4535 replies to this topic

[Kalmake]

In the Japanese GP, Leclerc received a time penalty that dropped him behind Ricciardo at the finish. He finished the race lapped, just behind Bottas. Had he unlapped himself, with Ricciardo lapped but still within 15 seconds of the Ferrari, am I right in thinking Leclerc wouldn't have lost a position (he'd have had 15 seconds added to his time but still classified ahead of the Renault due to completing an extra lap) or is there something in the time penalty system that takes this into account?

You are right.

[Izzyeviel]

Thinking back to the good old days of pre-qualifying. How did certain cars manage laps times that ranged from 5-15 minutes?

[ATM]

Well, first the teams were sometimes one-time entrants, as such their mechanical qualities were in a different timezone than the usual runners.
Then there’s the drivers, which were local heroes given a chance to be present at their home track.
I don’t know about 15 minutes lap times, maybe it’s a timing error thing (I’m quite sure I can lap Silverstone in my stock 75 Hp Mitsubishi Colt in less than that) but seeing a driver being 30-50 seconds off the lead in Nürburgring was not at all strange.
For more recent references, there’s some Youtube videos with Life F190 going at (its) full beans at around 250 km/h on a straight line- and everybody else is just zooming past him like the Milenium Falcon or something; such were the differences in history.

Edited by ATM, 15 October 2019 - 19:59.

[Ross Stonefeld]

5-15 minute laps sounds like a time lapped that ended in the pits, but their garage was before the timing line. So when they went back down the pitlane they 'finished' their lap many minutes later? 

[PayasYouRace]

For more recent references, there’s some Youtube videos with Life F190 going at (its) full beans at around 250 km/h on a straight line- and everybody else is just zooming past him like the Milenium Falcon or something; such were the differences in history.

 

Ask and you shall receive:

 

[Cornholio]

Thinking back to the good old days of pre-qualifying. How did certain cars manage laps times that ranged from 5-15 minutes?

 

I'm sure I remember being told once - and quickly searching I can't find any references for this so take it with as much salt as you like (or maybe someone else can confirm) back then the out lap was timed from the start of the session. So, (numbers totally made up) if they left the pits after 8 minutes, did a 1:30 out lap, then the car went pop on its first flying lap (or they came straight back into the pits never to return), they'd be credited with a 9:30 lap.

 

I think it was when I saw the results of a practice session in the early 90s (would probably have been just after pre-qualifying) a car credited with a 32 minute lap or something and thinking "did he do that on a bicycle or something?!" (I'd have been about 8 or 9 years old) and being told that - i.e. he went out roughly midway through the session but never completed a flying lap.

[RobNNN]

Why doesn't F1 have a race on the Moon? That would solve the aerodynamic turbulence problem.

[Bleu]

5-15 minute laps sounds like a time lapped that ended in the pits, but their garage was before the timing line. So when they went back down the pitlane they 'finished' their lap many minutes later? 

 

 

I'm sure I remember being told once - and quickly searching I can't find any references for this so take it with as much salt as you like (or maybe someone else can confirm) back then the out lap was timed from the start of the session. So, (numbers totally made up) if they left the pits after 8 minutes, did a 1:30 out lap, then the car went pop on its first flying lap (or they came straight back into the pits never to return), they'd be credited with a 9:30 lap.

 

I think it was when I saw the results of a practice session in the early 90s (would probably have been just after pre-qualifying) a car credited with a 32 minute lap or something and thinking "did he do that on a bicycle or something?!" (I'd have been about 8 or 9 years old) and being told that - i.e. he went out roughly midway through the session but never completed a flying lap.

 

It's pretty much how Cornholio explained. 

 

I'm not sure when the habit was introduced but at least for three decades timing line has to be either before or after all garages - never in the middle.

[PayasYouRace]

It's pretty much how Cornholio explained. 

 

I'm not sure when the habit was introduced but at least for three decades timing line has to be either before or after all garages - never in the middle.

 

The timing line actually has to be opposite race control. Usually that's at one end of the pit buildings or the other.

[Clatter]

It's pretty much how Cornholio explained.

I'm not sure when the habit was introduced but at least for three decades timing line has to be either before or after all garages - never in the middle.

Rule was changed after Schumacher was allowed to avoid taking a penalty by leaving it until the last lap, and crossing the finish on the way to garage. This was at Silverstone 1998.

[ANF]

Why doesn't F1 have a race on the Moon? That would solve the aerodynamic turbulence problem.

What a stupid question.

[Bleu]

Rule was changed after Schumacher was allowed to avoid taking a penalty by leaving it until the last lap, and crossing the finish on the way to garage. This was at Silverstone 1998.

 

Only change they made after that was regarding pitting on the final lap. The timing line at Silverstone was before all pit boxes. 

 

Look at the moment Häkkinen finishes and where chequered flag is waving.

https://www.youtube....h?v=efZUyhATNTo

[RedBaron]

A chef from a Formula 1 team was on MasterChef. His name is Chris.

Anyone know which team he's from?

Twitter is saying Williams... but they're saying that because he was pretty bad, ha.

Edited by RedBaron, 14 November 2019 - 21:59.

[7MGTEsup]

Rule was changed after Schumacher was allowed to avoid taking a penalty by leaving it until the last lap, and crossing the finish on the way to garage. This was at Silverstone 1998.

 

Still don't get how that result stood as he served his penalty after the race....

[HP]

Still don't get how that result stood as he served his penalty after the race....

Not well thought out rule contributed to that. Simple as that.

 

But it gets worse. The stewards were too late in issuing the order in the race. So in the end 3 stewards handed in their license after an FIA internal meeting.

[PayasYouRace]

At the 7:25 mark in this onboard video, Sainz's DRS briefly closes then reopens.
https://youtu.be/sa1e6aPrjVQ?t=442
For some reason I was under the impression that DRS could only be activated once per DRS zone (providing the driver is within 1sec of another car at the detection point). So, if something happened part way through a DRS zone that caused the driver to brake, they then couldn't reactivate DRS for the remainder of the zone. Google hasn't been much help. Does anyone here know if DRS can be switched on/off/on with in one zone?

That’s new to me. I’ve always understood that you can open and close it as needed, and it will automatically close if you brake.

[balage06]

Does anyone here know if DRS can be switched on/off/on with in one zone?

 

Absolutely. The electronics enable the switch itself, then the driver can flip it as many times as he likes, but lifting the throttle and/or applying the brakes also closes the flap. Just watch Leclerc testing the switch at the end of FP3:

https://streamable.com/kawy7

Edited by balage06, 20 November 2019 - 09:57.

[balage06]

By the way, I have a question as well: I've been following grand prix motorcycling for quite a while now, but I never got into the details, just enjoyed the racing. And i've always wondered: how does a rider's "junior career" look like until they reach the international level? I'm aware of the Red Bull Rookies Cup, but how can the kids learn how to ride and race a bike before that, given that it's potentially more dangerous than karting for example?

[ANF]

This might be a really stupid question: Listen to Lance Stroll's engine, beginning at 3:48 in the video. It sounds like he doesn't keep his foot down on the straights, doesn't it? Has he adopted fellow Canadian Jacques Villeneuve's flich throttle technique or what's going on?

[7MGTEsup]

This might be a really stupid question: Listen to Lance Stroll's engine, beginning at 3:48 in the video. It sounds like he doesn't keep his foot down on the straights, doesn't it? Has he adopted fellow Canadian Jacques Villeneuve's flich throttle technique or what's going on?

 

Backing off the throttle to avoid other cars?

[Risil]

By the way, I have a question as well: I've been following grand prix motorcycling for quite a while now, but I never got into the details, just enjoyed the racing. And i've always wondered: how does a rider's "junior career" look like until they reach the international level? I'm aware of the Red Bull Rookies Cup, but how can the kids learn how to ride and race a bike before that, given that it's potentially more dangerous than karting for example?

 

My knowledge is a bit out of date, but in Europe most Grand Prix riders (roughly, aged 13-18) will have previously competed on Moto3-like 250cc bikes, either in their national championship, or in the gold standard Spanish CEV series if they're good/rich/well-connected. Some of these are explicitly junior series but often they'll be racing against adults who are just small. From there, a rider might be picked up by the Red Bull Rookies Cup, which is auditioned for, or go directly into the Moto3 world championship. Of course, most aren't, and don't. The transition from Moto3 machinery (used to be 125cc two-strokes) to bigger bikes is tricky and many don't make it.

 

The story is complicated by the many national series using production machinery (think the 600cc and 1000cc sport bikes you see overtaking you on a Sunday afternoon). It's not exactly cheap to run a racing bike but the barrier for entry is much lower than whatever the equivalent in car racing would be. There are quite a few riders in, say, British Superbikes who left school, scrabbled up through clubbie events into superstock racing and with speed, funding and opportunities moved quickly up the ranks. Not normally the ones who end up in world championships, mind.

 

At even younger ages riders will compete on pit bikes or mini bikes, and often motocross (dirt bikes) or supermoto (hybrid dirt and tarmac bikes). In the United States and Australia riders often start on speedway style dirt bikes but this path is less common elsewhere in the world.

[milestone 11]

Has RoC been confined to the annals of history?

[Run]

Is it mandatory for the drivers and their engineers to speak in english thru the radio during FP/Q/Race ?

Edited by Run, 04 December 2019 - 18:11.

[PayasYouRace]

Is it mandatory for the drivers and their engineers to speak in english thru the radio during FP/Q/Race ?

 

No it's not. Occasionally you'll hear drivers and their engineers speak in other languages. English is used most commonly because it's the international standard, but when a driver and engineer speak the same language that's not English, it sometimes gets used.

[Joefane]

Don’t know if this is a stupid question or not but it’s something I’ve not understood... ever

I’m only 18 so in 2008 I would’ve been pretty young and don’t remember the race very well, but how on earth did Sebastian Vettel win Monza 2008? I’ve seen the race and know there was rain all weekend but is there a reason why he was faster than everyone else or was it luck, because that kind of thing would never happen these days.

[PayasYouRace]

There’s no simple answer to that, but I’d say it comes from a combination of factors.

 

The rain is the obvious one.

That year was the second where Toro Rosso and Red Bull were using the same chassis, as they used Red Bull technology to hold the IP. Remember that Toro Rosso actually finished ahead of Red Bull Racing that year. The car was fundamentally quick.

At Monza, Toro Rosso had an advantage over the parent team by using the more powerful Ferrari engine rather than the Renault.

It wasn’t just Seb who was fast. Webber qualified 3rd and Bourdais 4th. We never found out how well Bourdais could do because he stalled on the grid.

Variable rain levels in qualifying mixed up the grid further. Seb might have not won if Lewis had been near the front at the start.

The entire field was very close at the time. If you’re used to today where the top teams have a margin between them and the midfield, that wasn’t the case at the time. So at Monza, which like today is pretty unique on the calendar, swings in performance would be noticeable on the grid.

I’d say it was a perfect storm for Seb. Everything lined up for him that day, and all he had to do was get his head down and lap in clear air, which is his strength as the past decade has shown.

[ATM]

To be mentioned that Toro Rosso was using a detuned 10-cylinder engine as an exception, whilst the others were using a V8. That must have been a factor, methinks.

[Joefane]

There’s no simple answer to that, but I’d say it comes from a combination of factors.

The rain is the obvious one.
That year was the second where Toro Rosso and Red Bull were using the same chassis, as they used Red Bull technology to hold the IP. Remember that Toro Rosso actually finished ahead of Red Bull Racing that year. The car was fundamentally quick.
At Monza, Toro Rosso had an advantage over the parent team by using the more powerful Ferrari engine rather than the Renault.
It wasn’t just Seb who was fast. Webber qualified 3rd and Bourdais 4th. We never found out how well Bourdais could do because he stalled on the grid.
Variable rain levels in qualifying mixed up the grid further. Seb might have not won if Lewis had been near the front at the start.
The entire field was very close at the time. If you’re used to today where the top teams have a margin between them and the midfield, that wasn’t the case at the time. So at Monza, which like today is pretty unique on the calendar, swings in performance would be noticeable on the grid.
I’d say it was a perfect storm for Seb. Everything lined up for him that day, and all he had to do was get his head down and lap in clear air, which is his strength as the past decade has shown.

Yeah that makes sense to be fair just seems the win was very dominant for him at the time. Also, I’m the fact that the McLaren and especially Hamilton were very very good in the rain (thinking japan 07 and Silverstone 08), you’d think that Lewis coming from way back on the grid would be able to catch in the race, or even heikki even if he wasn’t particularly fast.

I dunno, the whole race has always confused me and I feel like people don’t make a big deal out of it even if it was an unbelieveable feat, and no Vettel fan

[ANF]

To be mentioned that Toro Rosso was using a detuned 10-cylinder engine as an exception, whilst the others were using a V8. That must have been a factor, methinks.

Ah, thanks. I remember there was something about the engine being suitable to the conditions.

Edit: Apparently not!

Edited by ANF, 04 December 2019 - 22:00.

[Fatgadget]

Thinking back to the good old days of pre-qualifying. How did certain cars manage laps times that ranged from 5-15 minutes?

Back in those days it was comedy central/amateur hour with the tail end Charlies the likes of Andrea Moda!...It wasn't until Paul Storddart and his professional Minardi outfit  that put the brakes on that....It was fun watching though!

[PayasYouRace]

To be mentioned that Toro Rosso was using a detuned 10-cylinder engine as an exception, whilst the others were using a V8. That must have been a factor, methinks.

 

It definitely wasn't. Toro Rosso used a V10 only for one season, in 2006, because the STR1-Cosworth was actually a recycled RB1-Cosworth. They were using Ferrari V8s from 2007 onwards.

[Clatter]

To be mentioned that Toro Rosso was using a detuned 10-cylinder engine as an exception, whilst the others were using a V8. That must have been a factor, methinks.

 

2006, not in 2008.

[messy]

Don’t know if this is a stupid question or not but it’s something I’ve not understood... ever
I’m only 18 so in 2008 I would’ve been pretty young and don’t remember the race very well, but how on earth did Sebastian Vettel win Monza 2008? I’ve seen the race and know there was rain all weekend but is there a reason why he was faster than everyone else or was it luck, because that kind of thing would never happen these days.

One of those wonderful anomalous days where someone from outside the top teams just pops up at the front from nowhere. I love it when that happens. You said it’d never happen now (and it wouldn’t) - but it has happened since - Fisichella at Spa in 2009, several times in 2012 (Maldonado/Spain, Perez/Malaysia, Hulkenberg/Brazil) and....never since, sadly. The hybrid era just hasn’t allowed for it. I suppose Felipe Massa nearly chasing down Lewis Hamilton for victory in Abu Dhabi 2014 is maybe the closest, but it’s a stretch.

[Amz964]

Apologies if this has been asked before and this is probably a very dumb question but it has always boggled my mind is how do F1 drivers see exactly what's on thier pitboards it always seemed pointless to me for example they are going at let's say 130 mph minimum when they see it how can they even read what's on there especially at places like Monza where the racing line is quite far on the opposite side of the pits as well as the vast speeds and the various other teams pitboards at the same time. I have done a single seat experience and they put a pitboard out and the track was quite narrow so wasn't to far from where I was driving and I struggled to see what was on there and can't have been going more than 80 mph at the time granted my eyesight isn't great but this is something I always think when watching older races especially.

Edited by Amz964, 05 December 2019 - 00:10.

[TheFish]

Yeah that makes sense to be fair just seems the win was very dominant for him at the time. Also, I’m the fact that the McLaren and especially Hamilton were very very good in the rain (thinking japan 07 and Silverstone 08), you’d think that Lewis coming from way back on the grid would be able to catch in the race, or even heikki even if he wasn’t particularly fast.

I dunno, the whole race has always confused me and I feel like people don’t make a big deal out of it even if it was an unbelieveable feat, and no Vettel fan

 

IIRC, Lewis had a good shot of winning the race if the weather turned at the right time for his pit stop, but it was 5-10 laps out so he had to make an extra stop. Without that he was in the mix I think?

[Sterzo]

Apologies if this has been asked before and this is probably a very dumb question but it has always boggled my mind is how do F1 drivers see exactly what's on thier pitboards ...I have done a single seat experience and they put a pitboard out and ... I struggled to see what was on there and can't have been going more than 80 mph at the time granted my eyesight isn't great but this is something I always think when watching older races especially.

The answer is they are much cleverer than you and I. Studies long ago showed the eyesight of a top racing driver to be spectacularly good. Only a handful have worn glasses. Also, they have the ability to take in information at a glance. Most info is, of course, by radio, but they have no problem reading pit boards. (Jean Alesi being the exception who proved the rule).

 

You mention older races. In the fifties they'd chalk things on blackboards. During a Goodwood 9 hour race the electricity failed in the pits, so Aston Martin couldn't refuel their car, and decided to signal to their driver to "Go on" rather than stop. I think it was Eric Thompson who was mystified to see a board hung out reading "GOON."