British Grand Prix 2011, Silverstone Circuit - Race 9/19

utajoker said:
If it was quicker to go thru the pit lane because it skipped 2 corners and was quicker why didn't people just drive through them every lap? There's no rule to say u can't is there?
Click to expand...

only the inlap is quicker you still lose 6 seconds for doing it

whilst there are times when it may be necessary to apply some kind of penalty, the Schumacher incident was certainly not one of those, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

i find it pretty retarded , we have bene told all season long DRS is dangerous in the wet and thats why its disabled... they enable drs on a wet track whilst everyone is running on intermediates and an accident happens because of it and the guy gets punished....

seems like the FIA should take some of the blame and not solely dump it on MSC any penalties given should have been straight +10seconds onto your time schumacher lost a full 24 seconds on the stop/go penalty seems harsh for what was basicly an accident that wouldnt have happened if the DRS wasnt enabled in the wet like they have been telling us all year it wont be.
 
Last edited:
Skeeter said:
Yeah, the FIA picked up on this. With the finish line at the start of the straight, going through the pits was a much shorter route to the finish on the last lap than going around Club.

Again, it could have been much better communicated by the FIA. They could have stated before the race that due to the length of the pitlane a drive through would be upped to a stop go.

And as for the penalties, come on guys, why are we always surprised at the FIAs inconsistency? It happens every race, we should just get used to it. You win some, you loose some, or you just get a Platinum Card like Lewis (I proper lol'ed when he said that in his interview!).
Click to expand...

Charlie Whiting put out a statement about the stop/go penalty-pitlane-too-short during FP1.

I saw it on the live BBC text feed :)
 
And if he had more fuel, he would be carrying more weight and he wouldn't of been the fastes. They simplupy messed up, they didn't have any dry testing time to figure out fuel weight and with the OTBD ban, they had very little idea what actual fuel usage would be.

Filling as light as possible is part of the sport, occasionally it goes wrong.
 
I'm looking for the sponsor that was on the side of one of the McLarens, just behind the cockpit, not the Hugo Boss one, I'm sure it was spa's etc, anyone got any pictures?
 
JRS said:
What I want to know is where is all the outrage? People are disappointed, slightly surprised, they feel sorry for Webber, but that's about it. When Ferrari did it at Austria in '02, there were calls for pretty much every punishment short of sticking them in front of the firing squad....
Click to expand...

Short answer - Ferrari

Long answer - In the wake of the ****storm last year, people have become more aware/sympathetic of the decisions a team manager has to make. Horner sounded worried that Webber and Vettel could not race each other without contact. In that situation, he's going to interfere to guarantee the maximum number of points in both championships. Vettel doesn't need the extra points at the moment, but every little helps!

Also (YMMV, but I'd guess most people would think this way) it isn't a direct comparison. Austria '02 & Germany '10 were both position swaps for victories. This was a hold station order for 2nd - it's more palatable to be denied racing than it is to see the result of previous racing reversed. IIRC the FIA said something along these lines before they rescinded the team orders "ban".
 
utajoker said:
If it was quicker to go thru the pit lane because it skipped 2 corners and was quicker why didn't people just drive through them every lap? There's no rule to say u can't is there?
Click to expand...

I am surprised that this was not the case with Di Resta's screwed up pit stop. He said he got the call to stay out when he was already into the pits so it was too late. Why not just sail straight through then pit-in properly next lap? Force India would have had the perfect excuse if it went to the stewards.

The whole stop-go instead of a drive through could have been avoided by cutting the pit lane speed limit too which would negate any advantage that taking the pits rather than the track gave a driver.
 
They are completely unrelated.

Austria '02 was a swap of position. It was unpopular, and the rules were changed.
Germany '10 was a swap for position AND team orders were against the rules. Ferrari broke the rules.
Silverstone '11 was a hold position, and team orders are no longer against the rules. There was no swap, there was no rule broken, there was simply a team boss preventing (or trying to prevent) his drivers crashing into each other.

This whole argument is being fueled by people who hold the opinion that if it was the other way round (Webber infront of Vettel) that Webber would have been told to move over. They have no proof of this, and I very much doubt it would have happened. However, this doesn't stop those people confusing their opinion with a fact, and then using it as evidence in an argument.
 
Pete19s said:
The whole stop-go instead of a drive through could have been avoided by cutting the pit lane speed limit too which would negate any advantage that taking the pits rather than the track gave a driver.
Click to expand...

Red Bull actually asked for the limit to be 60kph rather than 100kph as they could not accelerate to 100kph before the end of the pitlane (there garage being right at the end) and so worked out they were loosing 0.25 second in the stops.

Thinking about it, this might have been a good idea. Move the limit line further up the 'in road' to increase the limited length, and slow them down. Maybe the FIA will consider this for next year.
 
Pete19s said:
I am surprised that this was not the case with Di Resta's screwed up pit stop. He said he got the call to stay out when he was already into the pits so it was too late. Why not just sail straight through then pit-in properly next lap? Force India would have had the perfect excuse if it went to the stewards.

The whole stop-go instead of a drive through could have been avoided by cutting the pit lane speed limit too which would negate any advantage that taking the pits rather than the track gave a driver.
Click to expand...
you dont get an advantage you still lose over 6 seconds for doing it the only advantage is on the inlap because the start finish line is near the start of the pitlane.

the only advantage would be in qualifying and the end of the race
 
arknor said:
you dont get an advantage you still lose over 6 seconds for doing it the only advantage is on the inlap because the start finish line is near the start of the pitlane.

the only advantage would be in qualifying and the end of the race
Click to expand...

I think he was saying Di Resta would have been better off driving through, going round and coming back in again rather than sitting there fore 30 seconds while the ran around sorting tyres out. i.e. a drive through + a normal pit stop would have cost less time than the one long botched pit stop.
 
arknor said:
you dont get an advantage you still lose over 6 seconds for doing it the only advantage is on the inlap because the start finish line is near the start of the pitlane.

the only advantage would be in qualifying and the end of the race
Click to expand...

I know you lose 6 seconds on an out lap, but Di Resta wouldn't have stopped so the outlap would not have had a time hit of sitting in his box having a tyre change. He would have gone through the pits & into the 1st/2nd corner quicker than if he had taken the same route out on the track.

*edit* Beaten by Skeeter
 
Is the time lost in a drive through only 6 seconds? I heard it was 19ish second for a normal stop, which includes about 4 or 5 seconds stationary.

Either way, its a short pit.
 
Skeeter said:
Is the time lost in a drive through only 6 seconds? I heard it was 19ish second for a normal stop, which includes about 4 or 5 seconds stationary.

Either way, its a short pit.
Click to expand...

schumacher lost roughly 21 seconds in total on his stop/go
10 seconds stopped in his box
probably 2 seconds lose when he entered/exited his box
so i guess we can safely asume you lose around 9 seconds if your given a drive through penalty or just drive through

all the datas on the mclaren site if you want to check my maths
http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page=chart&gp=861&graf=3&dr1=Michael Schumacher&dr2=Nico Rosberg
LAPTIME [position] GAP to rosberg
lap prior to inlap 1:43.475 [9]-3.484
inlap 1:39.067 (DT*)[8] -7.302
outlap 2:07.302 [17]+17.917
Click to expand...
from -3.484 to +17.1917 behind rosberg
 
Wow, at 9 seconds, you can understand why they went for Stop/Go's rather than drive throughs!

Is Silverstone now the shortest pitlane in terms of time lost of all the GP tracks?
 
Skeeter said:
Wow, at 9 seconds, you can understand why they went for Stop/Go's rather than drive throughs!

Is Silverstone now the shortest pitlane in terms of time lost of all the GP tracks?
Click to expand...

whats a drive through elsewhere ? it cant be that much more
either way from 9th to 17th place is a ridiculous penalty imo
 
arknor said:
whats a drive through elsewhere ? it cant be that much more
either way from 9th to 17th place is a ridiculous penalty imo
Click to expand...

Probably around 15 to 20 seconds at the most. Given all the work that went into the new pit lane & facilities I find it unbelievable that such a basic & important thing was only picked up on so late. I would have found even a drive through penalty for the Schumacher/Kobayashi incident was harsh but because of such a silly oversight he ended up with a Stop-go which was bonkers. Losing his front wing and having to tippy-toe round at low speed was penalty enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom