Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Baku City Circuit, 2016

Hamilton unhappy with radio rules after engine problem

2016 European Grand PrixPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Lewis Hamilton was unhappy with Formula One’s radio rules after his team were unable to help him correct an engine problem during the European Grand Prix.

Rules introduced this year place limits on how much assistance teams can give their drivers on the radio, which prevented Mercedes from telling Hamilton how to solve his problem.

Asked if he felt the restrictions on radio communications were correct Hamilton told reporters: “I don’t see the benefit.”

“The FIA have made Formula One so technical as it is today. We probably have at least a hundred, two hundred switch positions it could have been. And there’s no way to know, no matter how much I study that, I don’t know what the problem was.”

He added he was disappointed the problem kept him from pushing to catch the drivers in front of him. “It was a shame that I couldn’t race,” he said.

“It’s a race. If I had been able to resolve the power situation I might have been able to at least be part of the show and maybe catch the guys ahead. But it wasn’t to be and that’s the way it is.”

Hamilton said he had “no idea” how to fix the fault. “There’s like 16 different engine positions and in those engine positions there’s like 20 positions, so I had no idea what problem I had, just low power.”

The problem eventually went away of its own accord. “I didn’t do anything,” Hamilton confirmed, “it just fixed itself.”

Despite that he decided to back off in the final laps anyway. “I turned the engine down,” said Hamilton.

“I was 14 seconds behind the guys in front with eight laps to go, so I just saved the engine. Remembering that I don’t have as many engines as the guys in front for the rest of the year.”

Lewis Hamilton’s radio messages about his power unit fault

From: Hamilton De-rates everywhere. I’m sure that’s not helping. Is there no solution for this?
To: Hamilton We are working on it, Lewis.
From: Hamilton You guys need to pick up the pace.
From: Hamilton Can I not reset this thing?
To: Hamilton OK Lewis so the problem appears to be with the current mode you’re in.
From: Hamilton Ah, I don’t know what you mean but I don’t know what’s wrong.
Copy that Lewis, hard to say what it is.
From: Hamilton This is ridiculous guys, I don’t know, looking at my fricking dash every five seconds trying to find a switch that’s in the wrong position. I haven’t changed anything or done something wrong as far as I’m aware.
To: Hamilton Yeah Lewis it’s nothing that you’re doing wrong, just got a setting that’s icorrect.
From: Hamilton Is it HPB?
To: Hamilton I’m afraid I can’t say, Lewis.
From: Hamilton I may not finish this race because I’m going to try to change everything.
To: Hamilton Don’t advise that, Lewis.
From: Hamilton Can I make a suggestion and you say if it’s OK or not?
To: Hamilton No that’s not allowed. Let’s just get our head down and focus on the job.
To: Hamilton OK Lewis you’re the fastest car on the track.
From: Hamilton Thanks man. Got power back.

2016 European Grand Prix

Browse all European Grand Prix articles

88 comments on “Hamilton unhappy with radio rules after engine problem”

  1. As an IT professional I can’t understand why they don’t have the computer determine the optimal settings and give the driver a button that will use the computer settings. It’s all a matter of crunching numbers and if computers can drive a car they can be coded to take the majority of managing the settings out of the drivers hands.

    1. as someone who took some IT classes, including those dealing with usability and man-machine interfaces I question Merc’s interest in actually furnishing their drivers with the tools to get the job done.

      ps. Lewis said after the race that the car fixed itself, so it probably had nothing to do with an error on his part, more likely a reliability issue, that potentially could have been sorted out by selecting some menu options. Why Merc don’t have a page/menu in their UI that tries to point out fault conditions is kinda beyond me. This isn’t the hardest stuff to do, believe it or not, those cars are not actually that sophisticated, the only difficult aspects of them is tolerances, and whether or not the people doing their jobs are actually competent. Because incompetence will cost you a lot more than actually developing the system or incorporating changes.

    2. In that case, let’s just let the computer do all the the steering too. And bring back traction control!

      1. @Hans Not the same thing! Telling where the problem and hinting how to solve it is different than just a traction control, which is physically altering brake and engine conditions, here we have a settings issue, that could have been easily sorted with a mini menu stating like “charge is not working due to in the 1-2-3 engine modes, 4-5-6 better options etc”

        He can already see fuel levels, tire pressure/temp, brake temp etc… These are very obvious ones drivers should know how to fix/manage.

        Electrical charging systems are much more complicated and many systems involved as well engine modes that just changes the behavior.

        Hamilton’s issue was from the start, and unlikely self inflicted as told by the team! Meaning some idiot didnt explain properly what those changes were, or not very clear about those changes before. Ros had the issue before so he knew how to solve it.

        1. But what @hanswes mentions is exactly the reasoning of why these things have to be done manually by the driver @mysticus.

          Not too long ago they often had engine map modes for different parts of each track and I think some of them even switched automatically based on GPS info of where they were, making it far easier for the driver to have the car perfect for every corner on every track without having to do anything but setup (which is done by the engineers based on simulation).

          They CAN do it, just as they can do adjustable wings, adjustable ride heights, could do active suspension, interlinked suspension (Friq) and traction control.

          1. Drivers should know all the knobs of course, but when they keep changing settings all the time under pressure it may be a little diffucult, esp if you are not briefed about a change (as per info from the team). He didnt have the scenario before, so hard for him to call back a memory that doesnt exist!

            They map different settings every race, beside, his problem was ERS, which was differently mapped on one of the settings which he started the race on, and he wasnt aware of the setting that cause the issue as it sounds more like miscommunication by engineers…

    3. This yes.

      Why not simply let computer decide best mode to be in and set it.

      Why? Because computer cannot decide in advance. Driver can.

      Driver can decide ahead of time brake balance, maybe optimum balance is forward, but he wants to save front tires.

      Maybe he wants to drive faster but run leaner… Maybe rich up the mixture to burn more fuel after safety car..

      Options are.there to gain an advantage.

    4. Well, they have. What the computer lacks, is an AI that’s capable of understanding what the driver wants from the car at any exact moment– that’s where the driver / engineer comes in.

      I agree that telling drivers how to drive a racing line into a corner, or where to brake more, or less, is a bit much, helping the driver resolve engine mode / mapping issues IS EXACTLY WHAT A FREAKIN’ ENGINEER SHOULD BE FOR!!!

      Or in other words, as usual, the FIA, while attempting to scratch a minor itch, amputated the drivers’ hands.

      1. Exactlly, FIA messed up.

        Now arguably their goal was to make racing less predictable. Maybe they succeeded, nobody could predict Lewis to struggle so much.

        But who wants to see that.

        We want to see drivers unpredictably good, not unpredictably bad.

    5. Because it is F1. Not PS3! If you want computers to do everything, why not just get computers to race the cars. The whole point of this is simple. People race cars. It’s what we pay to see. The cars are bespoke, but once they are on track, we want the drivers to drive them, not computers. Heck, if we used computers, we could even get rid of half of the engineers at each race as they wouldn’t be needed. Even 10 years ago this was possible and even more so now.

      Of course the computers can be designed to handle everything. They sample data every millionth of a second and could control everything from traction to engine power, suspension to downforce, fuel usage to tyre usage and so on. If they hadn’t outlawed that stuff, we would probably never see a driver stuff up ever. We may never see an overtake as well.
      Thank god they outlawed this stuff and the drivers need to control it. Yeah, it hurt Hamilton and Raikonnen. Drivers like Brabham won championships out of knowing how to get the best out of his fallible car. That is the whole freaking point of F1. Drive to the limits of your ability and your car.

      Imagine 20 years from now when half the cars on the roads are self driven and the technology is that good. I can’t imagine watching a SPORT where the drivers get in the car and just sit back and relax while the car does everything.

  2. I know the purists don’t like it… But software is everywhere. And you know what? Just like every other piece of technology it can be engineered. There’s no reason why the software can’t be engineered to be more user friendly.

    Give an end user a generic error message and of course they won’t be able to trouble shoot it.

    The teams have no one to blame but themselves. Blaming the rules is a complete cop out.

    1. I dont think its a cop out, the reason the rules where brought in was because certain drivers where being coached far too much on how to drive the circuit, but the rule makers, instead of addressing this problem, just put a blanket ban on radio communication except for when there’s a dangerous or racing ending situation. There shouldn’t be any thing wrong with the engineers telling drivers how to fix a technical issue with the equipment.

      1. My sense is that this was actually an intended outcome—a relatively fast car way laid by a technical problem that would have been simply fixed before. It makes the race outcomes more stochastic. Of course we get to hear about it on the radio and it sounds absurd. The optics were not intended.

        1. Lol. Team intentionally sabotaging their triple champion.

          Right.

          1. Strange thing to say. Mercedes did not create the rule.

          2. not intended by Mercedes this race @jureo, but intended by the rule maker to be a factor in the races

          3. @bascb intended yes, but did it contribute to the sporting side? Did it improve the show? What exactly did it do?

          4. Personally i did not have much against them discussing all sort of things including strategy, what nobs to turn, etc. It made for great entertainment to find out who drives by themselves, who likes to draw on the pits and who get’s annoyed by being told what to do @jureo.

            The irony is that Sky complaining about how much Rosberg drew on the team to tell him about settings (and Massa being instructed how to drive a lap) was a large factor in getting that kind of team speak abandoned in the first place. A ban that never seemed too well thought out (is anything kneejerk in F1 ever?).

    2. Agreed. I find all this quite funny. It’s so logical too.

      F1 teams try their best to make the cars as adjustable to varying circumstances as possible, thus giving them the flexibility to adapt to different situations and extract as much performance as they can. But making the cars infinetly adjustable might make them too complex, and thus ineffective.

      Of course, they want as much flexibility as possible, so they make a compromise: a differential gets 10 possible settings, no more, no less. Less means less performance achievable, more options makes it too complicated for engineers and drivers alike.

      And if your design is too complex to operate, then maybe it’s your fault, not the regulations. It’s logical in every sense: every single machine, software, whatever has to be as user friendly as possible, to allow proper operation, easy configuration and guarantee an effective result.

      I found it funny that Brundle and company were complaining about this. It’s not FIA’s fault that Mercedes decided to make their engine/car/whatever this complicated. They could well design it with only 1 option for everything: a car working “out of the box”, if you will. But they didn’t, and so Hamilton and Rosberg have to work extra to make it work the way they like and the way they need.

      Pilots press kazillion switches and buttons every day, but they train very hard in the simulator, and they work around different problems. Maybe Hamilton should do it too… that’s another way to use the simulator, not just testing and learning new tracks.

      1. Pilots gets training on those said systems for years before they are mentally and physically capable of doing it. In racing, everything changes from season to season, and there is limited training available… You can train abstract all you want, but if it is not done and experienced on track, it is meaningless. Because when you are training, you are not under pressure, not driving inches from walls at speeds exceeding 350kmh…

        It is not Mercedes’s car that is designed like that! We have seen Ferrari had the same issue in the very same race! All of those cars! If you do a quick google image search of other F1 cars’ steering wheels, you will see different layouts but pretty much similar buttons and knobs!

        Asking about which buttons/knobs and settings to use to overtake and when to use them was the issue, not when you are stuck in a drive mode you didnt intended to! Ham and Raikonnen was asking how to rectify the errors/problems they see while driving fast inches of walls! They were not asking anything other than how to get rid of the problem!

        Asking Hamilton should do it too is over simplistic and arrogant couch cowboy talk, as they guy is 3 timed WDC and has been racing since he was early teenage! He cant get to the seat and use those knobs without knowing what to do! He was just overwhelmed and was under pressure and couldnt figure what was wrong because it seems and as told by team, he didnt do it himself or settings were not communicated to him before nor he was given info on how to get out of the situation as he hasnt seen it before like Ros who had this second time! Obviously he knew what to do, now because he was super clever as people stupidly and jokingly claim….

      2. Pilots press kazillion switches and buttons every day, but they train very hard in the simulator, and they work around different problems.

        Pilots are working in planes with a set design, similar to a car (although more complicated).

        A closer analogy is a test pilot, flying a new prototype, as all F1 cars are prototypes. They change often, as a prototype plane does. However, the test pilot is in constant contact with engineers and other personnel the ground. They will guide him through any problems.

        If an engineer has (as I believed happened here) set the wrong parameter in one of the maps, how is the driver supposed to know which setting to change to get out of that map? There are a huge number of settings which decide which parameters to use. If the setting was engaged from the start (as I believe was the case for HAM), not selected by the driver (as I believe was the case for ROS), there is little chance of him figuring out the correct combination of dozens of settings to clear the fault.

    3. Don’t you think some of the smartest engineers in the world would do that if they were allowed to? I hardly think this is a problem due to lack of ability or insight.

      1. As someone who has a friend who is a captain for Virgin Atlantic I can tell you that the pilots have to go on the simulators every 6 months. They fly all the different types of aircraft in their fleet. The engineers put the simulators into various dangerous scenarios and the pilots then have to use the various knobs and switches to make the situation safe. Hopefully after all this the pilots know what to press if anything goes wrong. Should work for drivers as well when they go on their simulators.I’ve been lucky enough to go on the Mclaren sim at the MTC although that was 2012.

  3. I think you can either have complex cars / engines or the current radio restrictions. The combination of both just makes the sport look a bit stupid. I agree with what @KeithCollantine said on Twitter – let’s have less complicated engines next year.

    1. It only makes a certain driver looking stupid.

      Only now Hamilton wants changes of the rules. We didn’t hear him saying this last week.

      1. he actually didn’t say that. I kinda get the ‘looking stupid’ angle though. The press have been painting him like that for most of his career, over emotional, uninterested, unmotivated, incompetent. It’s a real slam dunk when this kind of failure is cause for a ‘base’ promotion/story. Funny how ROS panicking last race or before he acted like a fool and took himself and HAM out really never gets this kind of reporting. “Oh it’s Lewis fault”, “he was being over aggressive”, “the guy should have slowed down”, bla bla bla.

        I think the worst part about today, for Lewis was the insulting twitter post from Merc alluding to someone missing out on the setting, even though Lewis stated that in the race, the car sorted itself out.

        Reliability is what canned Lewis today, not pressing the wrong button.

      2. @dutch-1: You seem bothered by the very existence of HAM. Try some objectivity.

    2. @girts No, I don’t want less complicated engine if the more complicated engine is opening new research possibilities. We always look the past as better time and the current in overly complicated. Bet in 2026 people will wish they go back to 2016 where the power unit is much simpler with only 6 module.

    3. A less complicated engine is not the answer. Anything that takes technology backwards is not what F1 should be about.

      There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that the race engineer shouldn’t be able to help the driver resolve issues with the engine / electronics during a race, except a bunch of luddite so-called F1 fans who insist on living in 1990, and a pair of committees who shouldn’t be trusted to determine what color to paint the white lines on track.

      1. Exactly.
        F1 is also about technology, I don’t understand the fans that want to go back to the stone age (read the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s depending on the age of said fan). And I don’t undertand the FIA that still live in the stone age.

        1. If technology is so good why are even road cars breaking down. Ask an AA or RAC guy which cars break down most due to technology/electronics…..German marques.

  4. Someone is moaning now

    1. It’s you

  5. It sounds like Hamilton was in the wrong engine mode from the start of the race.

    The question is whether that mode was what he was told to have his engine in, or whether he incorrectly put his car in that setting.

    I’m neutral when it comes to Hamilton’s success – I’m neither a fan nor a detractor of his – but I can’t help but feel that Mercedes being unable to simply tell their driver “switch to mode-X” or whatever the message would’ve been to rectify the situation and race at full speed is a rather silly situation for the Formula 1 World Championship to have.

    Modern Formula 1 cars are so complex to drive. That is a reality we must accept. Either we deal with the fact that modern cars are complicated and allow teams to help drivers by advising them on how to operate their cars during races, or we sacrifice some of the complexity so that drivers can concentrate on just racing without having their entire races compromised by having one switch out of place.

    At the moment, the current situation with the radio rules does not sit right with me at all. If we want to improve racing and make these drivers seem like ‘real heroes’ again, let’s work on making the sport more competitive and have the action come naturally, not come up with half-hearted, reactionary rules that only cause other problems rather than solving them.

    1. A COTD candidate?

      (It is “compatible,” for example the “rather silly situation for the Formula 1 World Championship to have” could also go well with SEO keywording and stuff.)

    2. I think many of these scenarios can be prepared for on the simulator.

      1. They can Hans. As I said in a previous post i’ve been lucky enough to go on the Mclaren sim.

    3. The team have confirmed through Toto that they and not HAM engaged the setting. In ROS’s case, he switched it himself.

    4. I agree.

      I would also say that, at the very least, race control should be allowed some discretion. The team would apply to race control saying, “We cocked up, can we just tell our driver how to get out of this mess?”

  6. Well, according to Lauda, Rosberg had the same issue as Hamilton but solved it himself. Though I don’t know if Rosberg got lucky or he knew what he was doing.

    Still, I find the radio restrictions to be garbage. Although, a good compromise in my opinion would be to ban coaching on things like racing lines and braking points, but allow the engineers to help the drivers solve problems.

    F1 isn’t sure if it wants to be driver-oriented or team-oriented.

    1. It was confirmed by Mercedes that Hamilton had the issue from the start, so the team said for him to figure out the issue was practically impossible, where as Rosberg, having changed a setting mid race, knew that to fix the issue he just had to revert back to his previous setting.

    2. What Merc said afterwards according to C4 was Rosberg actually put his car in the wrong mode during the race and so it was easy enough for him to fix. Hamiltons car was already set wrong from before the race and so there was nothing for Hamilton to go on in terms of fixing it.

      1. So Lewis car was broke before it even left the line.

        1. would be nice to get a straight answer from Merc, but that would probably cost more than both cars combined. #BothCars FTW !!!

        2. That’s what it seems like given the information that has been released so far. Hamilton was complaining about engine issues from the start of the race according to Autosport.

  7. These team-radio-rules are so ridiculous.
    The team knew what the problem was, how to fix it but weren’t allowed to tell their driver?!

    This is so stupid and ridiculous, even by F1-standards.

  8. Hamilton whines too much.

    1. Lol yeah. Same weekend he starts about whinning drivers, and ends as one.

  9. Well, if Mr. Hamilton would spend less time partying and living the high life and more time working with his mechanics, he probably could have fixed this issue himself.

    1. If people would stop repeating the party line, people might find out what is really going on/happened.

    2. @klon Not a Hamilton fan, are we?

    3. @klon agreed. If he spent more than 5 laps in a simulator, study some settings on the evenings… Maybe issue would be resolved like quiet boy Rosberg.

    4. @klon, well if commenters would actually get their facts straight instead of spouting off at drivers they obviously don’t like… No, what am I thinking, that will never happen.

  10. The stupidity of F1 continues. F1 is a team sport, there are 100s of people involved in producing the car for Sunday’s race. The team is more than the driver. The driver does not change the wheels at a pit stop the pit crew do. The engineers look after the engines and the strategy come from the pits. The driver drives the car. They all have role, but for some stupid reason an engineer has to watch an engine get destroyed (for a penalty later) and is not allowed to tell the driver how to fix it. I’m glad I’m losing interest in this ‘sport’.

    1. Hear hear. Formula 1 is comical at the moment.

    2. You are correct. A driver is supposed to drive the car, chase the car ahead, overtake and defend as the situation is, give feedback to the team and try to get the chequered flag as fast as possible. He is not supposed to be fiddling with switches in the middle of an apex to find the appropriate engine modes. There are engineerers, strategists, pit crew etc and each have a specific role. Toto Wolff is not supposed to just pick up the jack and start changing tyres at the Mercedes.

  11. I wonder if safety can be compromised by this rule, an engine that suddenly stops working, bursts out in flame, or can’t be controlled can be very dangerous for the driver and the ones around him. “Formula 1 driver xxx crashed on track after his engine suddenly stopped working because the team couldn’t tell him how to fix it even though they knew how.” is just going to be a very bad headline for F1.

    1. @ducpham2708 I think F1 is pretty conscientious when it comes to safety, for example, if a part needs replacing or even upgrading it can be done without penalty if a case can be made to the FIA that it is for safety reasons, and they agree and allow it.

      I’m sure if the car was actually about to blow up or what have you, the F1 watchdogs listening in, and/or giving advice to the team as they ask what their allowed parameters of communication are, would simply agree to allow technical advice under the guise of safety, or advise them to pit.

      Seems to me the advice given by F1, ie. no technical help, meant that this was not dire, and technical aid would have indeed been performance enhancing, and therefore was disallowed.

  12. “We probably have at least a hundred, two hundred switch positions it could have been. And there’s no way to know, no matter how much I study that.”

    Yes, there is. It’s not the pizzazz of handling a car at the limit, but, at the moment, being comfortable with using the “onboard computer” is a just as essential part of being successful. And Nico is better than Lewis in that respect. (He’s better at car setup and the mechanical stuff while Lewis is simply quicker than him, can simply drive closer to the limit of grip.)

    1. did you see the last race when Nico was panicking with all the alarms and bells, or when he crashed in to Lewis because he was going to slow because he fumbled with his knob?

      Maybe it doesn’t matter what really happened, it only matters what someone says happened. And maybe thats a sad commentary.

      1. @xsavior No, none of us saw NR panicking, nor crash into LH. Those are your personal imaginings. Was there urgency for NR when his wheel lit up? Naturally there was. Was NR ‘fumbling’? No just resetting. Was it LH that crashed into NR? Yes it was.

        But maybe it doesn’t matter what really happened, it only matters what someone says happened.

        And yes, that is a sad commentary on your part.

        1. actually they collided in to each other, Lewis had no control over his car, so he really didn’t crash in to Nico. 2ndly, if Nico was responsible for pushing Lewis off the track than ultimately the incident is his fault.

          You can argue the characterization or my qualification about Nico panicking, which he has and does, and if he didn’t panic when he pushed his teammate off the track then he knowingfully and meaningfully pushed his teammate off the track which ended up in a collision.

          You can say what you want, but when it comes down to it, if you run someone off the road cause u screwed up, it’s your butt thats responsible. Nico caused the crash that ended his own race, Nico either lost control of his car by way of fumbling with his steering wheel or intentionally ran his teammate off the track.

          Take away your first two points, and your proposition is baseless and consistent with my original conclusion. Have a nice day. Nico has two excuses for running Lewis off that day, he was either unwitting or intentional, and we all know why he was going so much slower than his teammate.

          1. @xsavior ‘Lewis had no control over his car, so he really didn’t crash in to Nico’

            I stopped there with a chuckle.

    2. just read what the team said and you will see that it was rosberg who made a mistake [ not for the first time ] so he knew what to turn back

      1. If I understand Toto’s comment correctly, both cars were misconfigured. Its just that in Nico’s case, he’d recently made a settings change in about the same place, and rewinding that put him into the right area. Kudos to Nico for sussing it, even so.

        Toto’s answer also implies it wasn’t simply a matter of “turn xyz on/off”, though its hard to see how anything much more complex than that would be practical for a driver to work out.

      2. @audifan Read more carefully. Nothing says that NR made a mistake. He was in a mode because they had been scrambling all weekend with modes and weren’t fully prepared. Nothing says Nico
        mistakenly put his car in a mode that he knew was going to be problematic. But when it turned out to be problematic he knew what to do.

    3. Cite please.

      They guy who’s driven a hybrid for 2 1/2 years found it unknowable and his team says the same. From the outside, there is no way to known whether the onboard display really does provide the necessary information; I’m curious as to why and how you are confident that it is easy to find what was wrong and correct it.

      1. I didn’t say it was easy, I’m just saying it’s always possible to learn. You “just” have to memorize those “20 positions” for each of the 16 engine modes. You need a structured mindset. (I’m pretty sure some or most of them go along the same principles.)

