Teams preventing SC rule change

http://www.homeofsport.com/f1/news/item.aspx?id=22110

Quote:

---

That is the suspicion of Australian driver and GPDA director Mark Webber, who said he has heard that a few teams are preventing the required unanimity for a rule change to be put in place.

"But there needs to be unanimity and I have heard that some teams want to keep the current rules.

---

mclaren ?
ferrari ?
teams with no members in gpda

It can be pushed through under the "safety" banner

...............only if Max feels up to it.

Can anyone think of a reason why some teams would want to keep the current rule?
Possibly if you're a mid-field or back-marking team, you might luck into a podium or some points when a front-runner has to refuel under the safety car. But that seems a stretch.

I think some backmarkers (like Force India) might prefer the current SC rule. From their perspective such attitude is logical - if SC appears, they have a bigger chance of getting a good result with front runners getting a penalty or facing a drop to the back of the field. So yeah - I think the most uncompetitive teams might be blocking the change.

It´s possible... but these SC rules aren´t the "best of the world"...

The current SC rules are Good(TM)! in that they eliminate the previous problem we experienced with driviers rushing to pits when SC came out.

I also think they make SC less unfair. Before the you could lose or gain 10+ places if you happend to be at the right place (close to pits) when the SC was deployed. Now, whilst at least drivers keep their positions.

How about teams don't run on fumes? And always pit with one more lap worth of fuel in the car?

Problem solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

The current SC rules are Good(TM)! in that they eliminate the previous problem we experienced with driviers rushing to pits when SC came out.

I also think they make SC less unfair. Before the you could lose or gain 10+ places if you happend to be at the right place (close to pits) when the SC was deployed. Now, whilst at least drivers keep their positions.

How about teams don't run on fumes? And always pit with one more lap worth of fuel in the car?

Problem solved.

---

What? :s The only "real loss" I can remember, was Montoya in Canada in 2005. Besides that there have been no problems - everyone, who wanted, managed to pit and get a fair position, what he would realistically have had without SC session. At the moment it is unfair. Why should those, who have pitted just before SC, be the winners?

And that "rushing" into the pits wasn't actually a problem as there basically weren't any incidents with this. FIA simply visualizes the "problems".

And about your last sentences. Well, there actually isn't too much difference whether to pit and get a stop & go or pit one lap later and drop to the back of the field anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

...............only if Max feels up to it.

---

Not now, he's got a headache...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jens

At the moment it is unfair. Why should those, who have pitted just before SC, be the winners?

---

Exactly. Those who pit early are also those who qualified with less fuel on board, and thus are slower and less deserving than those who qualified with more fuel and didn't stop before the SC was deployed.

If we can have a pit lane speed limiter button, can't there be a SC speed limiter that is automatically activated when SC is deployed?

No one loses or gains then, do they?

Oh dear, am I dreaming of a perfect world again..... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

If we can have a pit lane speed limiter button, can't there be a SC speed limiter that is automatically activated when SC is deployed?

No one loses or gains then, do they?

Oh dear, am I dreaming of a perfect world again..... ;)

---

Now with a common ECU, there's no reason why it couldn't be done, especially as it's also done at most reputable Go-kart tracks(on the hire karts).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

If we can have a pit lane speed limiter button, can't there be a SC speed limiter that is automatically activated when SC is deployed?

No one loses or gains then, do they?

Oh dear, am I dreaming of a perfect world again..... ;)

---

It is unsafe to remotely stop a car, which might be travelling at 250 mph to 50 without the driver knowing it. He can very easily go off, and be a danger to himself and the rest of the field. He might be in the middle of a tight corner going fast not knowing about the incident and if you just put a brake on him, you might as well order his decapitation.

You can't notify drivers that such a button will be activated in say 5 seconds through radio, because radio fails. In fact I believe there has not been a single race where at least someone's radio hasn't failed.

There is no universal safe speed. Think of Indianapolis 2004 where ralf had his crash. The appropriate speed at that particular section of the track was about 20 mph, and that was the speed the safety car was travelling at. At other times, the appropriate speed might be higher, as it mostly is. You need human observer, and experienced driver to lead the pack to set the pace, knowing what the safe pace is.

SC can easily coordinate and communicate with emergency services if they are being deployed in a specific part of the track, and will let fire extinguishers and/or ambulance pass. Drivers in your hypothetical situation will simply drive at the maximum controlled speed, with total disregard for such requirements.

I think you guys should read the word "safety car" a couple of times more, to perhaps see the safety aspect of it a bit more clearly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

It is unsafe to remotely stop a car, which might be travelling at 250 mph to 50 without the driver knowing it. He can very easily go off, and be a danger to himself and the rest of the field. He might be in the middle of a tight corner going fast not knowing about the incident and if you just put a brake on him, you might as well order his decapitation.

