The FIA has revealed tougher rules intended to prevent drivers abusing track limits during the 2016 season.
The revised regulations for 2016 states drivers “must make every reasonable effort” to stay within track limits and must have a “justifiable reason” if they do leave the track.
Drivers gaining an advantage by leaving the track has become a frequent problem for stewards due to the increasingly widespread use of asphalt run-offs. The high-speed punctures experienced by two drivers during the Belgian Grand Prix weekend was blamed on track limits abuse by circuit representatives.
During Sunday’s Russian Grand Prix Fernando Alonso was given a five-second time penalty for cutting the track at turn 16.
2015 track limits rule
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 re-join, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the race director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track.
A driver may not deliberately leave the track without justifiable reason.
Sporting Regulations article 20.2
2016 track limits rule
During practice and the race, drivers may use only the track and must at all times observe the provisions of the Code relating to driving behaviour on circuits.
Drivers must make every reasonable effort to use the track at all times and may not deliberately leave the track without a justifiable reason.
Drivers will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with it and, for the avoidance of doubt, any white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
Should a car leave the track the driver may re-join, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the race director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track.
Sporting Regulations article 27.3 and 27.4
2016 F1 season
- Which was F1’s best down-to-the-wire title fight?
- Are tickets too dear? Crowds fell at some tracks in 2016
- F1’s TV audience decline stopped in 2016
- Brawn among key F1 hires announced by Liberty
- Has F1 hit ‘peak penalties’? Fewer sanctions in 2016
PorscheF1 (@xtwl)
14th October 2015, 10:09
Loophole right away – you can do what you want in Q?
If I brought these kind of sentences as tutor goals I wouldn’t receive much marks…
RL
14th October 2015, 10:13
The stewards in some races have been stricter in qualifying than in the race, e.g. deleting qualifying times in Silverstone.
FlyingLobster27
14th October 2015, 10:23
I believe qualifying is rated as practice – a limited time session in which the fastest laps are recorded.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
14th October 2015, 15:49
Exactly – it’s properly referred to as ‘qualifying practice’. Other practice sessions used to be referred to as ‘un-timed practice’.
Alex Ward
14th October 2015, 10:24
Qualy is a practice session.
andae23 (@andae23)
14th October 2015, 10:16
It’s good that the FIA recognises this is a problem, but as usual the solution is over-complicating it. There’s a trend developing: something used to be one way back in the good old days, it’s not the same anymore, so let’s make up some rules to get back to the good old days. Examples: sparks, engine noise, slipstreaming (DRS), good-looking cars with low noses… and now track limits: back in the day a driver would receive a natural punishment for leaving the track -> this is not the case anymore -> the FIA invents a rule to make the situation similar to the good old days.
The main problem with ‘natural punishment’ is the safety standards imposed by FIA, FIM etc. Most F1 circuits are certified by both organisations, so they need to fulfil both safety requirements. If we truly want to have natural punishments and keep the track ‘safe’ for both 4-wheelers and 2-wheelers, FIA and FIM need to work together to come up with a good run-off area type. I’ve suggested before that the kerb stones could serve as FIM’s main run-off area, while whatever’s beyond the kerb stones (grass for instance) is the run-off area for the FIA.
But yeah, that’s not going to happen, is it?
xivizmath (@xivizmath)
14th October 2015, 10:29
COTD material right here. Tracks and the way they are build are often overlooked when judging the current state of F1. Fans and drivers should be listened to, but their voice is being neglected – see changes to Parabolica and the discussion sorrounding it.
dragoll (@dragoll)
14th October 2015, 11:32
@andae23 The only problem is, the FIA will look down at FIM and will mandate everything and expect FIM to make concessions without making any meaningful ones in return. While in essence, you are right, it needs to be looked from an overall perspective, I just don’t see it happening.
On the flipside however, this concept of natural punishment can have a modern twist, and perhaps a forced 5sec slowed pace, where the driver presses a button on the steering wheel to engage a speed limiter when safe to do so, and it slows him for 5sec’s upon being automatically judged going over the line by a “hawkeye” type system. This way, driver gets punished, not as much as a drive through, and yet, is safe, even on tracks like Monaco where the driver can select where they can take the penalty. If it occurs on the final lap, add 5 seconds to their finishing time.
Revenger210
14th October 2015, 22:43
No offense, but this really reminds me of the penalty system employed in online races in Gran Turismo 5 and 6; it works for them because they’re games, but the cars also ghost, so faster cars won’t have issues overtaking them; slowing down the cars like that irl could have much serious consequences, as well as being one of the most gimmicky artificial ways of adding drama to the sport :/
ColdFly F1 (@)
14th October 2015, 10:21
IMHO I’m not sure how adding ‘every reasonable effort’ makes this rule any stronger.
Pure legally it makes it even weaker, as it is difficult to prove a driver made a ‘reasonable effort’ – ‘I tried sir, but the car wouldn’t turn!‘
PorscheF1 (@xtwl)
14th October 2015, 11:04
@coldfly Have you seen the GT3 drivers at Paul Ricard, I’m sure they were also trying…
Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
15th October 2015, 19:27
I agree.
They also have this:
As I read it, that says you can have three wheels outside the track limits and one touching the white line and you’re okay.
BenH (@benh)
14th October 2015, 10:46
Qualifying is deemed a practice session as per the rulebook
BenH (@benh)
14th October 2015, 10:47
Can someone delete my comment? Was meant as a reply for the top post, but got shunted to the bottom and now someone else has made the same point. Thanks
ColdFly F1 (@)
14th October 2015, 12:35
@benh you can try deleting it yourself – click on your own name, and then click next to the comment you want to delete.
Not sure if this functionality works though; tried it to no avail before.
PS – the ‘other person’ also replied earlier. But maybe you didn’t update the page, and missed that.
BenH (@benh)
14th October 2015, 16:04
Yeah I normally open up a myriad of tabs to read and then read through them when I get chance, so they probably posted in that time.
Tried that delete button as well, as you suggested, but it didn’t work for me either :(
ColdFly F1 (@)
14th October 2015, 20:34
@keithcollantine, what does the and buttons do in the User-Activity-Personal menu?
hahostolze
14th October 2015, 10:51
Even more difficult season for Alonso expected…
StuBeck
14th October 2015, 11:13
I will have absolutely no faith that the rule will do anything until the FIA starts penalizing drivers based on the already clear rules that exist. Why do they need to constantly change the rule about track limits when the rule they used in 2012 to penalize drivers for a few races did exactly the same thing? Whiting keeps on talking about track limits, then immediately forgets about it. At some point, a replacement who has a longer memory needs to be brought in. If the rule was consistently penalized, whether an advantage was gained or not, drivers would stop doing it.
As well, FOM should give every track a $250k loan to put 2 meter wide of astro turf on the outside of all white lines. This will stop it as well if there is an immediate lose of performance. Ironically, Russia has the best implementation of this.
skylien (@skylien)
14th October 2015, 11:23
I don’t see any change at all that would have any practical effect. On the other hand I don’t see how they could word it better. In the end it will always be a matter of judgement by the stewards and you cannot write down how to judge what since every case is different. So the only thing you can actually criticize is the actual rigor with which stewards punish drivers. What you also can’t do is criticize drivers for using every inch on and off track to be faster that doesn’t get them a penalty.
Leo B
14th October 2015, 11:59
I see little difference also. But isn’t the solution by strictly defining what ‘gaining an advantage’ means. I can, for instance, imagine that a driver that goes off track and does not come completely off-throttle before rejoining, has gained an advantage. Give the stewards real-time telemetry and and every cut corner can be punished right away.
skylien (@skylien)
14th October 2015, 12:43
Leo B,
They call it especially “lasting advantage”. So in race they actually don’t want to deal with very small time gains, especially since you can’t know how big the actual difference really is, how would you? You have no counterfactual. In qually it should be easier, just delete any time that involves one occasion of exceeding track limits, at least at the corners people obviously do it intentionally.
Regarding real-time: Since we often see in TV the telemetry as live graphic in th on board camera I would guess they already have that.
Neil (@neilosjames)
14th October 2015, 13:22
I’d like it to make a difference, but… if we get to this stage next season and I’m not sat here, quietly grumbling to myself about exactly the same sort of track limits stuff I currently grumble about, I’ll eat every single hat I own.
qq
14th October 2015, 13:25
bring back those gravel
graigchq (@graigchq)
14th October 2015, 13:28
After the Ascari chicane in Monza, the run off area there has been consistently used by drivers over the years to allow them to get on full throttle quicker. Why oh why oh why don’t they just paint the white lines a bit wider, and then actually penalise drivers when they cross what is deemed acceptable?
In computer games, for exaple Race07 which I compete in regularly, you get a penalty when you cross the lines after two warnings. My lowly PC can handle policing this, so you’d think the might of the FIA, plus a multitude of trackside stewards and live telemetry, that crossing the line should not happen. Why write the contrived rules with get-out clauses like “reasonable efforts” and “lasting advantage” when it’s simple, race track has edge, drivers stay within, cross the line, receive penalty.
BasCB (@bascb)
14th October 2015, 14:22
Hm, this seems to me a new rule that doesn’t really change anything. Only if it were punisheable by default (taking away a lap with more than one instance, or a penalty for doing it more than 3 times in a race for example), with allowance for the team to prove the driver had no choice and leaving room for the stewards to waive a penalty if it would creat an unreasonable situaton (if say a driver is pushed off track, or has to avoid something on track etc.)
Unicron (@unicron2002)
14th October 2015, 15:59
What if… kerbs on the exit of corners were completely eradicated? So we just have track- white line – astroturf/grass – tarmac/gravel. As soon as the cars get on the grass or astroturf beyond the white line it breaks traction and the driver gets a poor exit from the corner. Surely this would then be a no-brainer incentive for the drivers to keep within the white lines?
DB-C90 (@dbradock)
15th October 2015, 11:50
They took away gravel because of safety concerns, but gravel traps were the penalty that kept drivers on the track.
Would there be a safety issue if a sensor line was placed on the White line that flipped on the car’s pit lane limiter if it crossed it? Make the penalty “automatic” (sudden loss of power) and severe like that and drivers will very quickly adjust to stay on the track.
No need for silly rules that aren’t enforced – just a straight out penalty. But only if that doesn’t compromise safety.
Stephen Crowsen (@drycrust)
15th October 2015, 19:43
I agree, there is a range of technical options available that could be implemented. I think part of the problem is cars can be pushed off the track or may need to go off the track to avoid having a collision, and this can get confused with drivers wanting to go off track to gain an advantage.