Formula 1

[Broucek]

Being "prepared to suddenly stop or change direction" to my mind means driving no faster than you can see and react to. So, in the dry that might mean that 80mph is fine, but in conditions as wet as it was on Sunday even 40mph might be too fast.

I agree but I can also see a problem with this.

Principle 1: Beached cars must be recovered
Principle 2: When executing on Principle 1, we need to protect the marshals from the racing cars and the racing drivers from the recovery vehicles

In the wet, Principle 2 implies going VERY slowly anywhere near a tractor or marshal. Given how sensitive F1 cars are to tyre temperature, does that in turn mean that a red flag is the only really safe answer. In which case, we need to follow the oval track principle of not running in the wet. Which means we shouldn't race in Asia or Europe. And should have more races in the Middle East. Yay! (sarcasm)

 

[najaB]

Given how sensitive F1 cars are to tyre temperature, does that in turn mean that a red flag is the only really safe answer. In which case, we need to follow the oval track principle of not running in the wet. Which means we shouldn't race in Asia or Europe. And should have more races in the Middle East.

I'm not sure that follows. Red flags would only be necessary in the case where there is both extremely heavy rain and a car that needs to be recovered from a location that requires equipment on track. How often does that happen - one or two races a season?

 

[Broucek]

I'm not sure that follows. Red flags would only be necessary in the case where there is both extremely heavy rain and a car that needs to be recovered from a location that requires equipment on track. How often does that happen - one or two races a season?

But cars tend to crash more when it's wet. Hence the probability of equipment and/or marshals on track is quite high

 

[bspahh]

The BBC says Red Bull have been found guilty of breaking Formula 1's budget cap by the sport's governing body, the FIA.

Red Bull have been found guilty of breaking Formula 1's budget cap by the sport's governing body, the FIA.

Red Bull exceeded the $145m (£114m) limit during 2021, the FIA said, adding that the offence was "minor", the lower of the two categories of breach.
This means the team exceeded the cap by less than 5%, or $7.25m.

Both Red Bull and Aston Martin were also found guilty of a procedural breach of the cap.

The FIA did not reveal the amount by which Red Bull exceeded the cap, or what penalties would be applied. It said it was "currently determining appropriate action".

Both teams have the possibility of appealing against the decision.

A statement added: "With respect to this first year of the application of the financial regulations, the intervention of the FIA cost-cap administration has been limited to reviewing the submissions made by the competitors and that no full formal investigations were launched."

A procedural breach is not an overspend, but rather a failure to fill in forms correctly. Williams were also found guilty of this and fined $25,000 earlier this year.

Potential penalties for a 'minor' breach include: a reprimand; deduction of drivers' and/or constructors' championship points for the championship in question; suspension from one or more stages of a competition; limitations on aerodynamic or other testing; and a reduction of the team's cost cap.

Earlier on Monday, Red Bull team principal Christian Horner repeated his belief that the team were under the cap in 2021, a season in which Red Bull driver Max Verstappen won a close championship fight with Mercedes driver Lewis Hamilton in controversial circumstances at the final race of the year.

"We're very confident we're within the cap and within those financial regulations," Horner told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

"So we've been shocked at the speculation and accusations that have been made by other teams. We wait for the FIA to conclude their process and we wait to see what comes out. Anything other than compliance we'll be extremely surprised at."

In addition to the potential of an appeal, Red Bull also have the opportunity to enter into a 'settlement agreement' with the FIA.

In this scenario, a team accepts its guilt and the FIA imposes a penalty it deems appropriate.

If a settlement agreement cannot be reached, the dispute will go to an adjudication panel of independent judges, who will look at the case and come to the conclusion whether the offence should be penalised.

If the team is still not happy after that, it can take its case to the FIA's international court of appeal.

Aston Martin did not comment, but their position is understood to be that they spent less than the total amount of the budget cap in 2021 and regret their breach, which centred on administrative protocols that reflect what they consider a complex regulatory interpretation.

Ferrari team principal Mattia Binotto said on Sunday that even a so-called 'minor' breach was a significant offence, and detailed the value of an overspend to a team's competitiveness.

Binotto said: "If there is a breach, the penalty has to be significant. Our car has been developed respecting the budget cap and we know how much even a minor breach would have implied in performance.

"$5m is about half a second, $1-2m is 0.1-0.2secs, which can be the difference between second on the grid to pole.

"It is about 2021. And also over the following seasons. I am expecting full transparency and clarity on the discussions they have had."

Mercedes F1 team principal Toto Wolff has also called for transparency about the process that was used to arrive at the assessment of any offence.

 

[Geezertronic]

They trialled technology immediately after the Bianchi crash whereby speeds would be overridden on all cars by the push of a button in the stewards room when double yellows were waved. It's proven technology that was even in some junior forms of motorsport at the time, they just dallied about and didn't proceed further.

They have that system on the electric go-karts at Teamworks in Birmingham and I believe also at other electric & petrol kart Teamworks sites, so it's certainly possible. No doubt some teams would argue whether it could be hacked or manipulated by external forces if it was a system controlled by Race Control so I'd be more in favour of a system similar to the pit limiter where it is activated by the driver by explicit direction of Race Control during specified-in-advance scenarios, and that system should be monitored to ensure that all drivers are adhering to the instruction given. That would be good for a VSC, some specific guidance given for a full safety car as it could mean that cars would be unable to catch up.

Yes the tractor should not have been there at that time, but I have little sympathy for Gasly in this instance as he was responsible for the speed he was going through the double-yellow section (that turned into a red just before he reached the tractor) so he definitely was not adhering to the double-yellow flag rules.

 

[Cloud Strife]

system similar to the pit limiter where it is activated by the driver by explicit direction of Race Control during specified-in-advance scenarios

It should be perfectly possible to create a system that manipulates the cars according to the on-track needs. Let's say that there's been a bad crash and we need to bunch the cars up so that the car can be recovered and the track cleaned up. Just broadcast "YELLOW LIMIT" or some other phrase along with displaying it trackside, and from then on, the speed of the cars would be automatically adjusted so that they form a pack as quickly as possible. Then, during the restart, 'full throttle' would only be allowed once the previous time gap was reached. So, let's say Verstappen is first by 20s: he gets to accelerate at full speed until he reaches the 20s gap. Then Leclerc is free to go, and so on.

You could have the situation that they're obliged to hit the yellow limit button within 5 seconds, to retain driver control.

All this is not very complicated to implement, and allows for as much fairness as possible.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Quick question - I believe there is a yellow light indication inside the car whicjh lights up when there is a yellow flag - but is it the same indication when it's a double yellow flag or does it visually make it obvious that the higher restriction is in force?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The BBC says Red Bull have been found guilty of breaking Formula 1's budget cap by the sport's governing body, the FIA.

Mercedes will be pushing for some form of retribution after last years last race debacle. Also the yank owners will want a penalty on Red Bull so the championship keeps on going good for media income.

 

[birchesgreen]

Mercedes will be pushing for some form of retribution after last years last race debacle. Also the yank owners will want a penalty on Red Bull so the championship keeps on going good for media income.

I doubt either will happen, taking the championship away from Max now would be high farce.

 

[gswindale]

My personal view on the cost-cap debacle is that any breaches should result in the team being disqualified from the constructor's championship for the season at play (and so in this case have to start at the wrong end of the pitlane next season). Any expenditure over the cost-cap should also then be deducted from that team's cap for the next season (i.e. if over in 2021, then reduce the team's cap for 2023).

I do feel it is potentially unfair to penalise the drivers themselves due to the team's inability to budget according to the guidelines...

 

[Geezertronic]

I do feel it is potentially unfair to penalise the drivers themselves due to the team's inability to budget according to the guidelines...

Unfortunately if the driver is suspected of gaining an advantage by any cost-cap breach then the driver should incur a penalty as well. How many write-offs did RedBull suffer last season for Verstappen? Silverstone? Azerbaijan? Do they then have an excuse?

 

[gswindale]

I refer you back to 2007. McLaren disqualified from constructors championship, but Alonso & Hamilton kept their points despite being obvious beneficiaries of the team having illegally gained Ferrari data.

The cost cap doesn't include write-offs though does it?

