Posted 20 July 2013 - 19:36
A predictable furious overreaction to a perfectly sensible suggestion. Anderson is not suggesting a minimum pitstop time or anything that would fetter competition between the teams. It's a measure aimed at reducing the overall number of people exposed to danger in the pitlane, and improving sightlines for the people who release the cars to make it more likely that, if there's a problem, they will see it. I can't think of another form of motorsport that doesn't regulate the number of pit crew. If Anderson's measures only add 1.5s to a pitstop, in most cases that won't affect things enough to make teams change their strategy, so I don't think it's reasonable to oppose it on the grounds that it will discourage stopping.
Although Mattferg says the Webber incident was a "one off" I'll wager there have been more instances of cars being released without their wheels on in the three years since refuelling was banned than there were in the sixteen year period prior to that in which refuelling was allowed, which, if true, would suggest to anyone with a grey cell functioning that the shorter pitstop times and the fact that the wheel change is the limiting factor in pitstops, has a lot to do with this. This is not, therefore, a simple knee-jerk reaction, it is a rational response to a problem. If anything, Anderson's proposal arguably doesn't go far enough, as it is not a sure way of preventing cars being released without the wheels being fitted properly.
F1 could very easily adopt the system they have in FIA GT and in many other forms of sportscar racing, where the pit crew have to retreat behind the white line that separates the working lane from the garage, along with the wheels and tyres they've removed and their airguns, before the car can be released. This means the person releasing the car gets a clear view of it as there aren't people crowding around the car. It prevents incidents of the kind that occurred a few years ago when Yamamoto pulled away when there was a guy leaning over the car and the fellow ended up going under the rear wheel. It would also mean you wouldn't have airlines dangling in the path of the cars (put Ralf Schumacher Zandvoort pitstop into Youtube to see what happens when an airline is left dangling an the path of a car's rear wing) and most of all, it would prevent nearly every case of cars being released without the wheels on since the wheelgun man invariably knows if the wheel has gone on right or not, and he would not retreat behind the white line if the job wasn't done.
I'm opposed to minimum pitstop times or spec wheelnuts/wheelguns because I think, in F1, you have to let the teams innovate and compete. But it is ridiculous, in my view, to oppose further regulation of pitstops of the kind Andreson is suggesting when it is clear that so much more could be done to prevent the kind of nasty incident which we've seen too much of in recent years.
