Why do million-dollar F1 drivers keep making mistakes at red lights?
Lewis Hamilton would be best advised to skip today’s newspapers. Unless he wants to read several unfortunate comparisons between his father’s prang in a Porsche last week and his crash with Kimi Raikkonen in the pits (see video here).
Hamilton is not the only F1 driver to have messed up at a red light in recent years. Nico Rosberg committed exactly the same mistake yesterday but, not being Hamilton, he gets less attention and a lot less vitriol from some quarters.
But why is it happening at all? We all know that if the light is red you have to stop so surely the world’s top racing drivers know the same?
Running red lights
Hamilton and Rosberg are the latest drivers to fall foul of a closed pit exit. They join Rubens Barrichello, who re-joined the track passing through a red light at Melbourne this year and was disqualified.
So were Felipe Massa and Giancarlo Fisichella in last year’s Canadian Grand Prix. And Juan Pablo Montoya two years before that.
The phenomenon of drivers passing through red lights has become more frequent in recent years because of the increasing use of the safety car.
For safety reasons, the pit lane exit is closed while the safety car and any F1 cars near it are passing by. However last year the rules were changed to control when drivers could come into the pits during a safety car period, meaning the entry to the pits may be open while the exit is closed, which rarely happened in F1 before.
Driver/team error
But despite all this a red light means stop so why are the drivers not seeing it and not stopping?
Hamilton said:
I saw the two guys in front battling in the pitlane and all of a sudden they stopped. I saw the red light but by the time I stopped it was too late.
This suggests a couple of things. First, the pit lane stop light is hard to see if you’re not one of the first drivers in the pit lane queue. And it also suggests that it hadn’t occured to Hamilton, and presumably Rosberg, Barrichello and the rest, that the pits would be closed.
In other forms of motor racing we hear the teams giving their drivers a constant stream of useful information. In Indy Car the drivers have spotters around the track to let them know if they have a car close by them that they might not be able to see.
Exactly what F1 teams do in terms of giving their drivers information can be hard to tell because we rarely get to hear their radio transmissions. Did McLaren or Williams warn their drivers of the likelihood of the pit lane exit being closed yesterday? If so the warning wasn’t heeded.
The blame ultimately has to rest with the drivers but as with everything in F1 it’s a team game as well as an individual sport. If it’s hard to see the pit lane exit light at Montreal, and past experience has suggested it is, then McLaren and Williams should have taken that into account.
Problem solved?
However this may no longer be a problem from the next round. At the next race in France the teams are to trial a new system where, in a safety car situation, the drivers will receive a message informing them to activate a special ‘safety car mode’ on their cars, slowing them down.
This should allow the pit lane to remain open during safety car situations and hopefully will eliminate the chance of accidents happening as the drivers react to a safety car deployment.
The image above is illustrative and not a photograph of the red light at the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve
UncleBoogie said on 9th June 2008, 23:23
The BIG FLASHING RED LIGHT was easy to see and shown as clearly visible ABOVE the cars in front. Plus why are the drivers not paying attention anyway? If the safety car is out, you’re not allowed to pass anyway, meaning that Lewis had no need to be flooring it as, unlike Kubica and Raikkonen, he wasn’t racing anyone to the end of the lane.
On my website, while reserving most of my vitriol for Lewis, mostly due to his arrogance and attitude, I did mention Rosberg did it too. Perhaps if Rosberg had petulantly smacked the camera away, and had a history of arrogance I’d have given him a kicking too. But Rosberg is a sportsman. Not a media hyped, overrated driver.
I find it rather telling that McLaren are whining about Lewis’ punishment, whereas Williams and Rosberg appear to have just accepted it. I would expect nothing less from a team that actually has class and dignity.
Rob ijbema said on 9th June 2008, 23:34
evely bodely mades mistekes
Christopher said on 9th June 2008, 23:53
I don’t know the pitlane layout and the timings, but Rosberg seemed closer to Hamilton than Hamilton was to Raikkonen when they set out, and Rosberg’s impact was smaller, so it seems like Rosberg managed to react better at least.
I thought giving them both the same size of penalty seemed a little unfair. Maybe jsut 5 places for Nico?
chunter said on 10th June 2008, 5:01
I don’t know if Formula 1 stewards know how to give a penalty of less than ten grid spots.
I think that as much as we like to pretend we want to see the best car and driver win, I think this season is secretly revealing that human error is and should be as much a part of the championship as forgetting to tighten the lugs on the wheels or destroying an engine.
If there is to be a habitual queue of cars leaving the pits, maybe it’s time to consider having the pit signal be similar to the lights on the grid, so nobody can complain about its visibility? That light bar Ferrari are using instead of a sign on a broomstick like everyone else must be having some kind of positive effect…
Oliver said on 10th June 2008, 8:01
Whitmarsh said they did warn Hamilton, but he said something like “frankly we gave him, we could have given it to him earlier”. I think the the pits was just to busy for both drivers and team personnel
George said on 10th June 2008, 10:08
Michael K – Oliver and Scott Joslin pretty much answered your question for me.
Chaz said on 10th June 2008, 10:40
I’m curious as to whether a series of escalating fines can be introduced to drivers especially when they appear to insist on leaving their cars in dangerous parts of the track when they break down. Perhaps this will encourage drivers to think about what they are doing and not mess up the race for everyone else with silly safety cars spoiling the race.
George said on 10th June 2008, 11:06
An interesting suggestion Chaz, but one that opens as many problems as it solves, I think. Sutil did park in an awkward place, true, but could he have gone any further? If he couldn’t then he had no choice but to stop where he did. And to have pulled over earlier than he did on that particular stretch of track would have been even more dangerous. It would be a minefield of claim and counter-claim in attempting to assess intention and judgement. The safety car calls at Montreal this year were particularly erratic. My feeling is that Montreal is a track at which this kind of chaos always erupts. The layout of the circuit ensures that it does. This isn’t a bad thing in itself, but the volume of pitlane incidents there over the years is now a cause for concern, I think. The problem is, given that Circuit Gilles Villeneuve is on an island, they are limited in the amount of room that they have to make alterations.
Kanyima said on 10th June 2008, 11:17
doctorvee, Senna wasn’t God. He commited errors too. Vent your hate alright else but don’t try to pull wool on our eyes by giving a half-assed reason for Hamilton bashing.
Chaz said on 10th June 2008, 11:25
Perhaps in this instance George, hence the suggestion at escalating the fine system depending on what the telemetry data shows up (i.e. could Sutil have free wheeled to a safer position or was he more concerned on reducing further car damage?). I must add that it appears Sutil could have continued a further 10 or so meters on the grass around the right hand into the corner which would have been safer, not to mention the slip road directly ahead of him which was perhaps marginally a little further away. But this has not been the first and indeed I’m sure will not be the last frustrating and quite probably avoidable instance that need not have needed a safety car deployment.
A Singh said on 10th June 2008, 11:36
I think it’s just simply the case of a driver reacting under racing circumstances. Under normal conditions, he would try to nail it, but then realises he’s under the safety car.
Speaking of which, can someone please explain why the current safety car rule was ever implemented. It serves no purpose whatsoever…
By my recollection there were certainly no problems (apart from backmarkers screwing it up) with the pit lane being open under the old system.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 10th June 2008, 11:55
A Singh – it was because when a safety car period was called drivers would often head straight to the pits, still at racing speed, potentially passing through a crash site on the way. By preventing them from being able to go into the pits the organisers wanted to prevent that but, as so often happens in F1, it brought unintended (but entirely predictable) consequences.
Tom said on 10th June 2008, 13:01
Leaving aside the issue of Hamilton, there is a good case for making the stop light at the end of the pitlane larger.
The whole point of having a red light there is for safety purposes. If it is small enough that drivers sometimes fail to notice it (as we have seen many times) then, even though it is the driver who is largely at fault, that is a good enough reason for improving the lights.
In road traffic lights the unit has to be made to balance safety, cost and also aesthetics. If safety was the only concern, road traffic lights would be huge and possibly arranged on gantries above the street, with repeater lights on the approach (as used on the railways). But that would be too expensive, and would ruin the aesthetics of the street for pedestrians etc.
In F1, cost and aesthetics are of far far less concern and safety is absolutely paramount. So the fact that the pit lane exit stop lights have not been altered, even though drivers continually fail to notice them every single year, is very surprising.
Jean said on 10th June 2008, 13:05
I was of the opinion it happened because , after having lost a healthy 6-7 sec. lead , pitting , and seeing BOTH his main opponents passing him , must have triggered a reaction to gun after them so that on re-joining the race , he could be in the best position to pass , but the safety car was still out then , so that does not explain. Obviously he just lost a bit of concentration at the wrong moment , and that was it. Unfortunately it has attracted the penalty for France , but if he had not crashed and gone through the red , would have been black flagged anyway. Hard , but fair. Kimi’s incident was a racing one , so was Coulthard/Massa , Fisichella/Vettel etc , racing incidents = no penalty. Maybe Lewis’ brain functions best at high speeds , thinking back to China last year , error at low speed again. If so . he has something to work on.
George said on 10th June 2008, 13:52
bChaz, I do see your point, I just don’t think it’s workable as a regulation. It’s not clear-cut enough and it would waste far too much of the steward’s time at each and every GP. There would be protests against unfair decisions and the whole thing would be a nightmare. It’s just a whole host of ‘what ifs’. What if Sutil had carried on and made for the escape road? What if he had come to a halt on the racing line? Ultimately, who is the judge of the ‘safest’ position to stop? The drivers? The GPDA? The FIA? The race stewards? The marshals?
I understand your frustration – you are right – it is not the first and it won’t be the last time that the safety car is deployed, but it’s a fact of life! There are enough convoluted rules in F1 without adding to the statute book.