Reply to: British Grand Prix Cancelled

[Old Hack]

You're all missing the point...

The issue is the tyre failing catastrophically if it gets damaged. There have always been punctures - racing tyres aren't all that robust - but they are supposed to deflate progressively (albeit very quickly on occasion) and then get ripped apart, by which time the driver has reacted to whats goping on. What they musn't do is blow apart, threatening the unsuspecting driver and the guy in the car behind him.

No, I think most of us got that point, and understood it very well. Apart from the Jesuit boy

[malvolio]

You're all missing the point...

The issue is the tyre failing catastrophically if it gets damaged. There have always been punctures - racing tyres aren't all that robust - but they are supposed to deflate progressively (albeit very quickly on occasion) and then get ripped apart, by which time the driver has reacted to whats goping on. What they musn't do is blow apart, threatening the unsuspecting driver and the guy in the car behind him.

[Old Hack]

No,

The track is clearly defined as between the white lines, anything outside of the lines is definitely NOT the track, the car is allowed off the track provided that part of the car is ON the track. Hence a wheel on the kerb is OFF the track in all scenarios but the car is deemed to be on the track if another wheel is ON the track.

Your explanation would keep extending the track in perpetuity.

Sent from my tweeting foot massager.

So you're saying that if one wheel is on the track, that it hasn't left the track.

You can see where this is going, can't you.

[Old Hack]

To all those claiming the kerbs are part of the track - as was already quoted, this is strictly outside the rules. Drivers have NOT been taking the exact same line for the last ten years... aside from the fact that tracks generally change slightly every year (especially the kerbs), drivers have been gradually pushing further and further due to technical and human factors. Maybe every year they can get away with 1/2" further without getting into trouble, that's how things naturally progress when you're always pushing the rules.

It's bad tyres go bang but if people cutting the kerb got punctures, they would simply stop doing so. Exactly the way they take corners much more conservatively when there is a gravel trap rather than concrete run-off - if a run-off area is modified drivers very quickly adapt because they're not stupid (unlike some of the posters in this thread whose posts I can only see when quoted).

d000hg, d000hg, d000hg. Why are you so dumb. Your idiocy knows no bounds.

Ok, look at the rules:

20.2 Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track.

Now, clearly, the kerbs on the outside of the track. The track is defined as the white lines, of which the kerbs are on the outside. So, if you are stupid, this would state, clearly, in black and white, that the kerbs are not part of the track. However, looking a little bit more at the rules themselves, it defines leaving the track as: 'no part of the car remains in contact with the track'.

Now, this leads you to assume, with the width of the car being almost 2 metres, that up to 2m either side of the white lines can be used as part of the track. That's right isn't it? You can see that, can't you?

I've already stated, that drivers adapt, if they know something is amiss. But, prey tell, did Massa's tyres explode after, or before that particular kerb?

Honestly d00ohg, I find it cute that you're still pretending to have me on ignore, especially after quoting me yourself

[Advocate]

No,

The track is clearly defined as between the white lines, anything outside of the lines is definitely NOT the track, the car is allowed off the track provided that part of the car is ON the track. Hence a wheel on the kerb is OFF the track in all scenarios but the car is deemed to be on the track if another wheel is ON the track.

Your explanation would keep extending the track in perpetuity.

Sent from my tweeting foot massager.

[d000hg]

To all those claiming the kerbs are part of the track - as was already quoted, this is strictly outside the rules. Drivers have NOT been taking the exact same line for the last ten years... aside from the fact that tracks generally change slightly every year (especially the kerbs), drivers have been gradually pushing further and further due to technical and human factors. Maybe every year they can get away with 1/2" further without getting into trouble, that's how things naturally progress when you're always pushing the rules.

It's bad tyres go bang but if people cutting the kerb got punctures, they would simply stop doing so. Exactly the way they take corners much more conservatively when there is a gravel trap rather than concrete run-off - if a run-off area is modified drivers very quickly adapt because they're not stupid (unlike some of the posters in this thread whose posts I can only see when quoted).

[doodab]

I agree the kerbs shouldn't be dangerous but I'm not convinced manufacturers can complain if damage is caused by non track areas, otherwise we'll find then moaning that the Armco is too strong and damages the car...

I think the manufacturers, and drivers, have every right to expect tyres that don't disintegrate without warning. Even if the rule were "stay within the white lines" there is still the possibility of running wide, or being forced wide. Picking up a puncture because of it is one thing, but catastrophic tyre failure at 190mph is really not on IMO.

Slightly different but we've seen a ton of rule changes designed to make the cars & circuits safer in the event of an impact, including restraints to prevent wheels flying off, drivers feet behind the front wheels, neck braces etc, not to mention bigger run off areas.

Still, the good news is that it appears something is going to be done about it, there is a meeting on Wednesday.

[Old Hack]

I think you have that backwards. Mercedes were always struggling with rear tyres, so a front limited track will favour them. However you're probably right in saying they've now got on top of the tyre issues that hurt them so much in Barcelona, and will probably be contending for wins from now on.

However Hamilton and Rosberg will take points off each other, whereas Vettel will win if Red Bull are strong, and if not, if he keeps putting in second places it may be enough to win the championship. Obviously I'd love to see Hamilton win it again, but he really needs a run of wins with bad results for Vettel and Alonso for it to happen.

I think I'd have to disagree with you there. Barcelona is a 'front limited track' as is Silverstone, in that it has lots of fast sweeping corners; you'd say a general rule of thumb is fast corners = front limited and slow corners = rear limited. But that's not always the case. Mercedes have no issues with the slow corners and traction, it has issues with the tyres burning out from the long sweeping corners and it's this, that they appear to have addressed.

As for the championship, I think Hamilton is finally coming to terms with the new car, as shown in the last two races. He's also renowned as being a monster on the brakes (did you see him drop Sutil yesterday? Magnificent on the brakes!), which he hasn't been until Canada. I think he's got the measure of Rosberg now, I really do, and see the last two races as a stepping stone. Let's also not forget Mr Brawn is a fan of team orders, and if Hamilton get's ahead in Germany, and the next race, he'll have no issue favouring one driver or the other for the WDC; he has form in this area. Webber, on the other hand, has nothing to lose.

I think it's going to be mighty interesting.

[VectraMan]

I am having a punt on Hamilton to win the WDC with a side bet that they'll also win the WCC. Something tells me that the tide has changed. Silverstone, is something known as a 'front limited' track, in which Merc were expected to struggle, as their car favours a 'rear limited' track.

I think you have that backwards. Mercedes were always struggling with rear tyres, so a front limited track will favour them. However you're probably right in saying they've now got on top of the tyre issues that hurt them so much in Barcelona, and will probably be contending for wins from now on.

However Hamilton and Rosberg will take points off each other, whereas Vettel will win if Red Bull are strong, and if not, if he keeps putting in second places it may be enough to win the championship. Obviously I'd love to see Hamilton win it again, but he really needs a run of wins with bad results for Vettel and Alonso for it to happen.

[Old Hack]

There are two different areas to look at, one is to do with damage caused by the kerbs. The other is the type of failure that occurs ( I.e catastrophic vs controlled deflation ).

I agree the kerbs shouldn't be dangerous but I'm not convinced manufacturers can complain if damage is caused by non track areas, otherwise we'll find then moaning that the Armco is too strong and damages the car...

Pirelli still have a lot to answer for but it's not a one sided argument! It could still be the old case of designing what the customer wants vs what the customer needs!

Sent from my tweeting foot massager.

But the kerbs are part of the track, aren't they? By the very fact it's not illegal to use them, then they become part of the track. When there are walls, drivers do not, in the main, hit them. As I said, there was one kerb at Turkey, that was slightly higher than the others, and it smashed the suspension. The drivers simply didn't use that kerb. If the organisers had said, that kerb has a sharp inside, and it will cause a massive deflation, the drivers would not have used it. But the fact is, they have always used it.

Any part of the track, that is 0.1mm less than the full width of the car, is part of the track, as defined by the regulations themselves, as you are allowed to use it. Therefore, as safety is paramount, you have to take these areas into consideration, and as a rule, the FIA do. This is a new thing. Look at any Brit GP over the past 30 years, watch that corner, and you'd see cars using it.

The only way around this, would be to say the car has to have all 4 wheels within the track at all times.

[Advocate]

You can, if you've taken precisely the same line for 10 years, then all of a sudden, the tyres are ripped apart. If it is dangerous, as it clearly is, then you shouldn't be ABLE to use the kerbs.

There are two different areas to look at, one is to do with damage caused by the kerbs. The other is the type of failure that occurs ( I.e catastrophic vs controlled deflation ).

I agree the kerbs shouldn't be dangerous but I'm not convinced manufacturers can complain if damage is caused by non track areas, otherwise we'll find then moaning that the Armco is too strong and damages the car...

Pirelli still have a lot to answer for but it's not a one sided argument! It could still be the old case of designing what the customer wants vs what the customer needs!

Sent from my tweeting foot massager.

[Old Hack]

But you can't complain if you get a puncture from an area that is defined as not part of the track!

Edited 'cus I was talking tulip!

Sent from my tweeting foot massager.

You can, if you've taken precisely the same line for 10 years, then all of a sudden, the tyres are ripped apart. If it is dangerous, as it clearly is, then you shouldn't be ABLE to use the kerbs.

[Old Hack]

Presumably that's nothing new. It's the third or fourth year of the new Silverstone, and all the kerbs and the track will have been rigorously examined by the FIA this year like every year, not to mention the drivers and engineers getting to walk around the track. And nobody mentioned those sharp edges, which are I would think exactly the same as on every other serated kerb.



Well yes it looks good for Mercedes. I'm not convinced they have the consistency to win the championship, but you never know. There's still more than half left.

It's the speed, and quality, of their updates that have surprised me about Mercedes. They now have 3 development teams, one for this year, one for 2014, and even one for 2015.

I am having a punt on Hamilton to win the WDC with a side bet that they'll also win the WCC. Something tells me that the tide has changed. Silverstone, is something known as a 'front limited' track, in which Merc were expected to struggle, as their car favours a 'rear limited' track. They were also renowned to favour cooler temps. But they seem to have resolved it. It's quite clear, that the Merc is now, the quickest car out there, and has been for a while, but that's over one lap. If they can get harder tyres, which seems to be the way this is going, then they're really in the best place, as they can push all the way through.

[Old Hack]

You're right but my understanding is that that's a gentleman's agreement rather than a formal interpretation of the rules.

Sent from my tweeting foot massager.

No, the rules state, you cannot leave the track. Keeping two wheels within the track means you haven't, for to leave the track, all 4 wheels have to have crossed the white lines. As ever, in F1, its interpreting the rules. But, clearly, you can have 2 wheels off the track.

20.2 Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track.
Should a car leave the track the driver may rejoin, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any advantage.

As I said, you left an important bit out.

[VectraMan]

I agree with Anderson. You should not have lips on kerbs, or they are no longer kerbs when they are like that.

Presumably that's nothing new. It's the third or fourth year of the new Silverstone, and all the kerbs and the track will have been rigorously examined by the FIA this year like every year, not to mention the drivers and engineers getting to walk around the track. And nobody mentioned those sharp edges, which are I would think exactly the same as on every other serated kerb.

I also think stronger tyres do not necessarily, hand the championship to Vettel, for if Hamilton had not had his issue yesterday, I am utterly convinced, that he would have beaten Vettel on merit.

Well yes it looks good for Mercedes. I'm not convinced they have the consistency to win the championship, but you never know. There's still more than half left.