accident.

That's why I can't see it happening and FIA need to nod nod wink wink and let Pirelli make the changes they have been asking alot for.

We've got a situation where Pirelli are asking to make changes to improve the product and FIA were bluntly saying no - despite nod nod wink wink knowing its because there's a design flaw with the tyre.

Edited by ZooL, 30 June 2013 - 17:49.


#57 MortenF1

MortenF1
  • Member

  • 23,721 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:47

What though, if anything, can be done for next week?

A change from steel to kevlar, but not in time for Germany, but for Hungary.

Edited by race addicted, 30 June 2013 - 17:48.


#58 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 30 June 2013 - 17:48

The FIA because they believed them and they also did not heed Pirelli's advice in that they need to change the tyre contruction.

FIA seem hell bent on letting Pirelli only change the tyre if Pirelli publically admit liability. I don't know why FIA are operating so stubbornly like this that there is more to it. Some sort of battle behind the scenes. Probably a contract battle with Ecclestone wanting Pirelli, FIA not signing an agreement and Todt wanting Michelin.

The FIA are playing a game of brinkmanship with the safety of the racing drivers purely for their own commercial greed.


Are you saying Pirelli entered F1 on the basis that they could change the tyres without admitting there was a safety issue? If so, they didn't read the rules very carefully. You know, the rules they agreed to abide by when they signed the contract with the FIA? It's not the FIA that's being stubborn here. If Pirelli were to "admit liability" as you put it, as long as they did not thereafter continue to supply the same unsafe products, i.e. as long as they actually fixed the problem, then obviously they would not have admitted liability in relation to the replacement product. So what's the problem with doing that?

#59 Darrenj

Darrenj
  • Member

  • 1,663 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 30 June 2013 - 20:44

How do you know that, even Pirelli don't.

What team do you support?


I was being sarcastic, couldn't you tell?



Advertisement

#60 ExFlagMan

ExFlagMan
  • Member

  • 5,726 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 30 June 2013 - 20:54

Jean Told has told Pirelli to be in Paris on Wednesday to propose solutions to the Sporting Working Group about the tyres issues in the British GP.

Autosport are now saying he has INVITED Pirelli to the meeting
.

#61 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 30 June 2013 - 20:57

I'm surprised Pirelli don't tell them to get stuffed.

#62 kimster89

kimster89
  • Member

  • 1,413 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 30 June 2013 - 20:59

Is anyone else getting really tired by all this neverending tyre row?

#63 fhaneef

fhaneef
  • Member

  • 161 posts
  • Joined: February 09

Posted 30 June 2013 - 21:04

The FIA are looking VERY incompetent again. They've gone from warning Pirelli to not change the tyres, despite Pirelli's advice, and are now setting up an extraordinary meeting to make Pirelli do something?!

What a U- turn by the shambolic FIA.


Look there's nothing wrong with the compound. They raced them in 2012, 11, and 10. They just need to change the construction and strengthen the side walls. This will impact traction no doubt about it and it will incur more wheel-spin meaning more degradation!

#64 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 17,121 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 30 June 2013 - 22:57

What a ******* buch of amateurs, the solution was already there pirelli wanted to do it, Mercedes & RBR of course opportunately pushed for it but Ferrari & didn't want to, now Massa is even considering a German GP probe.

The point is that they are not a bunch of amateurs, they are a bunch of professionals. As such, they write down rules and procedures for all to follow. And therein lies the problem. No one can do anything about the situation because either Pirelli or the FIA must declare that there is a safety issue that needs to be addressed or the teams must all agree a specific change.

Pirelli are unlikely to say there is a safety issue as they believe that it's not the tyres but other factors that are the problem. The FIA are unlikely to say there is a safety issue as Pirelli and the teams would want them to present technical data to prove this (remember they are all commercial operations and such changes affect their businesses). The teams are unlikely to agree a specific change because there are some teams that believe there is nothing wrong and it's just the design of their competitors cars that are the problem.


#65 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 30 June 2013 - 23:18

Pirelli are unlikely to say there is a safety issue as they believe that it's not the tyres but other factors that are the problem.


Pirelli are idiots, then. They're trashing their brand. Saying to the FIA "there's a safety issue" would have done so little damage to their brand by comparison to the TV pictures of their tyres going pop one, after another, after another. Blame outside factors if you like; to the extent that some of the blowouts today were caused by debris, it was debris created by Pirelli tyre failures. To the extent that it was kerbs, it was kerbs that have been there for years. This really is nobody else's fault. It's an avoidable problem caused by their own lack of a safety culture. There was a safety issue and they tried to cover it up instead of addressing it.

If I fit Pirellis to my Toyota, and then a friend tells me those tyres are liable to blowouts on the motorway, and I ring up Pirelli and they tell me there is no safety issue with their tyres, what am I supposed to think? If they tell me everything's fine and then I suffer a blowout on the M2 is it, as Zool suggested, my fault for believeing them? Apparently it's the FIA's fault for believing what Pirelli said of the safety of the product they supply under contract to the FIA.

Edited by redreni, 30 June 2013 - 23:19.


#66 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 01 July 2013 - 01:34

It is pretty explicitly on Pirelli to insure the tires are safe. THEY MAKE THE TIRES.

The big, big problem is that -

1) obviously their engineering isn't up to the challenge of F1
2) obviously they are not willing to be forthright and forthcoming about their role in the safety of the drivers.

Because of those two points, each point alone - they're not really in a position to guarantee the safety of the drivers, are they......? "We are sure these tires are safe" - how would they know? How would the drivers know if they're not stretching the truth a bit....? Has there ever in the history of F1 been this many "punctures" in one season, or even 5-10 seasons combined?


From a sporting standpoint - Hamilton has had how many races impacted by engineering faults with the tires? For the fans - did we *really want slow motion tire tests*????

WTF is going on with FOM and the FIA?

Edited by Rubens Hakkamacher, 01 July 2013 - 01:36.


#67 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 9,172 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 01 July 2013 - 02:46

I've been in Pirelli's corner until this year. Tyre performance was ridiculous today and it's time for a change--preferably to a new manufacturer after the season is over if Pirelli doesn't get their act together. Ferrari, Lotus, and Force India are fools if they decide that what happened today is acceptable in the name of their own performance gain; if one of their drivers had been injured I'm sure they would have changed tune before Rosberg had crossed the finish line. Instead, we have everyone dancing around their words because they don't want to upset the powers that be and nobody making any serious call for action. Ridiculous. :down:

#68 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:10

Pirelli have shown that they are more than capable in their tyre technology. They have moved from a kevlar belted hybrid tyre to a steell belted radial for this season while still maintaining the FIA's remit. J think Pirelli encountered unforseen circumstances at Silverstone. The drivers that were affected were all guilty of riding beyond the kerbs with the rear left sliding under load and hitting the sharper outside edge. Since the tyre wall is the most loaded that component is failing.
Now that Pirelli have the data they can alter the construction. As someone said earlier the teams tested the Silverstone prototype in Canada but its use was blocked.
Tyre blowouts are not new in F1. Nigel Mansell's tyre failure in Adelaide '86 is a case in point.

Edited by Petroltorque, 01 July 2013 - 08:40.


#69 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 8,724 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:15

The drivers that were affected were all guilty of riding beyond the kerbs with the rear left sliding under load and hitting the sharper outside edge.


Care to back that up?

Edited by Diablobb81, 01 July 2013 - 08:15.


#70 bonjon1979a

bonjon1979a
  • Member

  • 4,333 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:16

Pirelli have shown that they are more than capable in their tyre technology. They have moved from a kevlar belted hybrid tyre to a steell belted radial for this season while still maintaining the FIA's remit. J think Pirelli encountered unforseen circumstances at Silverstone. The drivers that were affected were all guilty of riding beyond the kerbs with the rear left sliding under load and hitting the sharper outside edge. Since the tyre wall is the most loaded that component is failing.
Now that Pirelli have the data they can alter the construction. As someone said earlier the teams tested the Silverstone prototype in Canada but its use was blocked.
Tyre blowouts are not new in F1. Nigel Mansell's tyre failure in A decade '86 is a case in point.