        1. There is not a single driver on the grid who can memorize over 300 engine settings, and know which one to go to when they don’t even know the problem to begin with. All while racing an F1 car at the limit. They are the best drivers in the world, but your expectations are ridiculous.

    4. “And Nico is better than Lewis in that respect. (He’s better at car setup and the mechanical stuff while Lewis is simply quicker than him, can simply drive closer to the limit of grip.)”

      Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

      Times Nico has put his car into the wrong engine mode all of his own accord this season: 2
      Times Hamilton has: 0

      Makes me laugh after 3 and half years as teammates in F1 people still believe this Rosberg is smarter / Hamilton is faster crap.

  13. Neil (@neilosjames)
    19th June 2016, 17:44

    A ban on driver coaching regarding actual driving is fair enough, but teams should be able to tell their drivers how to operate their computer.

  14. This seems like exactly the kind of thing Lewis could have prepared for in the simulator. In the simulator one could pretend to be mid-race somewhere and let it simulate some kind of weird electronics-malfunction that /can/ be adapted to on the steering wheel…

    But Lewis doesn’t like the simulator…

    1. Your scenario is ridiculous. It’s impossible to prepare for every possible malfunction. it’s not the drivers job to fix the an electronic/computer malfunction mid-race, that’s what engineers are for.

      What’s the flipping point of having a race engineer otherwise?

      1. Don’t worry, people will find any possible situation to blame Hamilton for something. Even if he knew every possible fix on the steering wheel, someone would blame him for not going to Brixworth and building the engine himself by hand.

    2. this is why they invent things like checklists and briefings before racing to go over things that the driver needs to know.

  15. Menorca Man
    19th June 2016, 18:23

    Head down in the cockpit trying numerous dial, knob and switch combinations whilst travelling at high speed isn’t conducive to safety. Could have resulted in a serious shunt. For this reason alone the pit wall should have been allowed to give Lewis some guidance.

  16. Common sense will likely prevail in a review of the current rules. The HAM case should yield an exception for disengaging covert or latent operation modes not engaged by the driver that later compromise his race.

  17. Not sure why there is not a GUI that simplifies all this Modes for drives. Luis said there are about 18 engine modes and each has an additional 20 positions. That places the total modes to 360. With a limited number of bottoms, there is no way any driver will master all of them. But with a GUI steering, a driver can easily select a mode from an icon and it can even include a top 10 modes that make it easier for the driver.

    1. Comfort, Eco and Sport drive modes !

      Just like in the cars we drive every day. ;o)

  18. This whole discussion highlights the major problem with modern F1. During the race, drivers should have only four things to care about: steering wheel, throttle, brake pedal, and gear-shift paddles!

  19. Maybe they should introduce “Cortana”.

    “OK Cortana reset engine settings!”

    1. i was thinking Jarvis. Jarvis sounds cooler too, more British, they could even use the same voice actor.

  20. FailureIsOption
    20th June 2016, 0:44

    There is a list of permitted communications in the 2016 regulations. Here are three communications that aren’t on the permitted list:

    1. “the problem appears to be with the current mode you’re in.”
    2. “it’s nothing that you’re doing wrong, just got a setting that’s incorrect”
    3. “Don’t advise that, Lewis.”

    When will Hamilton’s penalty(s) be determined?

  21. Driver must drive the car alone and unaided.

    Mercedes designed a to complex system for their star driver to manage.

    Same thing happend to Ferrari aswell with their lower placed car.

    That is simply pushing the limits of what their drivers can do, and pushing it slightly further.

    1. Can we have the pit wall boards back please! ;o)
      And why all those buttons on the steering wheel.
      If they want a change to setup or e.g. Lewis need help with a steering wheel button, well then dive into the pits and get the engineers to adjust it for you. Think we all agreed some years back that the remote controlled Red Bull RC car was not fun to watch, while knowing Horner and Newey sat in the garage (or IT team back in Milton Keynes) and remote controlled everything. A crash test dummy could have won with that… ;o)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.