European Grand Prix 2011, Valencia Street Circuit - Race 8/19

Shimmy said:
This tickled me :p

i6lw.jpg
Click to expand...

rofl, either Jake is a giant (yes he is) or Anthony Davidson is a midget (yes he is? ) :D
 
Setroc said:
They'll be burning less fuel, but the ballast won't change because the car weights are measured when they are empty
Click to expand...

Yeah, there is a minimum weight for driver and car, and a fixed weight distribution, so running with less fuel and having more ballast to add has little benifit as you cant chose where to put it.
 
Strange how they make a front cover too. There is no reference to the GP on the front, so unless he's manhandling the iPad then it shouldn't need changing at all.
 
Interesting interview with Charlie Whiting on formula1.com

http://www.formula1.com/news/interviews/2011/6/12223.html

A few passages.

Q: Will this [not changing engine maps] affect every team equally, or will some suffer a greater penalty?
CW: It is not for us to say whether or not one team will be penalised more than another. If depends how extreme they're going [with their previous map]. I've certainly seen evidence of maps from a number of teams that are ‘extremely' extreme. And it's not confined to one team.
Click to expand...

Q: There is a perception that decisions like this are political rather than technical, and damage the image of F1. What is your opinion?
CW: I'm aware of some stories being written, but to be frank with you, I know it's not a political decision. I know it's purely a technical intervention on our side and I feel perfectly comfortable with that.

Q: In recent years both the F-Duct and the double diffuser have been banned, but not until the end of the season. Would it not be simpler to allow the current technology to stay in place until the end of this year?
CW: No, because the double diffuser and the F-Duct were legal. [In those cases] during the course of the season the teams got together with us and we decided they weren't good for F1 and weren't needed, so we wrote laws to outlaw them. But they complied with the rules, which is why they were allowed to stay until the end of the season. They were completely different to the situation we have now.
Click to expand...

Q: Do you take into account what the drivers are saying on the radio when making these decisions?
CW: We listen to all the drivers' conversations [and consider] a selection of opinions from drivers' whose opinions we think count. We also take account of what position they're in.

In Canada, we were listening and you get the odd driver, usually the same one or two, who say ‘c'mon let's go, let's go', and then there are others who say it's not ready yet. We usually take their advice. It's very worthwhile listening to the drivers.

A good example of that was in Korea last year, where it was getting dark towards the end of the race. We were listening to the top six drivers, only two of whom were complaining. One of those two, his rear tyres had completely gone, so he had another reason for wanting the race stopped.
Click to expand...
 
To be fair to Whiting, at Canada, he was simply erring on the side of caution.
Yes, he ran the SC for far too long, but I think he had reached a stage in that GP, where he just didn't want to have to deal with any incidents.

Also, remember, this is 2011. In 2011, many drivers are "pansies". This means that they don't want to take any unnecessary risks. As we progress through the years, safety seems to be increasingly important.

I'm afraid that we just have to get used to it.
 
its hard to make decisions from what the drivers say.

you have vettel saying oh its too wet its too dark, he has the most to lose.

then you have hamilton shouting lets get going this is ridiculous its almost dry etc.

he was doing the chasing.

they should listen to the back markers who have nothing going for them.

tbh he should just decide when he thinks the standing water isnt extremely dangerous and then let them go, if its too wet they can slow down.

as long as they arnt constantly aquaplaning let them get on with it.


there have been many times were the rain has been far worse in previous years.
 
Last edited:
sunama said:
To be fair to Whiting, at Canada, he was simply erring on the side of caution.
Yes, he ran the SC for far too long, but I think he had reached a stage in that GP, where he just didn't want to have to deal with any incidents.

Also, remember, this is 2011. In 2011, many drivers are "pansies". This means that they don't want to take any unnecessary risks. As we progress through the years, safety seems to be increasingly important.

I'm afraid that we just have to get used to it.
Click to expand...

Charlie himself said in that that some drivers always want to get going while others are more cautious. Of course safety is more important, F1 had some terrible accidents in the past that were a direct result of people not giving a crap and thinking that drivers should quite literally put their lives on the line. If that was acceptable we would still have gladiatorial games.

Open wheel racing is still dangerous and it still takes a fair pair of stones to do what they do. I don't think erring on the side of caution is something to sniff at when you are talking about things like this.

I honestly wonder if F1 needs another death just to reinforce to people how important safety is in the sport.
 
Well Todge, you and I shall have to disagree on this point.

IMO, F1 is supposed to be dangerous. The idea that if you push hard, you will go faster and get the glory; and that if you push too hard, you will go off and possibly have a huge accident. This is the whole point of F1 - only the brave, courageous and skill-full should succeed.

If F1 becomes too safety concious, there won't be a punishment (ie. possible injury) when a driver gets it wrong.

The idea of a death occurring is not nice, but this is a very real possibility in F1. IMO there must always be a possibility of a death in F1...that's what makes it exciting. Drivers entering F1 must know that F1 can kill. This is the very reason why F1 drivers are paid so much (as much as for their skill), as they put their lives on the line.

The danger factor is also what made gladiator fights so exciting. It is also what makes (pro) boxing so exciting and amateur boxing so boring. Would you rather see 2 men fighting with (pro) or without (amateur) protective head gear?

But anyway, my way of thinking is disappearing. Your way of thinking is modern and is the direction that things are heading in.
 
IMO there must always be a possibility of a death in F1...that's what makes it exciting.
Click to expand...

I have to say, I completely and wholeheartedly disagree - the possibility of death is not what makes Formula 1 exciting.

The noise, the speed, the glamour, the technology, the racing - those are the things that make Formula 1 exciting.
 
i wouldnt go as far as saying the possibility of death but certainly injury. with the speeds they do there is always that possibility. if you want to be the best you have to risk this.
 
sunama said:
Would you rather see 2 men fighting with (pro) or without (amateur) protective head gear?.
Click to expand...

You don't understand then what head gear protects from. It doesn't stop the punch impact at all, it stops damage from head clashes and cuts to a degree. The impact is not softened. Gloves are to protect the hands not the power of the punch.

Kenai said:
I have to say, I completely and wholeheartedly disagree - the possibility of death is not what makes Formula 1 exciting.

The noise, the speed, the glamour, the technology, the racing - those are the things that make Formula 1 exciting.
Click to expand...

I agree, what needs to change though is the amount of flat out corners there are. Greatly reducing the aero grip so when drivers come up to the 130R they are either brave and risk a crash or lift. That will never happen though because they like 20 cars to finish and not have accidents.
 
As said it's not so much the death, it's the risk. If you remove the risk, it means the cars aren't going fast enough and as such becomes boring. We are seeing the start of this. I mean flat out round corners is stupid . We need more bhp or less downforce or a combination.
The massive run off areas which don't punish people due to safety is also a pile of junk and spoils it.
 
unledbsg.jpg


Qualifying - Vettel on pole as Red Bull dominate
Sebastian Vettel needed only one hot lap in the final qualifying to secure his seventh pole position of the season for Red Bull in Valencia. Just after Lewis Hamilton had lapped his McLaren in 1m 37.380s to set the Q3 pace after the first runs, Vettel replied with 1m 36.975s, and that was it. Job done.

Highlights - European Grand Prix qualifying
Watch highlights as Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel storms to an emphatic seventh pole position of 2011 ahead of team-mate Mark Webber and McLaren's Lewis Hamilton in Valencia.

Sebastian Vettel's European GP pole lap
Ride on board with Red Bull's Sebastian Vettel as the German secures his seventh pole position of the season in qualifying for the European Grand Prix in Valencia.

The European Grand Prix - Qualifying
Jake Humphrey introduces live coverage of qualifying for the European Grand Prix in Spain, with commentary from Martin Brundle and David Coulthard.
 
gord said:
I think RBR are still running quite an aggressive map. With the unknown engine factor it will be hard to tell unless they both self destruct.
Click to expand...


If they are running a aggressive map would this mean they would need more fuel and be heavier for the race?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom