Comments on: Brawn criticises safety car rules

By: MacademiaNut

MacademiaNut — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:40:42 +0000

Agreed. Since Michael started on the hard tyre, there’s really no excuse for this pit stop mishap.

By: GalTrack

GalTrack — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 15:55:32 +0000

True. But they hardly had to do any subtle strategy, did they? At first glance, it seems to me that, strategy-wise, everything was pretty straightforward last year for Brawn GP and Red Bull Racing; I mean: always pitting when expected and same kind of strategies… I may be wrong, though… You see the quality when unexpected situations (where you have to react fast) come in, or when you do need a different strategy to pass your opponents.

By: John

John — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:51:59 +0000

if he had gone through the red light, he probably would have been disqualified, like Montoya, Massa, Fisichella and Barrichello were

By: DGR-F1

DGR-F1 — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:43:12 +0000

Ooops, went slightly off-topic without meaning too….
(Please ignore/move/destroy as necessary)

By: DGR-F1

DGR-F1 — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:22:48 +0000

So why did so many teams and drivers get it wrong? Is this the start of a ‘lets ignore the rules’ season of F1? Is this down to the competitiveness of the teams or the idiocy of the mandatory pit stop?
I do agree the penalty on Hammy took way too long to be set, but I wonder if there is a minimum amount of time the FIA scroungers are allowed to make a decision, and being the freeloaders they are, they use that to the maximum – think of all the possible ‘instant’ decisions there have been in the past that took all race long to impose the penalty, or had to wait until after the race.
I still say instant penalties for the drivers in the race, within about 4 laps of whatever the problem was would soon get everybody obeying the rules, and driving sensibly.
Also, I am surprised Hammy only got a meagre drive-through, I was expecting a stop-go at least!

By: Chalky

Chalky — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:18:05 +0000

That was when the cars had to re-fuel. Now they don’t need to.

By: Patrickl

Patrickl — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 10:04:31 +0000

We had that rule for a few years until last year. It didn’t work at all!

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:57:48 +0000

If a tree falls on the track then the track is blocked and the race is stopped. The regulation already exists for this.

Driver’s wouldn’t weave because if they did that they would lose time on the driver in front. A straight line at constant speed is faster than a wiggly line at the same speed.

The pit lane speed limit should be slow enough. There are people walking across the pit lane all the time and no one has been hit yet. Plus, on the corner where the actual incident is you have double waved yellows, which means marshals on track. Further, (in addition) instruction could be issued by race control on the radio, i.e. “Debris on turn 13, keep left on approach.”

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 09:53:35 +0000

I said Monaco! The penalty at Monaco is what I was referring to.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 28 Jun 2010 04:59:15 +0000

Good idea but its riddled with problems.
First it is necessary to slow the cars down a lot, where the incident occurred. second, would you have the drivers go at max pace? or stop and start to warm the tyres and breaks, and what it something happens that can’t be expected, like a tree falls on the track? a safety car is necessary.