The biggest grid penalty..... EVER
#1
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:01
#3
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:10
He starts from Jannah
Jp
#4
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:11
Ouch.
#5
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:11
maybe he gets pole and can start from the last position
Edited by 1Devil1, 21 November 2014 - 13:11.
#6
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:11
#7
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:13
Maybe they should make him do the entire race in the opposite direction? It's about as logical
#8
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:14
It looks harsh... but when you think about it, it makes sense. If say mercedes or red bull had a 20 place penalty, that will massively impede their race, which is a pretty serious punishment. Whereas any sort of grid penalty for say Caterham will not change anything. It's the same as the argument that fines don't effect all of the teams equally. The big teams can afford to pick up fines for on track infractions, whereas the minnows can't.
Edited by learningtobelost, 21 November 2014 - 13:15.
#9
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:16
It looks like he's going to get 5 penalties for 1 offense, thats just bloody stupid.
#10
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:17
#11
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:18
Grosjean 20 place grid penalty....
http://m.gpupdate.ne...e-grid-penalty/
Oh for God's sake there's no need to carry it over into the race!
#12
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:26
Is there a rule in the regulations for this or has the FIA made this up on the spot?
At this rate why didn't they decide to change the whole bloody PU and have a pitlane start?
#13
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:28
So basically he will start last and he has also to do a drive through.
#14
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:30
A couple more places and he would have to start from his mother's womb
#15
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:31
Is there a rule in the regulations for this or has the FIA made this up on the spot?
At this rate why didn't they decide to change the whole bloody PU and have a pitlane start?
Maybe Lotus couldn't afford that?
#16
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:32
He has to go back to Brazil and start there instead
#17
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:34
Is there a rule in the regulations for this or has the FIA made this up on the spot?
At this rate why didn't they decide to change the whole bloody PU and have a pitlane start?
He did change the whole PU, thats why the penalty is 20 and not 10 places. Grosjean has also said he won't take the same rout as Vettel in Austin, I guess he'd rather just start from the grid.
#18
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:37
On another note, taking the spectacular failures of winter testing and the brand new engine technology into consideration the reliability has been pretty good in this season. I expected that half a grid would take penalties regularly from September.
#19
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:40
Is the back of grid start worse than starting from the pit lane?
Surely it is better to start of the grid than from the pit lane as you loose less time starting from the grid?
Advertisement
#20
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:50
a sad joke,
and next year it is only 4 PU for the season
#21
Posted 21 November 2014 - 13:53
Best thread title...EVEN!
#22
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:01
Is there a rule in the regulations for this or has the FIA made this up on the spot?
At this rate why didn't they decide to change the whole bloody PU and have a pitlane start?
I just had a quick scan of the sporting regulations and it says nothing about grid penalties turning into time penalties for this offense, so I would say they are making it up.
#23
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:03
Overly harsh.
#24
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:09
a sad joke,
and next year it is only 4 PU for the season
And one extra race.
So this year, a PU had to last 3.8 races - next year it will be 5.
Edited by Kristian, 21 November 2014 - 14:10.
#25
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:10
....and ladies and gentlemen, this is the reason why Lotus are leaving Renault for Mercedes.
#26
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:15
#27
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:23
Plllllleeeeeeeease can admin change EVEN to EVER lol
Oh all right. But the revised title doesn't make me picture Snagglepuss saying it, so I think it's a poor editorial choice.
#28
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:29
I just had a quick scan of the sporting regulations and it says nothing about grid penalties turning into time penalties for this offense, so I would say they are making it up.
Thanks mate. Why am I not surprised that this is the case?
#29
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:30
a sad joke,
and next year it is only 4 PU for the season
Its farcical.
#30
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:45
#31
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:54
For every grid place he doesn't drop he has to take a 1 sec penalty in the race I believe.
So if he drops 10 places he'll have to do a 10 sec stop go in the race as well, have I got that right?
#32
Posted 21 November 2014 - 14:58
Could have been worse - Could have said you have no engines so no (more) racing...
#33
Posted 21 November 2014 - 15:32
Maybe rule makers need to bang their heads in tact with an engine going kaputt. Maybe that will beat some sense into the process of making sound rules.
Even Mercedes (as in the engine maker) these days cannot afford any more that their engines blow up each other race. Much less so F1 teams, So why even bother with those engine penalties?
#34
Posted 21 November 2014 - 15:37
sigh :/
#35
Posted 21 November 2014 - 15:51
Didn't Vettel get the same thing in Austin?
#36
Posted 21 November 2014 - 15:55
For every grid place he doesn't drop he has to take a 1 sec penalty in the race I believe.
So if he drops 10 places he'll have to do a 10 sec stop go in the race as well, have I got that right?
Do you know where this is written? I did have a quick look at the sporting regs and couldn't see anything in there. Maybe I missed something, though.
If it's not there, I would like to know why the steward are imposing this and why Lotus are not appealing it.
Edit: Maybe the team should take the grid penalties and not take the time penalties and argue about it after the race. I can't see that all those penalties vs a DSQ will make a lot of difference.
Edited by pdac, 21 November 2014 - 15:57.
#37
Posted 21 November 2014 - 16:05
Plllllleeeeeeeease can admin change EVEN to EVER lol
Oh all right. But the revised title doesn't make me picture Snagglepuss saying it, so I think it's a poor editorial choice.
You have spoiled my joke!
#38
Posted 21 November 2014 - 16:10
The penalty could only be topped if it would be stretched to the next season. Oh FIA, what have you done to this sport...
#39
Posted 21 November 2014 - 17:01
Advertisement
#40
Posted 21 November 2014 - 17:07
Oh for God's sake there's no need to carry it over into the race!
There is if you want it to mean something. Carrying it over to the first race next year isn't feasible because there's no guarantee that any particular car and driver combination would necessarily continue into next year, and I'm sure you wouldn't want that either.
I'm afraid these penalties are a necessary part of the new engine regs, otherwise the mileage requirements would be meaningless and the costs would be absolutely ridiculous.
Edited by redreni, 21 November 2014 - 17:08.
#41
Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:18
What's different between this and what happened to Vettel in Austin? Vettel didn't get any penalty during the race other than having to start from the pits. Is the only reason lotus get the penalty because they're starting from the grid, or have the rules changed?? Doesn't make any sense to me to be honest.
#42
Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:20
Excuse my language but this is the dumbest ****ing thing I've heard in a long time. Seriously. When I first read about this I was like "this must be a good April fool's joke, except it is November". How can you get a drive through or time penalty before the race? How is that possible?
#43
Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:20
What's different between this and what happened to Vettel in Austin? Vettel didn't get any penalty during the race other than having to start from the pits. Is the only reason lotus get the penalty because they're starting from the grid, or have the rules changed?? Doesn't make any sense to me to be honest.
Vettel changed the whole power unit. Lotus only changed parts of it.
#44
Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:49
28.4 a) Unless he drives for more than one team (see 28.4(d) below), each driver may use no more than five power units during a Championship season.
b) For the purposes of this Article 28.4 the power unit will be deemed to comprise six separate elements, the engine (ICE), the motor generator unit-kinetic (MGU-K), the motor generator unit-heat (MGU-H), the energy store (ES), turbocharger (TC) and control electronics (CE). Each driver will therefore be permitted to use five of each of the above six components during a Championship season and any combination of them may be fitted to a car at any one time.
c) Should a driver use more than five of any one of the elements a grid place penalty will be imposed upon him at the first Event during which each additional element is used. Penalties will be applied according to the following table and will be cumulative :Replacement of a complete power unit = The driver concerned must start the race from the pit lane.The first time a 6th of any of the elements is used = Ten grid place penalty.The first time a 6th of any of the remaining elements is used = Five grid place penalty.The first time a 7th of any of the elements is used = Ten grid place penalty.The first time a 7th of any of the remaining elements is used, and so on = Five grid place penalty.
#45
Posted 21 November 2014 - 19:58
Excuse my language but this is the dumbest ****ing thing I've heard in a long time. Seriously. When I first read about this I was like "this must be a good April fool's joke, except it is November". How can you get a drive through or time penalty before the race? How is that possible?
The stewards started doing it last year, in response to the backmarkers constantly getting penalties that had no effect.
It's actually quite a sensible solution.
#46
Posted 21 November 2014 - 20:04
There is if you want it to mean something. Carrying it over to the first race next year isn't feasible because there's no guarantee that any particular car and driver combination would necessarily continue into next year, and I'm sure you wouldn't want that either.
I'm afraid these penalties are a necessary part of the new engine regs, otherwise the mileage requirements would be meaningless and the costs would be absolutely ridiculous.
That is true, but personally I find it over the top/too harsh, because it's continuing the punishment over two days (albeit the same event), which makes the chances of a decent recovery drive slimmer.
I agree, carrying over till next year would never work, not something I'd want to see either.
Bolded: I'd never thought of it in those terms before, so I've learnt/realised something there - thank you
#47
Posted 21 November 2014 - 20:08
He starts from Jannah
Jp
Ffs .
#48
Posted 21 November 2014 - 20:16
So basically he will start last and he has also to do a drive through.
He should qualify last, that way he'd be in p1 with that penalty.
#49
Posted 21 November 2014 - 22:31
The stewards started doing it last year, in response to the backmarkers constantly getting penalties that had no effect.
It's actually quite a sensible solution.
You consider it sensible, that a team that changes the whole PU (which consists of 6 parts) only needs to start from the pitlane, while a team that can´t /doesn´t effort that and therefore changes only 3 out of 6 parts, receives a harsher punishment?
#50
Posted 21 November 2014 - 22:53
You consider it sensible, that a team that changes the whole PU (which consists of 6 parts) only needs to start from the pitlane, while a team that can´t /doesn´t effort that and therefore changes only 3 out of 6 parts, receives a harsher punishment?
No its not sensible buts it is clearly in the rules so its the teams own fault for not taking advantage of the pit-lane start 'easy option' like Red Bull did. A bit of better planning from Lotus could have seen them able to do the same but I guess they were not expecting to need to change to the 6th elements?