120 replies to this topic

[Kvothe]

https://twitter.com/...829613314539520

An excerpt from the f1 racing mag, which states that for the 2013 race, the chicane at turn 10 (widely known as the Singapore sling) will be reconfigured to turn it into a flowing left hander before accelerating towards the Anderson Bridge. The removal of the chicane will be a relief to both the drivers and the teams especially with its history of launching cars, and causing punctures (Hamilton in 2011 qualifyihng) . Considering the chicane was introduced to keep speeds down, it'll be interesting to see how much speed the drivers can carry through now? What overtaking opportunities will it open up? Will it become similar to Tabac at Monaco?

Credit to Journeyer in the comments section of f1 fanatic.

[Cyanide]

Best decision ever. That chicane was useless.

[Muppetmad]

Yes, I'm intrigued as to how they'll slow the cars down sufficiently heading onto the bridge. Let's see.

[Mediansoft]

Yes, I'm intrigued as to how they'll slow the cars down sufficiently heading onto the bridge. Let's see.

The cars have brakes you know Im sure no car will try to take a corner at any speeds that would prevent said car from making the turn.

[HuddersfieldTerrier1986]

Can't imagine it'll result in a major change in the length of the track, so likely still 61 laps (albeit a bit quicker now presumably).

[Muppetmad]

The cars have brakes you know Im sure no car will try to take a corner at any speeds that would prevent said car from making the turn.

That's not what I mean - somebody will have a better answer than I do, but the Singapore Sling in its current configuration (i.e. what has been used up until now) was created specifically to slow the cars down before the Anderson bridge. I can't recall if it was because of fears of contact with the bridge or the lack of runoff (or another reason), but there was a reason. Either way, by "they" I meant those redesigning that turn, not the drivers - because for whatever reason, the cars need to be slowed down heading into that part of the circuit.

Edited by Muppetmad, 18 August 2013 - 16:29.

[MikeV1987]

Best decision ever. That chicane was useless.

[olliek88]

What Cyanide said.

The term "Mickey Mouse" was defined by that corner.

[TomNokoe]

I'm waiting for someone to draw a mini diagram! And yes as someone posted, my first thought was Tabac

[RockyRaccoon68]

I imagine they'll fashion it into a tight left hander to keep things slow for the bridge.

[sanW10]

(2010)Hamilton criticises ‘Singapore Sling’ chicane

[PayasYouRace]

It's good that they're getting rid of it. It never really worked for what it was supposed to do. It didn't increase runoff at the end of the straight at all, and it had no effect on the bridge because of the T11-12 chicane did that job fine anyway.

[Puhoon]

I liked it. It was something different and it was nice to see cars going airborne there when drivers got it wrong.

Edited by Puhoon, 18 August 2013 - 19:18.

[Kingshark]

Will this change be on the new F1 2013 game? Not that it really matters as I take that chicane like one left-handed corner anyway.

Edited by Kingshark, 18 August 2013 - 19:22.

[redreni]

The corner was mickey mouse, but worse than that it was put there to try to address a safety issue but it arguably made matters worse. The natural layout and geometry of that turn is determined by the street layout - it‘s a tight-ish 80-odd degree left leading down towards the tricky bridge section. The main reason, as I understood it, why those ludicrous kerbs were put in was because there‘s a major public building in the way of where the run-off area should be for such a fast corner. But this is where the box-ticking mentality for circuit homologation overtakes common sense - the criterion says a 60mph corner needs x amount of run-off, an 80mph corner needs a bit more, 100mph needs more still, and it‘s determined by estimated apex speed, so by putting the kerbs in and making a chicane you can get around the lack of run-off by saying it‘s a slow corner. But cars that go off are not necessarily going to be travelling at the estimated apex speed. If ever anybody were to lose control before the braking point and arrive at that corner sideways at high speed those kerbs would have sent them barrel-rolling into the debris fence. They‘re lucky it hasn‘t happened yet and mercifully now it sounds like it isn‘t going to. At least if you have a normal, quick-ish corner without much run-off and without stupidly high kerbs, any car going off there is likely to hit the tyre wall or techpro barrier rather than be launched, potentially cockpit-first, into catch fencing.

So this sounds like a positive move for safety and an even more positive move from a racing point of view - that corner was as out of place on a modern Grand Prix track as a crazy-golf hole would be at Wentworth.

[Disgrace]

They'll still want them to slow down over the bridge, presumably it will be replaced with a Detroit-esque 90 degree corner.

[PayasYouRace]

They'll still want them to slow down over the bridge, presumably it will be replaced with a Detroit-esque 90 degree corner.

That's what the T11-12 chicane does quite nicely, and my understanding is that that will remain.

[Fastcake]

The only downside is that was the only corner in Singapore I could remember.

Good riddance, and it's refreshing to see a new circuit actually make some changes for the better.

[Shiroo]

they should just put there fast left

[Nonesuch]

... will be reconfigured to turn it into a flowing left hander before accelerating towards the Anderson Bridge.

After exiting Turn 10, the drivers had to navigate Turn 11 and 12 before coming onto the bridge. Does this imply that said corners will also be altered - or is 'towards', rather than 'onto', supposed to signify that Turns 11 and 12 were taken into account, and that they will remain in their previous configuration?

Edited by Nonesuch, 18 August 2013 - 21:39.

[BillBald]

I don't think it has anything to do with the bridge.

There isn't much runoff at turn 10, that's why they wanted to slow the cars right down. If it's a fairly fast left and someone loses it, they could hit the wall very hard. But kerbs which can launch a car aren't actually much better.

I don't understand why they haven't made a chicane a short distance before turn 10, that would be the safest thing as far as I can see.

[Tenmantaylor]

Suggested this first time round, glad they are listening. Don't know why it took so many seasons and unnecessary dangerous launchings of cars to work it out though and enact my commands.

If they make the left hander sufficiently tight it won't affect the approach speed to next corner if that is what they are worried about.

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 18 August 2013 - 22:42.

[redreni]

I don't think it has anything to do with the bridge.

There isn't much runoff at turn 10, that's why they wanted to slow the cars right down. If it's a fairly fast left and someone loses it, they could hit the wall very hard. But kerbs which can launch a car aren't actually much better.

I don't understand why they haven't made a chicane a short distance before turn 10, that would be the safest thing as far as I can see.

So you want to replace one mickey-mouse chicane with another? I really don't thinlk the road is wide enough to put anything but the most ridiculous little corner in on the approach to (what is currently) turn 10.

You have to remember that although the turn 10 run-off is insufficient by the letter of the FIA rules as they apply to new tracks, there are plenty of old tracks that have much faster corners than this proposed "flowing left hander" with similarly miserley run-off areas e.g. Imola, Suzuka. There's no run-off at Tabac either, which is probably just as fast as the proposed new turn 10, but we had a major crash there this year and the drivers walked away. There's a three-layer techpro barrier there at the minute, which won't do much for a car that is launched over the top of it by the kerbs, but as long as they make it so the track follows the line of the left-hand lanes of the existing public road, leaving as much space as possible on the outside, and make sure they carry on the techpro barrier further around the corner than at present, I don't think the risk would be unacceptable.

[ryan86]

I would think that the best move would be to move the barrier so that the barrier follows the track rather than having any run-off, therefore if anyone has any problems they'll crash along the barrier rather than into it.

[BillBald]

So you want to replace one mickey-mouse chicane with another? I really don't thinlk the road is wide enough to put anything but the most ridiculous little corner in on the approach to (what is currently) turn 10.

You have to remember that although the turn 10 run-off is insufficient by the letter of the FIA rules as they apply to new tracks, there are plenty of old tracks that have much faster corners than this proposed "flowing left hander" with similarly miserley run-off areas e.g. Imola, Suzuka. There's no run-off at Tabac either, which is probably just as fast as the proposed new turn 10, but we had a major crash there this year and the drivers walked away. There's a three-layer techpro barrier there at the minute, which won't do much for a car that is launched over the top of it by the kerbs, but as long as they make it so the track follows the line of the left-hand lanes of the existing public road, leaving as much space as possible on the outside, and make sure they carry on the techpro barrier further around the corner than at present, I don't think the risk would be unacceptable.

ISRT that the road leading down to turn 10 is fairly wide, so you could have a decent chicane which would lead into turn 10, if you wanted to make it as safe as possible.

I'd agree with you that even without a chicane, it would be no worse than Tabac, but I am fairly sure that Tabec would not be allowed if it were on a new circuit.

[BillBald]

I would think that the best move would be to move the barrier so that the barrier follows the track rather than having any run-off, therefore if anyone has any problems they'll crash along the barrier rather than into it.

Possible problem with hitting the end of the barrier, unless you extend it right round the corner.

[redreni]

ISRT that the road leading down to turn 10 is fairly wide, so you could have a decent chicane which would lead into turn 10, if you wanted to make it as safe as possible.

I'd agree with you that even without a chicane, it would be no worse than Tabac, but I am fairly sure that Tabec would not be allowed if it were on a new circuit.

No, it wouldn't but if it's okay to have Tabac why is it not okay to have two Tabacs? I worry that if this chicane goes in it would be just as **** a corner as that horrible plastic chicane at Surfers Paradise.

If slowing the cars is essential for safety then I would literally prefer it if they would paint a couple of lines across the track, about 20 metres apart, about three quarters of the way along the straight between turns 9 and 10, lay down coloured asphalt between the two lines, and enforce the pit lane speed limit on the coloured section. Anyone caught speeding gets a drive-through, no arguments. It would be mickey mouse but no more so than a chicane, and at least you wouldn't have constant debates over people exceeding the track limits.

[BillBald]

If slowing the cars is essential for safety then I would literally prefer it if they would paint a couple of lines across the track, about 20 metres apart, about three quarters of the way along the straight between turns 9 and 10, lay down coloured asphalt between the two lines, and enforce the pit lane speed limit on the coloured section. Anyone caught speeding gets a drive-through, no arguments. It would be mickey mouse but no more so than a chicane, and at least you wouldn't have constant debates over people exceeding the track limits.

A pedestrian zone, maybe...

[wj_gibson]

I would think that the best move would be to move the barrier so that the barrier follows the track rather than having any run-off, therefore if anyone has any problems they'll crash along the barrier rather than into it.

I dunno, you might end up with a blocked track then.

[froggy22]

While I didn't like the corner, it was kind of unique and identifiable in a way. It will probably be changed to a feature-less left hander now

[redreni]

I dunno, you might end up with a blocked track then.

As you would if anybody crashed as they turned onto the swing bridge, or in several other places. If the track is partially blocked, that's what the yellow flags are for. If the track is completely blocked, that's what the red flags are for. Even with the barriers set back as far as possible from the track (which isn't very far in this case) cars will still hit the barrier and bounce back onto the circuit.

A more important consideration is to think about trying to make sure any car that crashes won't hit the barriers too hard or at too severe an angle, so I agree that it might in this case be better to make the barrier follow the outside of the track rather than to curve around the stone steps of the builing as it does at the moment, purely because it would make it much less likely that somebody would go in at 90 degrees to the barrier, thereby reducing the severity of any impact, and allowing energy to dissipate gradually as the car slides along the barrier and around the corner.

The only slight issue this might create is it would take away an escape route - I'm not sure but I've a feeling the outside of 10 is the last opportunity for a broken down car to pull safely off the circuit before the swing bridge?

Edited by redreni, 19 August 2013 - 12:17.

[BillBald]

As you would if anybody crashed as they turned onto the swing bridge, or in several other places. If the track is partially blocked, that's what the yellow flags are for. If the track is completely blocked, that's what the red flags are for. Even with the barriers set back as far as possible from the track (which isn't very far in this case) cars will still hit the barrier and bounce back onto the circuit.

A more important consideration is to think about trying to make sure any car that crashes won't hit the barriers too hard or at too severe an angle, so I agree that it might in this case be better to make the barrier follow the outside of the track rather than to curve around the stone steps of the builing as it does at the moment, purely because it would make it much less likely that somebody would go in at 90 degrees to the barrier, thereby reducing the severity of any impact, and allowing energy to dissipate gradually as the car slides along the barrier and around the corner.

The only slight issue this might create is it would take away an escape route - I'm not sure but I've a feeling the outside of 10 is the last opportunity for a broken down car to pull safely off the circuit before the swing bridge?

It's not a slight issue, losing the escape route would result in more safety cars, on a track which has too many already.

Best solution is a chicane consisting of a slight right turn followed by a sharp left turn (turn 10 itself). If the cars outbraked themselves or hit the kerbs too hard, they would hit the wall on the right (but not head-on) or just go down the escape road. It would be almost impossible to crash in the place where they have done it in the past.

[DampMongoose]

I dunno, you might end up with a blocked track then.

Didn't stop them creating a tunnel pitlane at Abu Dhabi that one car with a loose wheel wouldn't block!

[Skinnyguy]

Will this change be on the new F1 2013 game? Not that it really matters as I take that chicane like one left-handed corner anyway.

You dirty exploiter!! The game is an absolut joke mainly because of the way curbs and grass (don´t) affect cars.

[SpaMaster]

Thank God, by far the worst corner in F1 is gone!

[redreni]

It's not a slight issue, losing the escape route would result in more safety cars, on a track which has too many already.

Best solution is a chicane consisting of a slight right turn followed by a sharp left turn (turn 10 itself). If the cars outbraked themselves or hit the kerbs too hard, they would hit the wall on the right (but not head-on) or just go down the escape road. It would be almost impossible to crash in the place where they have done it in the past.

It's an issue that could probably be resolved by making a gap in the barrier on drivers' left between turns 10 and 11 thus replacing the lost escape route, assuming there's room there to allow stricken cars to be pushed behind the barrier, which I think there is.