You can't notify drivers that such a button will be activated in say 5 seconds through radio, because radio fails. In fact I believe there has not been a single race where at least someone's radio hasn't failed.

There is no universal safe speed. Think of Indianapolis 2004 where ralf had his crash. The appropriate speed at that particular section of the track was about 20 mph, and that was the speed the safety car was travelling at. At other times, the appropriate speed might be higher, as it mostly is. You need human observer, and experienced driver to lead the pack to set the pace, knowing what the safe pace is.

SC can easily coordinate and communicate with emergency services if they are being deployed in a specific part of the track, and will let fire extinguishers and/or ambulance pass. Drivers in your hypothetical situation will simply drive at the maximum controlled speed, with total disregard for such requirements.

I think you guys should read the word "safety car" a couple of times more, to perhaps see the safety aspect of it a bit more clearly.

---

I take your points on board, and you make a bundle of sense......

....but.

The limiter does not need to physically stop a car, but prevent further acceleration. Surely, with GPS, you can program this limiter not to function in corners for the first 20 seconds of its deployment.

If drivers drove at a safe speed up until the safety car is reached, there would be no need for the silly rules we currently have.

But they don't, so we have these silly rules...... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

It is unsafe to remotely stop a car, which might be travelling at 250 mph to 50 without the driver knowing it. He can very easily go off, and be a danger to himself and the rest of the field. He might be in the middle of a tight corner going fast not knowing about the incident and if you just put a brake on him, you might as well order his decapitation.

You can't notify drivers that such a button will be activated in say 5 seconds through radio, because radio fails. In fact I believe there has not been a single race where at least someone's radio hasn't failed.

There is no universal safe speed. Think of Indianapolis 2004 where ralf had his crash. The appropriate speed at that particular section of the track was about 20 mph, and that was the speed the safety car was travelling at. At other times, the appropriate speed might be higher, as it mostly is. You need human observer, and experienced driver to lead the pack to set the pace, knowing what the safe pace is.

SC can easily coordinate and communicate with emergency services if they are being deployed in a specific part of the track, and will let fire extinguishers and/or ambulance pass. Drivers in your hypothetical situation will simply drive at the maximum controlled speed, with total disregard for such requirements.

I think you guys should read the word "safety car" a couple of times more, to perhaps see the safety aspect of it a bit more clearly.

---

:up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

The limiter does not need to physically stop a car, but prevent further acceleration. Surely, with GPS, you can program this limiter not to function in corners for the first 20 seconds of its deployment.

---

I would really hate for a drivers race to be ruined if the "FIA" controlled speed limiter malfunctions, and doesn't shut off at the end of the safety car period or and while I can't think of a scenario at the moment, would really such if a driver may be caught up in an accident he may have been able to avoid if he could have accelerated out of the way of something...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

If drivers drove at a safe speed up until the safety car is reached, there would be no need for the silly rules we currently have.

---

I'm not completely convinced that drivers driving to fast during the safety car period is the only reason for the current rules. We seen how the FIA takes to "johnny on the spot" benefits when non contending teams find themselves way ahead of where they should be... yah, a Force India car is lapping way quicker then everyone else on the wrong tires... lets bunch everyone up!!!

I still think the simplest solution to the current safety car issues is an FIA regulated reserve fuel tank. not stupid forced slow down buttons...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

It is unsafe to remotely stop a car, which might be travelling at 250 mph to 50 without the driver knowing it. .

---

Where there's a will, there's a way in this day of modern technology. Large banks of coloured lights can be deployed around a track, so that if the yellow goes on, it means yellow in the area where the light is deployed. Red means stop asap (within reason), but with current F1 cars, this can be effected quickly by the drivers themselves.

When Rosberg crashed, the broken car and wreckage just about blocked the track, and cars filtered through very, very slowly. I believe that the race could have been red flagged there and then, with red flags going back to the previous corner, and yellow flags going back around the rest of the track. Now if these flags were replaced by large banks of lights, there would have been no difficulty in stopping all cars before they reached Rosberg's wrecked car. I say this because Rosberg blocked much of the track and the immediate implementation of such red banks of lights could have prevented someone coming through and T-boning Rosberg.

This would also have prevented cars from running over the carbon fibre debris and puncturing tyres; as it turned out, Hamilton did suffer a puncture just after he crossed the finish line.