20 in 7 races is new. nothing like this before in f1

#71 w00dy

w00dy
  • Member

  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:19

They need to be extra careful. If FIA/Pirelli say that the tyres are unsafe, so they are changing them they must have the replacement tyres ready, because if not, Nurburging cannot go on. That is a huge liability for everyone involved to race with unsafe tyres...

#72 Slackbladder

Slackbladder
  • Member

  • 2,151 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:22

They need to be extra careful. If FIA/Pirelli say that the tyres are unsafe, so they are changing them they must have the replacement tyres ready, because if not, Nurburging cannot go on. That is a huge liability for everyone involved to race with unsafe tyres...


I personally would want the German GP not to go ahead. In my opinion it was dangerous on sunday, and with no time for tyre changes, it has to be at least a risk of it being dangerous next weekend as well.



#73 David1976

David1976
  • Member

  • 1,638 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:36

I personally would want the German GP not to go ahead. In my opinion it was dangerous on sunday, and with no time for tyre changes, it has to be at least a risk of it being dangerous next weekend as well.



The German Grand Prix WILL go ahead. There is too much money at stake to cancel it regardless of the tyre issues.

I honestly cannot see a solution to these tyres by this weekend. More likely that they will machine any sharp edges on any kerbs for one race before reverting back to their original spec for the following race. By Hungary Pirelli may have a solution.

Edited by David1976, 01 July 2013 - 08:37.


#74 Petroltorque

Petroltorque
  • Member

  • 2,856 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:42

The German GP is not at risk as it is not a high loading circuit. Spa is the problem.

Edited by Petroltorque, 01 July 2013 - 08:43.


#75 Slackbladder

Slackbladder
  • Member

  • 2,151 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:45

The German Grand Prix WILL go ahead. There is too much money at stake to cancel it regardless of the tyre issues.

I honestly cannot see a solution to these tyres by this weekend. More likely that they will machine any sharp edges on any kerbs for one race before reverting back to their original spec for the following race. By Hungary Pirelli may have a solution.


If anything happens this weekend, given the issues at Silverstone, then it could seriously damage the sport. You cannot have drivers in a serious accident if there is a known something wrong before. It would be an absolute huge awful disaster.

#76 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 17,539 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:12

Pirelli have shown that they are more than capable in their tyre technology. They have moved from a kevlar belted hybrid tyre to a steell belted radial for this season while still maintaining the FIA's remit. J think Pirelli encountered unforseen circumstances at Silverstone. The drivers that were affected were all guilty of riding beyond the kerbs with the rear left sliding under load and hitting the sharper outside edge. Since the tyre wall is the most loaded that component is failing.
Now that Pirelli have the data they can alter the construction. As someone said earlier the teams tested the Silverstone prototype in Canada but its use was blocked.
Tyre blowouts are not new in F1. Nigel Mansell's tyre failure in Adelaide '86 is a case in point.

Paul, is that you?;)

More than capable? The whole season the tires fall apart, let alone the abismal performance with nanny driving to get to the finish. How can you say they are up to standard?

The kerbs in Silverstone are there for a long time, other classes the SAME DAY had no problem with them.
The tire wasn't tested in Canada due to rain.

And Mansells tire failed after many laps, where he tried to get away with one less stop. No comparison to yesterday, where the tires went after 11 laps (includiing a Q-run) at the first driver. Hards were affected as well as the mediums.

Edited by SenorSjon, 01 July 2013 - 09:14.


#77 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 01 July 2013 - 10:42

Pirelli have shown that they are more than capable in their tyre technology. They have moved from a kevlar belted hybrid tyre to a steell belted radial for this season while still maintaining the FIA's remit. J think Pirelli encountered unforseen circumstances at Silverstone. The drivers that were affected were all guilty of riding beyond the kerbs with the rear left sliding under load and hitting the sharper outside edge. Since the tyre wall is the most loaded that component is failing.
Now that Pirelli have the data they can alter the construction. As someone said earlier the teams tested the Silverstone prototype in Canada but its use was blocked.
Tyre blowouts are not new in F1. Nigel Mansell's tyre failure in Adelaide '86 is a case in point.


Even if true, this misses the point. Tyres get cut all the time - it is not unusual.
What is unusual is the complete structural failures that resulted from those cuts.

Were the teams running excessively low pressures/high cambers or did the changes made to the bonding agent mean that the mode of failure changed compared to what we saw in Bahrain/Barcelona?

Whatever the truth is, I doubt we will hear it.

A fudge will be announced on Wednesday that sees teams having to run with higher pressures/lower cambers and the teams will miraculously agree that changes are needed but it will be framed in such a way as to avoid the tyres being deemed unsafe.

#78 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 17,121 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 July 2013 - 11:59

Even if true, this misses the point. Tyres get cut all the time - it is not unusual.
What is unusual is the complete structural failures that resulted from those cuts.

Were the teams running excessively low pressures/high cambers or did the changes made to the bonding agent mean that the mode of failure changed compared to what we saw in Bahrain/Barcelona?

Whatever the truth is, I doubt we will hear it.

A fudge will be announced on Wednesday that sees teams having to run with higher pressures/lower cambers and the teams will miraculously agree that changes are needed but it will be framed in such a way as to avoid the tyres being deemed unsafe.

Indeed

#79 Coops3

Coops3
  • Member

  • 1,841 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:01

Why Wednesday? Why not today? Wednesday gives Pirelli one day to produce new tyres, if that's what the outcome of the meeting were to be. It's not going to happen.

Advertisement

#80 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:06

Why Wednesday? Why not today? Wednesday gives Pirelli one day to produce new tyres, if that's what the outcome of the meeting were to be. It's not going to happen.


they won't produce new tyres for Germany, you can bet the farm on that - as mentioned it's likely the teams will get a missive on Thursday advising maximum cambers and minimum pressures to get through the weekend and then maybe some new material will be tested in the YDT with a view to introduction after the summer break.

#81 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:13

Are we going to see sliding cars all over the place then?

#82 wrighty

wrighty
  • Member

  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: November 06

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:31

Are we going to see sliding cars all over the place then?


hold on while i get my crystal ball out.



ffs.

#83 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:35

I suspect we will see mandated minimum tyre pressures and maximum cambers until a new construction can be introduced.

Sad but necessary.

Yeah I think so.

That's OK IMO. Victory to the team that can adapt best to 20 psi...

#84 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:36

hold on while i get my crystal ball out.



ffs.


Are you done yet? :p

#85 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 01 July 2013 - 12:42

A fudge will be announced on Wednesday that sees teams having to run with higher pressures/lower cambers and the teams will miraculously agree that changes are needed but it will be framed in such a way as to avoid the tyres being deemed unsafe.


You're probably right, and since the tyres can't be changed for Nurburgring I actually think it's sensible, since it's a much easier circuit on tyres than Silverstone anyway, to go ahead but to take whatever other actions are possible to mitigate the risks, in particular minimum pressures, maximum cambers and grinding down kerbs to make them flatter and take away sharp edges. And Charlie will have to be extra-vigilent - as soon as there's a tyre failure, instant SC so the track can be cleaned. And if the pack cannot avoid driving through the debris, throw the red flag so the tyres can be changed. But the tyres must change for the next event: presumably this will be decided on Wednesday.

What I am worried about is the notion that Pirelli will be allowed to not admit there is a safety issue. The governance structures of F1 crucially rely on the FIA to take overall responsibility for safety and to be able to impose any change it wants without the need for notice or teams' agreement in the interests of safety. They can't do that if the tyre supplier is going to deny obvious safety concerns and the FIA is going to be too polite, or too scared of being sued, to contradict them. One would hope the tyre supplier would be responsible, and would realise that when there's a problem the only way to get the necessary changes done is to come clean about the fact that there is a problem. If they have done this straight away the damage to their reputation would have been minimal. The damage to their reputation now is huge, and if Fernando Alonso had suffered Massa-type injuries as a result of being struck by Perez's tyre, the damage to Pirelli would have been 100 times worse again.

If Pirelli are not prepared to be responsible about this the FIA should publicly declare that in its opinion there is a safety issue, demand that it is fixed, and decline to renew Pirelli's contract. The kind of behaviour Pirelli is engaging in undermines F1's governance arrangements by effectively making safety-related changes impossible without the teams' agreement, which is unworkable and is the complete opposite of how the system is supposed to operate.

#86 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 01 July 2013 - 13:04

You're probably right, and since the tyres can't be changed for Nurburgring I actually think it's sensible, since it's a much easier circuit on tyres than Silverstone anyway, to go ahead but to take whatever other actions are possible to mitigate the risks, in particular minimum pressures, maximum cambers and grinding down kerbs to make them flatter and take away sharp edges. And Charlie will have to be extra-vigilent - as soon as there's a tyre failure, instant SC so the track can be cleaned. And if the pack cannot avoid driving through the debris, throw the red flag so the tyres can be changed. But the tyres must change for the next event: presumably this will be decided on Wednesday.

What I am worried about is the notion that Pirelli will be allowed to not admit there is a safety issue. The governance structures of F1 crucially rely on the FIA to take overall responsibility for safety and to be able to impose any change it wants without the need for notice or teams' agreement in the interests of safety. They can't do that if the tyre supplier is going to deny obvious safety concerns and the FIA is going to be too polite, or too scared of being sued, to contradict them. One would hope the tyre supplier would be responsible, and would realise that when there's a problem the only way to get the necessary changes done is to come clean about the fact that there is a problem. If they have done this straight away the damage to their reputation would have been minimal. The damage to their reputation now is huge, and if Fernando Alonso had suffered Massa-type injuries as a result of being struck by Perez's tyre, the damage to Pirelli would have been 100 times worse again.

If Pirelli are not prepared to be responsible about this the FIA should publicly declare that in its opinion there is a safety issue, demand that it is fixed, and decline to renew Pirelli's contract. The kind of behaviour Pirelli is engaging in undermines F1's governance arrangements by effectively making safety-related changes impossible without the teams' agreement, which is unworkable and is the complete opposite of how the system is supposed to operate.


The problem, as I see it, is as much with the FIA (and FOM) as it is with Pirelli.

If tyres are not deemed safe then (much like Indy 2005) the supplier would have to advise teams/customers not to race from a liability point of view. Whatever the rights and wrongs - Bernie will not allow that to happen and Todt has every incentive to find a 'compromise' too.


#87 bonjon1979a

bonjon1979a
  • Member

  • 4,333 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 01 July 2013 - 13:09

Why Wednesday? Why not today? Wednesday gives Pirelli one day to produce new tyres, if that's what the outcome of the meeting were to be. It's not going to happen.


Hard to book meeting rooms at such short notice. Always, a problem.

#88 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 01 July 2013 - 13:33

The problem, as I see it, is as much with the FIA (and FOM) as it is with Pirelli.

If tyres are not deemed safe then (much like Indy 2005) the supplier would have to advise teams/customers not to race from a liability point of view. Whatever the rights and wrongs - Bernie will not allow that to happen and Todt has every incentive to find a 'compromise' too.


They've known there was an issue since Bahrain. They've had a potential replacement available, in the form of the 2012 tyres, all along and, according to Hamilton, they've also had other safe tyres available since the controversial tyre test with Mercedes. If you decide on the Monday after a Grand Prix that there's a safety issue and you tell the FIA, then as long as it's at least a fortnight to the next race, there's no reason why the next event can't still go ahead with safe tyres (especially if you knew in advance of the weekend that you were going to have this post-race epiphany). They had a 3 week gap after Bahrain to make changes before Spain, failing that they had a two week gap after Spain to make changes for Monte Carlo, they had a two week gap after Monte Carlo to make changes for Canada, and finally they had one last chance to correct the problem in the three week gap leading up to Britain. During that time they never admitted there was a safety concern - in fact they denied it. It's nobody else's fault they are now out of time to fix the problem for Germany.

Nevertheless we are where we are. If they want to go ahead in Germany, which I'm not against as long as analysis of the Silverstone incidents genuinely shows that there will be no recurrance in Germany due to different circuit characteristics and/or that recurrance can be avoided by running less aggressive camber and higher pressures, doing work on the kerbs etc, then they may wish to prolong their investigations into the Silverstone incidents into next week, thereby delaying the declaration that the tyres are unsafe until after the last race at which they're going to be used. But I can't accept that they will be supported by the FIA in having covered up a safety issue in a way that prevents corrective action occurring promptly. That sets an incredibly dangerous precedent, and this sort of thing must not happen again.

#89 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 19,631 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 01 July 2013 - 13:55

Higher pressure and cambers probably won't solve the issue. They increased tire pressure and there still were blow outs.

And reading the lastest story here on Autosport on the issue, pretty much explained what happened, and that because of the nature of the German track, similar issue might pop up as well.

Never mind that tire issues surfaced earlier this season.

The difference with Indy 2005 is , that instead having just a blown out tire on Perez car in FP, at Indy, a driver got hurt (RS). And possibly MM being more sensitive about safety issues than JT.

The big difference is that these issues at Silverstone could have been avoided, as the signs were there already. The whole F1 governing structure IMO seems to resemble politics in EU. Unable to make something coherent, as everybody serves his interests first , and unable to get people pull into the same direction to solve serious issues.

#90 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 01 July 2013 - 15:17

I'm tired of hearing about the kerb - not even "kerbs" but "the" kerb.

It's not as if Pirelli's tires haven't failed before this race.

And when they did, they always said "the driver ran over debris". Multiple drivers, multiple "debris".

Yeah, they were given a curious task to accomplish, but just because the task seems to go hand in hand with their problems doesn't mean it's related or a good reason for exploding tires to be happening.

#91 biercemountain

biercemountain
  • Member

  • 1,014 posts
  • Joined: June 01

Posted 01 July 2013 - 16:43

Hard to book meeting rooms at such short notice. Always, a problem.


:lol:


#92 camberley

camberley
  • Member

  • 438 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 02 July 2013 - 13:19

they won't produce new tyres for Germany, you can bet the farm on that - as mentioned it's likely the teams will get a missive on Thursday advising maximum cambers and minimum pressures to get through the weekend and then maybe some new material will be tested in the YDT with a view to introduction after the summer break.


They are changing tyres for Germany and going to use Kevlar tyres

#93 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 02 July 2013 - 13:33

They are changing tyres for Germany and going to use Kevlar tyres


This article repeats the big lie, that the teams blocked safety changes but the FIA have changed the rules to allow safety changes without agreement. The rules have always allowed safety changes without agreement. If they hadn't, the FIA wouldn't have been able to make the imaginary rule change it is pretending to have made. Very poor reporting.

I hope this untested tinkering works. The untested tinkering before Silverstone didn't work, did it?

#94 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 4,709 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 02 July 2013 - 13:41

Higher pressure and cambers probably won't solve the issue. They increased tire pressure and there still were blow outs.


Yeah, they didn't alter the camber, though. And the failure rate dropped off dramatically after everyone increased the pressures. Nobody's claiming the tyres would be totally safe with higher pressures and less aggressive camber angles, just that the risk of failure would be reduced. Which it would, quite a bit. The news that they can supply 350-odd kevlar rears at such short notice is a surprise bonus, though, and hopefully that will do the trick and give us a zero failure rate next time out.