And correct me if I'm wrong but if a car fails to negotiate the slight right part of this proposed chicane it will go off to drivers' left, surely, hit any obstacle that may have been placed there to stop corner-cutting, then re-cross the track at near enough 90 degrees to the traffic and hit the exposed barrier in front of the builing? Wouldn't it only hit the wall on the right if it made it round the first part of the chicane but not the second?

Edited by redreni, 19 August 2013 - 15:23.

[BillBald]

It's an issue that could probably be resolved by making a gap in the barrier on drivers' left between turns 10 and 11 thus replacing the lost escape route, assuming there's room there to allow stricken cars to be pushed behind the barrier, which I think there is.

And correct me if I'm wrong but if a car fails to negotiate the slight right part of this proposed chicane it will go off to drivers' left, surely, hit any obstacle that may have been placed there to stop corner-cutting, then re-cross the track at near enough 90 degrees to the traffic and hit the exposed barrier in front of the builing? Wouldn't it only hit the wall on the right if it made it round the first part of the chicane but not the second?

Unless I'm mistaken about the basic layout, if a car goes straight on it will go down the escape road. It would have to veer left (when the track is going right) to hit the wall as at present. Not impossible, but much less likely than with the current chicane.

I don't know what you mean by 'any obstacle' - a white line seems most appropriate, there would obviously be a kerb at the apex.

Crossing the traffic at near enough 90 degrees can happen at almost any tight chicane if the driver completely loses it on entry. The whack which Rubens gave Alonso in the Spa bus stop in 2010 comes to mind. Also that Monza start, can't remember who was involved but a backmarker took out a few cars.

[JeePee]

 

[Miggeex]

 

 

That's pretty insane to today's safety regulations   Won't be surprised though if the outside wall will be taken down and there will be some huge tilkedome airport-sized safety area. But anyway good to get finally rid of that chicane.

Edited by Miggeex, 12 September 2013 - 08:30.

[Lights]

According to Alonso it makes the track about 1 second faster: https://twitter.com/...076662124269568

 

Thought it would make more of a difference than that.

[Kobasmashi]

The biggest change that Singapore needs is to ditch the idiotic 90left-90right-90right-90left under the grandstand and just make the approach to the last corner into a straight, thus making the last corner a monster.

[apexpredator]

The biggest change that Singapore needs is to ditch the idiotic 90left-90right-90right-90left under the grandstand and just make the approach to the last corner into a straight, thus making the last corner a monster.

 

Agreed, last corner has the potential to be awesome. The short 90^o turns before it are a bit of a nuisance, and totally kills any potential for any racing around there.

[muramasa]

Agreed, last corner has the potential to be awesome. The short 90^o turns before it are a bit of a nuisance, and totally kills any potential for any racing around there.

i think it's not possible because several bridges touch there, so you have to go around to avoid them.

[falalalalaland]

Good thing I remembered to take a photo there last year then 

[joshb]

According to Alonso it makes the track about 1 second faster: https://twitter.com/...076662124269568

 

Thought it would make more of a difference than that.

they have to slow almost immediately for 11/12. Had there been a long straight after T10, then the laptime would've been cut by more but they gain a second by going through the corner faster then immediately hit the brakes again

[Baddoer]

Now it is insanely lovely place to crash. Also pretty good third gear corner.

[Rubens Hakkamacher]

If slowing the cars is essential for safety then I would literally prefer it if they would paint a couple of lines across the track, about 20 metres apart, a

 

I've been advocating for this approach for years.  It's as cheap as it gets, and they can really control it - they can paint the braking zone, making it longer, and at the same time do it diagonally so that you could have two real lines through a corner.

 

Same on exit - make the outside slippery, so an inside line can pull off the corner better.

[Rubens Hakkamacher]

 

 

 

Looks like they need to extend the top of the Tecpro.  If a car loses it there it's going to smush-up against it, and in turn ride up it. 

 

I don't think it looks particularly scary, the cars will be at a shallow angle if they lose it there, the only thing I'd be worried about would be a car going over the top of the barriers.

[euverus]

i think it's not possible because several bridges touch there, so you have to go around to avoid them.

 

But they could do something like this.

[muramasa]

But they could do something like this.

sure, but that doesnt increase the speed into the last corners.

 

One possibility is to make current T20&21 straighter complex, but I think there are bridge legs (dont know what it's called exactly, hope it makes sense) around there, so that there's limit for it too coz you might not want to arrange the track so close to the legs, so it's not possible either (even if it's possible it'd be v small change i think).

 

I think the last corners neednt be faster coz cars are sliding and twitching and drivers making mistakes alot there, that complex is difficult enough already. Also area for runoffs there is relatively small for the speed the cars are carrying, so making it even faster would most likely be pretty dangerous.