I understand such lights will be installed for the night race in Singapore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

SC can easily coordinate and communicate with emergency services if they are being deployed in a specific part of the track, and will let fire extinguishers and/or ambulance pass. Drivers in your hypothetical situation will simply drive at the maximum controlled speed, with total disregard for such requirements.

---

I do not agree with this at all - this is the job of the marshals at the scene who can do all this long before the SC is even deployed. Communication should be via race control, surely. The SC car is there merely to control the speed of the following cars and provide the TV viewers with something to look at. It is my understanding that the SC is recalled into the pits by the the Chief Steward after reports from on site marshals - I don't think the driver of the SC makes that decision. If it is really pissing down, I don't think the driver of the SC can see that much to make any decision regarding any other vehicles like ambulances or fire engines on the track.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

If drivers drove at a safe speed up until the safety car is reached, there would be no need for the silly rules we currently have.

---

The current rules actually encourage fast driving under the safety car - when lapped cars are allowed to pass, they then rush to make up an entire lap. I think one driver actually did his fastest lap of the race up to that point under the safety car on Sunday, I can't remember who though.

the rules are fine, just change the pit fueling option around, whereas the FIA receive the intended first fuel/pit stop window (+/- one lap)from each time prior to the start of the race ( or right when it starts) and then submit to the FIA/stewards, the next expected fuel/pit window (+/- one lap) after each stop. (this includesif they came in foor damage repair or whatever and change thier strategy etc. The information has to be recieved no later than one lap after the pit stop.

In this way, there are no surprises when a driver comes in ounder the SC rule, the pits remain open and nobody benefits from some unexpected change during the SC period.

simple enough.

Haven't figured out the penalties for late confirmation,
but a deviation from the pit strategy incurs a 10 sec penality which the teams serve by holding the cars for 10 seconds before any work/refuling/tyrechange can begin on the cars. there will be a steward at each pit to monitor (similar to Nascar and IRL)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyL

The current rules actually encourage fast driving under the safety car - when lapped cars are allowed to pass, they then rush to make up an entire lap. I think one driver actually did his fastest lap of the race up to that point under the safety car on Sunday, I can't remember who though.

---

The idea behind allowing lapped cars to pass, and specifically when they are allowed to do so, is once the accident is cleared, and the SC is preparing to come in.

At this stage, it is fair to assume the drivers know where the problem is/was, and will not be travelling at full tilt....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

there will be a steward at each pit to monitor (similar to Nascar and IRL)

---

No need for that, we have television around here! :p :
And the other teams will certainly report anything that isn't going by the rules! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truefan72

the rules are fine, just change the pit fueling option around, whereas the FIA receive the intended first fuel/pit stop window (+/- one lap)from each time prior to the start of the race ( or right when it starts) and then submit to the FIA/stewards, the next expected fuel/pit window (+/- one lap) after each stop.

---

Very bad idea. It would completely make pitstops inflexible.

Right now, team have the ability to pit earlier depending on race conditions. It is for example very common for leaders to pit earlier when they are faced with a string of backmarkers to lap.

I say the rules are fine, though the more I think of that reserved fuel tank, the more I like the idea. It's gonna be a b!tch to regulate though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

I say the rules are fine, though the more I think of that reserved fuel tank, the more I like the idea. It's gonna be a b!tch to regulate though.

---

I wonder what bunsen would think of that :p :

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

I wonder what bunsen would think of that :p :

---

Good one! :laugh: :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

Very bad idea. It would completely make pitstops inflexible.

Right now, team have the ability to pit earlier depending on race conditions. It is for example very common for leaders to pit earlier when they are faced with a string of backmarkers to lap.

I say the rules are fine, though the more I think of that reserved fuel tank, the more I like the idea. It's gonna be a b!tch to regulate though.

---

if they pit before the safty car they will not need to pit under the safty car.
this would only be if thay needed to pit under the safty car.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyL

The current rules actually encourage fast driving under the safety car - when lapped cars are allowed to pass, they then rush to make up an entire lap. I think one driver actually did his fastest lap of the race up to that point under the safety car on Sunday, I can't remember who though.

---

My point exactly in some prior threads---the "safety aspect" only comes into play once everyone is lined up directly behind the car. Until then it is crazy and Wilko has a very valid point.

Indeed, the SC really does not make a lot of sense, except for the really really slow response of the FIA medical car stuff, as when Ralf sat in his smashed car ar Indy, whereas if it had been a champ or IRL race, Ralf would have been out and back to hospital, long before the old now retired doctor would have arrived.....but so what. This is F1!!!!We are already too good

I don't see any problem with the pit lane limiter kicking in during a SC incident but it's not very spectacular ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

I don't see any problem with the pit lane limiter kicking in during a SC incident but it's not very spectacular ;)

---

If it happens when the cars are negotiating a turn like Eau Rouge or R130 than it get mighty spectacular, and I don't se any of them managing to keep the car on the black stuff if that happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

If it happens when the cars are negotiating a turn like Eau Rouge or R130 than it get mighty spectacular, and I don't se any of them managing to keep the car on the black stuff if that happens.

---

Agreed, but I've said before, enhance the system with GPS, so it won't kick in mid corner at racing speed.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

If it happens when the cars are negotiating a turn like Eau Rouge or R130 than it get mighty spectacular, and I don't se any of them managing to keep the car on the black stuff if that happens.

---

I wasn't planning on just kicking them in :laugh:

You can have a 5 or 10 second warning period with a flashing light on the dash and an audible alarm on the helmet warning the drivers.

Having the limiter engaged while on track might make it a little hard to keep those tires warm enough for a restart .
50mph might not be fast enough , and it might end in the cars getting strung out , having slowed enough below the limiter speed to get some wheelspin , and brake warming .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Having the limiter engaged while on track might make it a little hard to keep those tires warm enough for a restart .
50mph might not be fast enough , and it might end in the cars getting strung out , having slowed enough below the limiter speed to get some wheelspin , and brake warming .

---

Think the old grey matter has lost it's temperature Baggy.....

The whole point behind the limiter thing is to take away the ability of the drivers to peg it back to the pits, right?

So, once the danger is clear, the limiter can be removed, and the cars follow the SC as now, warming up their tyres and brakes as normal.

Is that too much logic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Having the limiter engaged while on track might make it a little hard to keep those tires warm enough for a restart .
50mph might not be fast enough , and it might end in the cars getting strung out , having slowed enough below the limiter speed to get some wheelspin , and brake warming .

---

As SGW says or failing that, keep them in formation until ready to restart and let them go.

After all, aren't we talking about banning tyre warmers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Think the old grey matter has lost it's temperature Baggy.....

The whole point behind the limiter thing is to take away the ability of the drivers to peg it back to the pits, right?

So, once the danger is clear, the limiter can be removed, and the cars follow the SC as now, warming up their tyres and brakes as normal.

Is that too much logic?

---

Well , ok , if you want to tweak the idea in that direction , it'll be ok , then .
That changes it from a "grey matter" to a little more black and white , Stu .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Well , ok , if you want to tweak the idea in that direction , it'll be ok , then .
That changes it from a "grey matter" to a little more black and white , Stu .

---

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knock-on

As SGW says or failing that, keep them in formation until ready to restart and let them go.

After all, aren't we talking about banning tyre warmers?

---

Also a good point , Mr. On .

My first comment was a bit too much on the devil's advocate side .

I'd actually like to see then held back by a mid-seventies Cortina , as safety car , going speeds we go on the road .
The majority of crashes could be cleaned up in one lap under the safety Cortina .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Also a good point , Mr. On .

My first comment was a bit too much on the devil's advocate side .

I'd actually like to see then held back by a mid-seventies Cortina , as safety car , going speeds we go on the road .
The majority of crashes could be cleaned up in one lap under the safety Cortina .

---

Lets settle for the Lotus Cortina, bring back a famous Marque to the F1 world?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Lets settle for the Lotus Cortina, bring back a famous Marque to the F1 world?

---

Ford not a famous enough marque for ya ?

Besides , the Lotus would be too fast , wouldn't it ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Lets settle for the Lotus Cortina, bring back a famous Marque to the F1 world?

---

I would only like that idea if Gerry Marshall was still with us. That might have "sped" up the process a little bit more. Plus could have been the most exciting safety car to watch ever. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Ford not a famous enough marque for ya ?

Besides , the Lotus would be too fast , wouldn't it ?

---

Yes, but not really a constructor in their own right for more than five minutes, were they? Well, they sort of were, but only because of, oh, what do you call that chap that run the team with Ford money in 1997?

Made not bad engines though, the Double Four Valve might have won the odd race here and there if I recall.... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aryan

I say the rules are fine, though the more I think of that reserved fuel tank, the more I like the idea. It's gonna be a b!tch to regulate though.

---

I don't think the reserve tank would be that hard to regulate. As I suggested in previous threads, a pigment could be added to the fuel so the the FIA could determine if the reserve fuel was used, along with a program in the ECU that could log when the reserve tank is used. (The coloured fuel would ensure that teams can't by-pass the ecu and run the reserve tank empty and only refill it during the final pit-stop aka running lighter then everyone else... ) The ECU can log weight of the reserve tank as well as when its activated and refilled...