Abu Dhabi Grand Prix 2012, Yas Marina - Race 18/20

PinkFloyd said:
Realistically it'll make no difference.
If he starts in the pits he'll be on the back of the HRTs by the end of the first lap anyway in all probability. That combined with no chance of tripping over people means its the right option to do even if nothing is really wrong with the car.
Click to expand...

when championship is at stake its right thing to do. especially when you expect points, have best car, drs etc

will he have to start on softs? he would from the back of the grid but not pits right?
 
PinkFloyd said:
Realistically it'll make no difference.
If he starts in the pits he'll be on the back of the HRTs by the end of the first lap anyway in all probability. That combined with no chance of tripping over people means its the right option to do even if nothing is really wrong with the car.
Click to expand...

It's a double edged sword to be honest.
Your school of thought is true...
Then again he could clear the back 6 cars by the end of the first corner as opposed to the first lap, but with the added risk of course.
 
Cavallino said:
I dont get it... why start from the pits... surely you have a better chance of making it up the field starting from the back of the pack? (Unless Horner doesnt want Vettel getting involved in any race start accidents?
Click to expand...

if you start from the pits while you can't leave the pits until the last car has passed the start/finish line it does allow you to make changes to the car that aren't allowed under Parc Fermé conditions. That includes front and rear wing changes, gearing changes and as they're starting from the pit lane already they can change gearboxes and even an engine change if they wanted to without penalty. It also gives them free tyre choice.

For the first time in a long time I'm going to watch it live, usually I end up watching it on delay so I can fast forward through the rubbish and adverts to get to martin's grid walk and the race itself.

As for Horners insistence that there's more than alitre in the car but it can't be extracted without removing bodywork etc the rules cover that too. They detail the method of extraction of the sample in detail. If a litre of fuel can't be extracted using the methods listed then the car is in breach of the regulations. It wouldn't matter if the car had full tanks, if you can't extract a litre of fuel by the methods specified then you're in breach. To the back of the grid you go.
 
MissChief said:
As for Horners insistence that there's more than alitre in the car but it can't be extracted without removing bodywork etc the rules cover that too. They detail the method of extraction of the sample in detail. If a litre of fuel can't be extracted using the methods listed then the car is in breach of the regulations. It wouldn't matter if the car had full tanks, if you can't extract a litre of fuel by the methods specified then you're in breach. To the back of the grid you go.
Click to expand...

Well its completely daft as they've had to have a litre taken at every other race before and its never been a problem, meaning that in every other race, if its true that they've got some odd system they've put in more fuel to comply with the regulations to have a litre available to extract, and they didn't manage to do that this time, so they still underfueled it compared to every other race.


The daft thing with this and Mclaren's equivalent screw up, Hamilton was on pole by miles and 2-3 laps of fuel wouldn't have made the blindest bit of difference, and here, they were easily faster than Alonso, absolutely no need to make the cut off as close as possible, wins irrelevant, he has one rival and being ahead of him would have been easy with way way more fuel than he obviously had. Ultimately in this situation if the car is far less good when stuck behind another car, and that could push them into Alonso during the race, that isn't the best circumstance but it really didn't look like that Hamilton lap was close to beatable, even if Alonso got them in the race, how many other good drivers/cars were there, how far behind would he finish. Daft to cut fuel so tight considering the punishment.


Anyway, odd's on a Red Bull car of some form(Webber or a TR), crashing or failing causing a safety car at the perfect time just after Vettel's made a pit stop? :p
 
It sickens me that Red Bull clearly went to the stewards and lied for the reasons. They then find the car didn't have enough fuel.

The punishment should be more than a back of the grid start. Vettel shouldn't get more punishment but the team should.
 
What would have happened if Vettel had 1001ml of fuel? Since the reason for stopping (lie) was accepted would they have got away with it?

Also with Mclaren did Hamilton have a litre of fuel when he stopped? I know their reason for stopping wasn't accepted.
 
dannyjo22 said:
It sickens me that Red Bull clearly went to the stewards and lied for the reasons. They then find the car didn't have enough fuel.

The punishment should be more than a back of the grid start. Vettel shouldn't get more punishment but the team should.
Click to expand...

They never play fair. ******* joke.
 
dannyjo22 said:
It sickens me that Red Bull clearly went to the stewards and lied for the reasons. They then find the car didn't have enough fuel.

The punishment should be more than a back of the grid start. Vettel shouldn't get more punishment but the team should.
Click to expand...

You're assuming they lied.

As I see it, Renault spotted a fuel pressure issue and requested the car was stopped immediately as a precaution (low fuel pressure can result in the engine running very lean which will increase combustion temperature massively potentially burning out a valve or otherwise trashing the whole engine). The car is stopped, Red Bull explain this in good faith to the FIA who accept the explanation.

Then the FIA try to take their fuel sample and cannot get enough fuel out of it.

I'd say that it's pretty plausible that a fault which causes low fuel pressure could also prevent the FIA from being able to extract enough fuel from the collector for sampling. The fault could be anything as simple as a pump not operating correctly, a leak or anything. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Red Bull have pulled the car from Parc Ferme to spend all night investigating this, they'll determine the exact cause of the fault and possibly appeal the penalty in the morning.
 
muon said:
What would have happened if Vettel had 1001ml of fuel? Since the reason for stopping (lie) was accepted would they have got away with it?

Also with Mclaren did Hamilton have a litre of fuel when he stopped? I know their reason for stopping wasn't accepted.
Click to expand...

Yes, if the car had enough fuel in it Vettel would have started 3d.

The situation was Lewis was different. At that time the rules did not say the car had to return to the pits, they just said the car must supply the sample after qualification had ended.
The team screwed up and under fuelled the car, they realised this and told Lewis to stop on track, this meant he didn't use up fuel getting back to the pits and would therefore be able to provide enough for a sample.
The FIA decided that McLaren deliberately ran the car low on fuel to gain an advantage and therefore disqualified Lewis. Subsequently they changed the rules to state the car must return to the pits under its own power. The irony was that when they checked Lewis's car it not only had enough for a sample but enough to cruise back to the pits too.

If a car genuinely breaks down during qualification and does not return to the pits it may not be disqualified if the team can prove it wasn't deliberate - lets say a tyre gets punctured on the in-lap, the team can say "we didn't want to block other cars or cause damage to our own" and thy are unlikely to be disqualified. This is what RBR did today, hence Vettel was allowed to start in 3rd until they discovered there was not enough fuel in the car.
 
Man its been a looong time since Ferrari have gotten flak for funny schenanigans... almost miss the weekly "Ferrari International Assistance" comments :)
 
Crafty said:
Yes, if the car had enough fuel in it Vettel would have started 3d.

The situation was Lewis was different. At that time the rules did not say the car had to return to the pits, they just said the car must supply the sample after qualification had ended.
The team screwed up and under fuelled the car, they realised this and told Lewis to stop on track, this meant he didn't use up fuel getting back to the pits and would therefore be able to provide enough for a sample.
The FIA decided that McLaren deliberately ran the car low on fuel to gain an advantage and therefore disqualified Lewis. Subsequently they changed the rules to state the car must return to the pits under its own power. The irony was that when they checked Lewis's car it not only had enough for a sample but enough to cruise back to the pits too.

If a car genuinely breaks down during qualification and does not return to the pits it may not be disqualified if the team can prove it wasn't deliberate - lets say a tyre gets punctured on the in-lap, the team can say "we didn't want to block other cars or cause damage to our own" and thy are unlikely to be disqualified. This is what RBR did today, hence Vettel was allowed to start in 3rd until they discovered there was not enough fuel in the car.
Click to expand...

Is that definitely true, Lewis car could have cruised around and still had enough, in which case, well, I keep saying Lewis is leaving because he can't trust Mclaren's management, case in point. Lewis blows everyone away, gets pole and his team cause him to start 24th.... for a mistake, about a mistake they didn't even make, seriously could that happen to any other team? Even in this case you see that Red Bull turned out not to have enough fuel, if they lied about the reason to try and keep third, or it was a genuine problem who knows, FIA believe them and they'd have more telemetry evidence than we do but you always get that suspicion with RBR.

The one thing I find odd is, considering Lewis's massive advantage, almost 6 tenths, why would the FIA decide they deliberately tried to gain an advantage. Williams were a surprise, RBR were having a crap quali, Ferrari haven't ever been good in quali this season and Hamilton was sooo comfortable.... how would you conclude it was deliberate and not a mistake, even more so when you find out they did infact have enough fuel? Certainly comes across as an odd interpretation , if they stole pole by 0.001seconds and underfueled, that is one thing, but getting pole when the car looked comfortable all weekend, by 6 tenths and they did infact have enough fuel.... bizarre.
 
majnu said:
yup :D

It's all good though, top teams or good drivers will always be targeted. I remember back in Schuey's "glory" days people used to say that Michelin gave Ferrari special compound tryes or at least a special batch for race day. ;)
Click to expand...

his karts had better engines as well allegedly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom