2008 Belgian GP - Race 13/18

Status
Not open for further replies.
Demon said:
And LH got (rightly) done for it!..

The conventional system would have stopped both incidents happening, the Ferrari system clearly relies on too many individuals getting their bits right, driver included. with far more failure modes then the conventional system it is flawed in comparison.

The FIA's punishment for the 2 pit lane incidents, and the fact they have left Ferrari keep the much less safe system in place is highly unorthodox, all the more so considering the swing to much harsher punishments the following race for much less serious offences, it's clear they have allowed one team to endanger pit crew and other drivers with only a token 'fine', but feel they must significantly affect the drivers title for a minor racing 'incident'. This sort of inconsistency is inexcusable.
Click to expand...

Yeah and look at Vettel and Alonso getting away scot free for almost colliding in the pit lane, and as pointed out, Alonso even crossed the pit exit line. Now was there a light system in place there??
And didn't a honda or Williams drive down the pit lane with the fuel hose attached to the car last year? And In 2004 Heidfeld dragged the fuel man along the pit in Canada.

Yeah you are right, cars exiting the pits with the fuel rig still attached never happens with the lollipop man there.
 
Domenicali explained how the team no longer uses a lollypop, but a system of lights in a pod directly in front of the driver. "The system works in the following way. When the fuel nozzle is connected to the car, you see that there is a red light on. At a certain moment, you see that there is a flashing light that is close to the red light, telling the driver that he has to be ready. Then, as soon as the nozzle comes off, the light becomes green unless the guy that is controlling the pit stop position overrides it manually, because there is a car in the fast lane coming through, so he has to delay the car. That is how the system works. We've used it since last year."

Was it too complicated, Domenicali was asked? "I don't think so, to be honest. When there is a red flight, it's a red light, it's like the lollypop is down. I don't think that we need to go towards that depth. Of course we need to make sure that the system is always working, that is something that we have to make sure, but this is another story." Domenicali explained that the light was red when Raikkonen attempted to rejoin.
Click to expand...

just some info on the ferrari system i dont see how it is any more dangerous than having a lollipop man in front of the car
the pitwall can also override the green light showing
 
JUMPURS said:
Yeah and look at Vettel and Alonso getting away scot free for almost colliding in the pit lane, and as pointed out, Alonso even crossed the pit exit line. Now was there a light system in place there??
And didn't a honda or Williams drive down the pit lane with the fuel hose attached to the car last year? And In 2004 Heidfeld dragged the fuel man along the pit in Canada.

Yeah you are right, cars exiting the pits with the fuel rig still attached never happens with the lollipop man there.
Click to expand...

I should have guessed by your demeanour you just want to argue for the hell of it, shame really, sometimes it's nice to have a useful discussion on these things, but it just makes it painful when you are in one of thees moods.. cheer up for gods sake..
 
TheStig1 said:
just some info on the ferrari system i dont see how it is any more dangerous than having a lollipop man in front of the car
the pitwall can also override the green light showing
Click to expand...

What happens when the controller/lollipop man makes a mistake and needs to stop the driver after he has said go?
With a lollipop, he can drop it back on the car and the driver knows something is wrong and should react accordingly.
With a light box, it is too late because the driver is no longer looking at the box. What do they do drop the box on him? :p
 
normally what happens when the lollipop man lifts too early then someone gets run over normally the fuelling guy as we have seen on many occasions in the past
the re-fuller can press the button to stop it going green? no different to the lollipop man lifting it to say go?
 
TheStig1 said:
just some info on the ferrari system i dont see how it is any more dangerous than having a lollipop man in front of the car
the pitwall can also override the green light showing
Click to expand...

That description must be wrong, as seems very poorly thought out, especiallyu around the manual override..

In my eyes, it decreases safety on the following fronts
1. A physical lollipop in the face is a much better indicator/reminder/signal/control of when the driver can go, instead of expecting an adrenaline fuelled driver, who is trying to anticipate the 'lights' with no physical 'barrier' in front of him, to not set off prematurely..
2. The 'override' is not automaticically on, which means by default the green light will come on when the fuelling rig is pulled out, and this is where the description given falls down, unless it is manually overridden.. that's unsafe by it's very nature, surely the pitwall should have to hit the button when it's safe to go (or keep a button pressed until it's clear to leave)
3. Having the override 'remotely' i.e. the Pitwall, what if the refuelling rig is pulled before the wheels are done up any other action not finished before the 'assumed' longest operation is completed. how does the pitwall know to 'override' if they are looking out for the pit lane to be clear?

I'm not saying the conventional system is 'safe', but having one person, stood in front of the car (or near enough) with a lollipop in the drivers face, who can make the decision when all operations are safely completed and the pit lane is clear to exit seems to put that quick thinking decision down to one person who is in prime position.


And at the end of the day, any changes to the dangerous pit operation that clearly haven't improved the safety aspect in the slightest and culminate in 2 serious incidents in one race should be questioned.

TheStig1 said:
normally what happens when the lollipop man lifts too early then someone gets run over normally the fuelling guy as we have seen on many occasions in the past the re-fuller can press the button to stop it going green? no different to the lollipop man lifting it to say go?
Click to expand...
Turning that around, I'd say that through the incidents, the driver is just as eager to drive off with fuel rig attached through anticipating the lights and having nothing physical in his face to remind him not to move.. I think possibly we could agree that the Ferrari system is by empirical evidence at best just as unsafe as the lollipop, and under other scenarios, possibly even worse?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ok it must be wrong, the ferrari team boss does not know come on seriously

ferrari has been using it since last year they have had 1 problem with it when kimi went too early i dont see any reason to think its a problem even michael schumacher ran over people in the pitlane by jumping the lollipop not sure where you get 2 incidents from the vettel and alonso incident was much worse with lollipops being in charge of release they were mighty close to wiping out the whole ferrari pitcrew but sweep it under the carpet
 
Demon said:
That description must be wrong, as seems very poorly thought out, especiallyu around the manual override..

In my eyes, it decreases safety on the following fronts
1. A physical lollipop in the face is a much better indicator/reminder/signal/control of when the driver can go, instead of expecting an adrenaline fuelled driver, who is trying to anticipate the 'lights' with no physical 'barrier' in front of him, to not set off prematurely..
2. The 'override' is not automaticically on, which means by default the green light will come on when the fuelling rig is pulled out, and this is where the description given falls down, unless it is manually overridden.. that's unsafe by it's very nature, surely the pitwall should have to hit the button when it's safe to go (or keep a button pressed until it's clear to leave)
3. Having the override 'remotely' i.e. the Pitwall, what if the refuelling rig is pulled before the wheels are done up any other action not finished before the 'assumed' longest operation is completed. how does the pitwall know to 'override' if they are looking out for the pit lane to be clear?

I'm not saying the conventional system is 'safe', but having one person, stood in front of the car (or near enough) with a lollipop in the drivers face, who can make the decision when all operations are safely completed and the pit lane is clear to exit seems to put that quick thinking decision down to one person who is in prime position.


And at the end of the day, any changes to the dangerous pit operation that clearly haven't improved the safety aspect in the slightest and culminate in 2 serious incidents in one race should be questioned.

Turning that around, I'd say that through the incidents, the driver is just as eager to drive off with fuel rig attached through anticipating the lights and having nothing physical in his face to remind him not to move.. I think possibly we could agree that the Ferrari system is by empirical evidence at best just as unsafe as the lollipop, and under other scenarios, possibly even worse?
Click to expand...

That was definately what I was trying to say.

I have always thought there is just too many people in the pit lane for it not to be considered unsafe. The Americans have it better thought out, with a pit lane which is twice as wide, and only 6 men are allowed to be at the car at any one time.
 
pit stops are dangerous that is true
so ferrari reducing the number of people round the car is a good thing but in reality it makes little difference if the driver ignores a light or a lollipop then someone normally gets hurt
 
Demon said:
I should have guessed by your demeanour you just want to argue for the hell of it, shame really, sometimes it's nice to have a useful discussion on these things, but it just makes it painful when you are in one of thees moods.. cheer up for gods sake..
Click to expand...

I am perfectly happy, but yo are going on about Ferrari gettg away scott free, when they actually got fined and the incident had happened earlier in the season when drivers and teams got no fine and no penalty.

And it was said that the 2 ferrari incidents wouldn't have happened if there was a lollipop there, well, yes they would have, and they did. It;s not like these incidents where foreign to F1 before Ferrari started using the light box.
 
NathanE said:
Exactly. The FIA have just made the situation much worse for themselves by "clarifying" this rule. If it wasn't in the rule book in the first place then it shouldn't be punishable this season. Next season maybe...
Click to expand...

I dont know about next season. New grey areas arise and should be clarified immediately as you cannot say they wont occur again at the next race. But I entirely agree, punishment for abiding by the rules is not right. You cannot abide by rules that are not yet set and this is what gets me with Hamilton's punishment. Alas, maybe they are so confident in Hamilton's Messiah status that he should be able to foresee new rule changes in one of his divine visions..?
 
Mosley hits back at claims of FIA bias

By Biranit Goren Friday, September 12th 2008, 18:55 GMT

FIA president Max Mosley has hit back at suggestions the FIA is biased against McLaren and in favour of Ferrari, insisting the governing body is 'utterly neutral'.

The FIA came under fire this week after championship leader Lewis Hamilton was striped of his Belgian Grand Prix victory for cutting the chicane while overtaking Ferrari's Kimi Raikkonen in the closing laps of the race.

The McLaren driver was awarded by the race stewards a 25-second penalty, which demoted him to third place. The penalty was heavily criticised by many fans and pundits, with the FIA again being accused of bias against the Woking team and their driver.

"Any suggestion there is a bias for or against any team or driver is completely untrue, absolutely not," Mosley told Reuters today at Monza.

"I think it's a reflection, and I'm sorry to say this, of the stupidity of the people who say it because they haven't really thought the thing through and put themselves in the position of the people who have to take these very difficult decisions."
Click to expand...

tend to agree with max :p
 
gord said:
I dont know about next season. New grey areas arise and should be clarified immediately as you cannot say they wont occur again at the next race. But I entirely agree, punishment for abiding by the rules is not right. You cannot abide by rules that are not yet set and this is what gets me with Hamilton's punishment. Alas, maybe they are so confident in Hamilton's Messiah status that he should be able to foresee new rule changes in one of his divine visions..?
Click to expand...

Well 19 other F1 drivers thought he was in the wrong, maybe the Messiah can't quite grasp the rules, so they need to have extra inclusions for him.

*shrug**
 
JUMPURS said:
Many actually think the punishment was a bit harsh, but he did commit the crime.

TBH i don't think anyone out of the top 4 (and Heidfeld) would give a flying **** about how many points the rest got.
Click to expand...

Very true.

Cant believe this thread is still rattling on, got back from monza tonight expecting this to be on page 15 and the monza thread 20 pages long!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom