Japanese Grand Prix 2014, Suzuka - Race 15/19

JUMPURS said:
The biggest problem just now is the FIA not giving any information so folk just make crap up.

I'm not expecting live tweeting from his bedside, but it's been what, 15 hours or something and not a single word? Can't they at least say he's had surgery, in intensive care where he is in a coma or something? Failing that you get nonsense on Twitter.
Click to expand...

FIA did say he had a CT scan, then went into surgery. I imagine it's more of a private matter now though.
 
There is no need for a slow zone, double yellows are already a slow zone, slow down and be prepared to stop means just that. The FIA just need to enforce that ruling properly and not accept 2tenths slower as a driver obeying the rules.
 
Mr Men said:
There is no need for a slow zone, double yellows are already a slow zone, slow down and be prepared to stop means just that. The FIA just need to enforce that ruling properly and not accept 2tenths slower as a driver obeying the rules.
Click to expand...

Exactly,ndoible yellows means be prepared to stop. Time to start issuing punishments for folk who are blatantly going too fast through them.
 
With a rule and a set specific speed limit you both can't punish it and can't expect the drivers to arbitrarily come up with 22 different speeds they drive to. One guy going 30mph slower, one 20mph slower, one has a huge advantage.

A rule with a specific speed limit that everyone sticks to means no advantage, no pushing the limits and becomes very easy to enforce, break speed limit get punished, people won't break it on purpose.
 
Have to give credit to Rosberg, he didn't make excuses about being slower and basically said Hamilton was just much faster than him. They asked him about oversteer but he pretty much said he had almost the same setup as Hamilton so Hamilton probably had oversteer to just Rosberg doesn't like driving a car with oversteer and Hamilton made it work really well.

He has many other times made lots of excuses or lost but said he was faster but he was honest and well, after some of his less than accurate comments this year, it was quite nice to see. Though I don't know, he didn't really fight Hamilton for the place, I don't think he meant to let him pass but, he's made a lot of mistakes lately. I think the crash, a probably behind closed doors reaming from his team, the fine, public turning on him somewhat. He seems a bit beaten and with Hamilton winning any time he doesn't have a major issue I think he may be slipping into accepting that he likely won't win or at least wouldn't win unless reliability hurts Hamilton more than him to the end of the season.
 
ZG002 said:
It also means if a guy at the front has a 10 second lead it's not wiped out by a safety car. It does sound a fair and safer solution.
Click to expand...

Yes, aside from the safety cars taking too long to back up the pack before people get out on track to clean up it's that it wipes out leads. If a car puts in some fuel and tire wear creating a buffer then it's wiped out, well exactly like when Hamilton got screwed and his lead over Rosberg was wiped out. It's a shame and they often change races for the worse.

If they can just slow guys down properly all for roughly an equal amount then it's basically fair. It's pretty damn easy for a computer to keep track of everyone and lift the speed restrictions so that everyone has done the same amount of slow sectors. IE if the speed restriction is for sector 2 and whoever is in 10th is first to hit that sector, then the issue is fixed, then the next lap the guys from 1-9th all do one more slow sector so everyone has slowed the same amount.

They also need to fix this BS laps done ridiculous crap that means when a full safety car happens cars unlap themselves, it's the stupidest thing that ever happened even more the part where they are catching up at safety car speed, even though they are only cleared to unlap themselves once the track is safe again(so no reason to be going slowly at that point). They need to drop back and rules adjusted so doing one less lap doesn't matter.
 
They already have deltas for the lap when they're catching the SC. Just modify the system fir a delta for one or more sectors. Implemented if it's double yellows, all issued by the computer system. I don't think you need to *** about with making sure they all have equal turns through it. There's already advantages depending where you are on the race track, when SC comes out. It's just one if those things. Any one close together would have the same deltas anyway. Only if there's a massive gap between two cars might one get an advantage.

Not sounding good at all. :(

To add to what Knip has said, that theirs more bleeding and possible another operation. It looks like he is now on life support.
 
Last edited:
Sky Sports News this morning are still questioning the lack of use of the helicopter. The hospital have confirmed it was due to fog, while the circuit have confirmed it was for medical reasons.
 
Vertigo1 said:
Stop generalising. No one has suggested a safety car is required for every recovery.

In this specific instance, recovery was being attempted at a notoriously tricky corner whilst the rain was coming down harder and harder and track conditions were deteriorating and with most of the field on intermediate tyres.

In that specific situation, deploying the SC before the crane attempted recovery of the car was a total no-brainer and the race director and marshals acted stupidly. All the cars should have been slowed right down as soon as possible which is the very reason for a SC.
Click to expand...

One could argue double waved yellows are enough. Double waved yellows means you may have to stop, that is the level of caution required.
 
Following the accident involving Jules Bianchi during yesterday’s 2014 Formula One Japanese Grand Prix at Suzuka Circuit, the Marussia F1 Team would like to acknowledge the huge outpouring of support and affection for Jules and the Team at this very difficult time.

With regard to the communication of information concerning Jules’ medical condition, we will respect, and be guided by, the wishes of the Bianchi family. Together with Jules’ care, they will remain our highest priority. Therefore, we would ask for patience and understanding with regard to further medical updates, which will be communicated in conjunction with the Mie General Medical Center in Yokkaichi, where Jules is being treated, when they feel it is appropriate.

Representatives of the Marussia F1 Team and Scuderia Ferrari will remain at the hospital to support Jules and the Bianchi family.
Click to expand...

http://www.marussiaf1team.com/news/1034/
 
You could argue that because full wet racing doesn't really happen anymore (as the SC has historically always come out and the race red flagged when it happens) teams are hesitant to go onto it. If the weather was so bad, why were people on inters?

Other comments about the crossover point being the most dangerous and therefore needs a SC is unecessary as it just again prevents full wet tyre racing. Just mandate everyone comes in for full wet tyres when the track gets beyond a certain point? If people then fall off the track consider SC and red flag.
 
Last edited:
Kenai said:
To be honest I think skirts is the wrong solution, or perhaps more accurately not the preferable solution in isolation.

The 'safety hierarchy' that gets drilled into you is eliminate > substitute > control > PPE.

In my eyes, the better situation is that you eliminate the problem of Formula 1 cars hitting JCBs rather than try and control what happens when they do, by simply not allowing JCBs on track without a safety car in operation to slow the cars down.

You can put skirts on as well but as I see it, the primary objective is to avoid the possibility of it happening in the first place rather than simply mitigating the severity of it if it does.
Click to expand...

I keep coming back to this post and I think it is correct. The first thing they need to think about. Is it possible to recover a car without a jcb ever being on track? Completely eliminating the risk. Speed limits and safety cars etc are all a way of controlling the risk and as said skirts are the final solution. Eliminating the risk totally has to be the main target.
 
There are other considerations though. Eliminating the risk has consequences which can be unnacceptable.

The H&S heirarchy only really applicable to normal scenarios where there isn't a knock on impact of damaging a spectacle being watched by millions. It works in the office, schools, hospitals etc.

Car racing is in itself still very dangerous, how do you eliminate the risk? Introduce speed limits?

That is why we have helmets, roll cages, fire proof clothing etc.
 
Last edited:
muon said:
There are other considerations though. Eliminating the risk has consequences which can be unnacceptable.

The H&S heirarchy only really applicable to normal scenarios where there isn't a knock on impact of damaging a spectacle being watched by millions. It works in the office, schools, hospitals etc.

Car racing is in itself still very dangerous, how do you eliminate the risk? Introduce speed limits?
Click to expand...

And there in lies the problem, a mans life should be more important than a spectacle. I don't see how using a crane to cherry pick a car (think monaco) under yellow flags couldn't be a option other than the cost possibly involved. These cars ain't heavy so it's not like you need monster cranes and a mobile crane covering a area could be possible. We have had Brundle going on about JCB's on track for years.
 
ZG002 said:
And there in lies the problem, a mans life should be more important than a spectacle. I don't see how using a crane to cherry pick a car (think monaco) under yellow flags couldn't be a option other than the cost possibly involved. These cars ain't heavy so it's not like you need monster cranes and a mobile crane covering a area could be possible. We have had Brundle going on about JCB's on track for years.
Click to expand...

F1 wouldn't exist if it was heavily neutered to completely eliminate danger. So wouldn't a lot of things. The number of people that die on the roads around the world is horrifically high, and yet we don't overreact to that. We still only minimise the impacts and likelihood of ocurrence.

A man's life should be more important than a spectacle is just an unhelpful statement. Things aren't black and white.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom