23 replies to this topic

[Vettelari]

So, now that the penalty for using an additional power unit is merely starting at the back of the grid...

http://www.autosport...t.php/id/119936

 

What would happen if Ferrari, McLaren, Renault, and the Merc customer teams (Every team except Works Mercedes), decided to use an extra unit at the exact same race? Humor me, please.

 

If the penalty is going to the "back of the grid", would the "back of the grid" start at 3rd place based on qualifying?

 

I mean, works Mercedes locks out the front row in Q3 everytime, anyway. So isn't the penalty basically NOTHING?

 

I know that you would NEVER get everyone to cooperate and I am sure that the Merc customer teams would have a hard time getting by with it contractually, but even if Renault, Honda, and Ferrari did collude at say the Italian, USGP and Abu Dhabi, would they essentially be starting from 9th place back (behind Merc, Williams, FI, and Lotus), with a brand new engine, and only the Merc customer teams infront of them due to this new engine penalty?

 

I am a LONG TIME lurker here. Finally figured I would chime in with one of my dumb questions. Ha ha.

 

Take it easy on me...

Edited by Vettelari, 13 July 2015 - 13:39.

[Jon83]

An interesting question. I'll let somebody else answer it

[Marklar]

Actually its a funny one. If everybody excerpt Merc would take the engine penalty at the same race than the order from P3 to P20 would be make by who inform the FIA first about the PU change. If McLaren is the first than Alonso and Button are 3rd and 4th on the grid.

If they change also this rule than you are right, than in this special case the penalty is not existing and everybody would start from their quali positions

Edited by Marklar, 13 July 2015 - 13:52.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Double post!

Edited by GrumpyYoungMan, 13 July 2015 - 14:00.

[chhatra]

I think the team would need to prove there is a geniune reliability issue. Remember they would need to change enough parts to be sent to back, if they only change ICE, it is only a 10 place drop.

I can't see any team trying to be clever with this rule. It really will only favour Honda, they can push their engines harder knowing the max they will lose is 5-6 places on the grid.

[ANF]

Everyone would be excluded from the WCC for having brought the sport into disrepute.

[Imateria]

I think the team would need to prove there is a geniune reliability issue. Remember they would need to change enough parts to be sent to back, if they only change ICE, it is only a 10 place drop.

I can't see any team trying to be clever with this rule. It really will only favour Honda, they can push their engines harder knowing the max they will lose is 5-6 places on the grid.

It'll help RBR and STR in the latter parts of the season as well, there's no way any of those 4 drivers will make it to the end of the season on just 4 Power Units each. It just means we wont see any more of these rediculous 25 place grid penalties with lap 1 drive throughs.

 

As for the grid order question, it'll be delt with the same way as it currently is, by order of penalty application.

[pdac]

What does it matter? Merc will be 1 and 2 and that's all we need to know.

[onemoresolo]

Penalties are applied in the order in which the transgression took place. So whoever has their engine chance first would start 3rd.

[redreni]

Because penalties are applied in chronological order of when the transgression took place, it would be difficult to coordinate this so that the actual qualifying order would be preserved, since the engine changes would have to take place before the grid order was known. However, it could be a good way of registering a protest, because it would create an almighty headache for the stewards in terms of determining the grid order (worse than that race at COTA where they kept publishing different grids on the Saturday night).

 

The basic answer to the question of principle, though, is that if everyone broke the rule, yes, somebody would still have to start on pole. But that doesn't mean there's no incentive to follow the rule, because everyone else would know that they could have been on pole if not for their own grid penalty. F1 has a poor record of drivers or teams showing solidarity.

[HP]

I hope they do that just to display that the rule on numbers of engines rule should be abolished. Too sad teams didn't do that earlier

 

Consider for a moment the situation before the rule was changed. Same scenario, but almost the entire field heading into the pits at the same time to take their drive through penalties.

 

Genius rule making? Not. Makes one wonder how they made that and other rules. Maybe someone enjoys the fun to calculate the final starting order, but sorry, that has got nothing to do with proper racing IMO.

Edited by HP, 14 July 2015 - 07:46.

[chipmcdonald]

Ahhhrggghhhh.

 

With the present line of thinking, the ultimate conclusion is to build a car that lasts the entire season with no parts changes at all. Which would be "interesting" - but it would have ZERO to do with facilitating racing cars against each other.

 

 

F1 is such a puddle of dreck right now.  By the end of the season the penalties, combined with tokens, and... ahrgrgrgrhhhhghghghghhg.....

[Dick Dastardly]

Consider for a moment the situation before the rule was changed. Same scenario, but almost the entire field heading into the pits at the same time to take their drive through penalties.

 

Not the same but reminiscent of Indy 2005 when all the Michelin came in after the green flag lap to quit the race....

[HP]

Ahhhrggghhhh.

 

With the present line of thinking, the ultimate conclusion is to build a car that lasts the entire season with no parts changes at all. Which would be "interesting" - but it would have ZERO to do with facilitating racing cars against each other.

 

 

F1 is such a puddle of dreck right now.  By the end of the season the penalties, combined with tokens, and... ahrgrgrgrhhhhghghghghhg.....

We can only hope someone is able to prove that making an engine bullet proof for the entire season is more expensive than the occasional KABOOM.

Edited by HP, 14 July 2015 - 09:13.

[BRG]

We can only hope someone is able to prove that making an engine bullet proof for the entire season is more expensive than the occasional KABOOM.

It's sad really.  Porsche, Audi, Toyota and their LMP2 cousins can make one engine last 24 Hours absolutely full chat round Le Mans, PLUS practice and qualifying, yet the 'pinnacle' of the sport needs more than five engines to cover a smaller mileage over a full season.  They agree a set of rules, fail to comply with them and then whinge and want them changed.  Pathetic.

[Tapz63]

It's sad really. Porsche, Audi, Toyota and their LMP2 cousins can make one engine last 24 Hours absolutely full chat round Le Mans, PLUS practice and qualifying, yet the 'pinnacle' of the sport needs more than five engines to cover a smaller mileage over a full season. They agree a set of rules, fail to comply with them and then whinge and want them changed. Pathetic.

20 races on average. So 4 races weekends per engine. That is 12 practice sessions, 4 qualifications and 4 races. Don't know how that compares in mileage but certainly isn't bad if you ask me.

[Exb]

20 races on average. So 4 races weekends per engine. That is 12 practice sessions, 4 qualifications and 4 races. Don't know how that compares in mileage but certainly isn't bad if you ask me.

4 engines per season = 5 races per engine (without penalties).

 

Next year they will get 5 engines due to there being 21 races scheduled (unless 1 drops out before the 1st race of the season).

[RealRacing]

This question is a reflection of the current state of F1.

[uffen]

I think the team would need to prove there is a geniune reliability issue. Remember they would need to change enough parts to be sent to back, if they only change ICE, it is only a 10 place drop.

I can't see any team trying to be clever with this rule. It really will only favour Honda, they can push their engines harder knowing the max they will lose is 5-6 places on the grid.

Interesting scenario.

So, there are eight races left in the season. All teams have made it through this far without engine penalties. Then in the third of the last eight a team has a problem. They need a new engine for the fourth (of the last eight) race. But, they say, hey we can't be given a penalty because we will use the new engine for the five remaining races. So, we stick with the seasonal allotment. So, they crank it up a bit, avoid the grid penalty and get their points and Bernie money and in the last race the engine goes boom and they don't finish. But they got all the points they needed to beat so-and-so to fourth place in the championship, or whatever their strategy was. Perfectly legal and another example of using the grid penaltiy system to achieve a goal.

[george1981]

I've got a feeling the Mercedes teams have to pay for each power unit they use. That reason was mentioned when there was talk of adding an extra power unit to this year's allocation but Williams and Force India didn't want to because it would cost more. I wondered whether one of the problem engine teams might try to pay Williams and Force India to change their mind. But Honda are so far off the pace it doesn't matter whether they get a drive through or not and Redbull seem nonplussed at the moment.

[V8 Fireworks]

Because penalties are applied in chronological order of when the transgression took place, it would be difficult to coordinate this so that the actual qualifying order would be preserved, since the engine changes would have to take place before the grid order was known. However, it could be a good way of registering a protest, because it would create an almighty headache for the stewards in terms of determining the grid order (worse than that race at COTA where they kept publishing different grids on the Saturday night).

 

The basic answer to the question of principle, though, is that if everyone broke the rule, yes, somebody would still have to start on pole. But that doesn't mean there's no incentive to follow the rule, because everyone else would know that they could have been on pole if not for their own grid penalty. F1 has a poor record of drivers or teams showing solidarity.

 

So they all race each other to be the first to change the engine so they can start on pole!?     

[TheUltimateWorrier]

 

The "NEW" new engine penalty

 

This is like those crazy Sky TV listings;  New New Girl, New The New Avengers, New New Tricks etc.

[pdac]

So they all race each other to be the first to change the engine so they can start on pole!?     

 

 

Or maybe make a dummy move to inform the stewards of a PU change in the hope that the others will go ahead and really change it.

[CurbPainter]

It's sad really.  Porsche, Audi, Toyota and their LMP2 cousins can make one engine last 24 Hours absolutely full chat round Le Mans, PLUS practice and qualifying, yet the 'pinnacle' of the sport needs more than five engines to cover a smaller mileage over a full season.  They agree a set of rules, fail to comply with them and then whinge and want them changed.  Pathetic.

 

It has to do with the WEC engines simply being tuned down to being able to last that long. Now Renault and Honda can tune down their engines also, but the races would be even more dreadful to watch.