 

[Cloud Strife]

Quick question - I believe there is a yellow light indication inside the car whicjh lights up when there is a yellow flag - but is it the same indication when it's a double yellow flag or does it visually make it obvious that the higher restriction is in force?

I believe not, but that the yellow light on the wheel means that they should pay extra attention to the marshals.

 

[D365]

Andrew Benson reporting on Twitter that, with respect to their cost cap transgression, the FIA are offering an ”accepted breach agreement” to Red Bull.

Guess what - the terms of this agreement are, once again, not to be public knowledge.

 

[Enthusiast]

I believe a number of teams are now suggesting that the future integrity of the spending cap rests on how the FIA deal with the Red Bull transgression.

 

[Broucek]

Andrew Benson reporting on Twitter that, with respect to their cost cap transgression, the FIA are offering an ”accepted breach agreement” to Red Bull.

Guess what - the terms of this agreement are, once again, not to be public knowledge.

According to "The Race" this approach doesn't involve any reduction in future expenditure which is surely the only meaningful sanction - say spending is reduced by the overspend +50% (say)

 

[PG]

Andrew Benson reporting on Twitter that, with respect to their cost cap transgression, the FIA are offering an ”accepted breach agreement” to Red Bull.

Guess what - the terms of this agreement are, once again, not to be public knowledge.

Not saying it's right but I suppose there is a precedent in that Ferrari had some similar, unknown, FIA action 2-3 years ago when their engine seemed way more powerful than other team's. That penalty was never revealed.

 

[Broucek]

Not saying it's right but I suppose there is a precedent in that Ferrari had some similar, unknown, FIA action 2-3 years ago when their engine seemed way more powerful than other team's. That penalty was never revealed.

The penalty was that someone added a bug to their strategy simulation models….

 

[JD2168]

Carlos Saint has qualified on pole for the US Grand Prix with Max Verstapoen alongside on the front row. Charles Leclerc finished second but has a 10 place penalty for an additional ICE & Turbo than allowed.

In sad news before qualifying it was announced that Red Bull co founder & Red Bull/Alpha Tauri F1 owner & owner/sponsor of many teams in sport Diectrich Mateschitz has died after a long illness.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Oct 2022 ==

Max Verstappen has won the US Grand Prix, coming from behind both Charles Leclerc & Lewis Hamilton after a dreadful pit stop put him behind both of them. Max overtook Lewis 5 laps from the end at the end of the DRS zone. There was a scary collision between Lance Stroll & Fernando Alonso on the back straight after a Safety Car caused by Valtteri Bottas spinning out. After the retirement of Carlos Sainz after being hit on the first corner by George Russell & a third for Leclerc with Sergio Perez finishing fourth Red Bull clinched the Constructors Championship title.

Four races from the end of his career Sebastian Vettel led a couple of laps today, passing 3000 laps led in his career & also gaining the Driver of the day award.

 

[66701GBRF]

30 second time penalty for Alonso following a protest from Hass after the race regarding his mirror. Drops him to 15th. Absolutely poor decision given the stewards/FIA made no mention or gave no direction during the race.

 

[357]

30 second time penalty for Alonso following a protest from Hass after the race regarding his mirror. Drops him to 15th. Absolutely poor decision given the stewards/FIA made no mention or gave no direction during the race.

However they should have pitted him and taped it up as soon as they knew about it.

Considering previous incidents with parts flying off of cars and hitting drivers, I do agree with the penalty, however I also agree it should have been given much earlier. Either during the race or directly after.

It shouldn't take a protest from another team about an unsafe car after the race for the FIA to do something about it.

 

[DarloRich]

for a few moments i thought Hamilton might win. The Red Bull ( and an angry Verstappen) is just too fast.

 

[Geezertronic]

Carlos Saint has qualified on pole for the US Grand Prix with Max Verstapoen alongside on the front row. Charles Leclerc finished second but has a 10 place penalty for an additional ICE & Turbo than allowed.

In sad news before qualifying it was announced that Red Bull co founder & Red Bull/Alpha Tauri F1 owner & owner/sponsor of many teams in sport Diectrich Mateschitz has died after a long illness.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Oct 2022 ==

Max Verstappen has won the US Grand Prix, coming from behind both Charles Leclerc & Lewis Hamilton after a dreadful pit stop put him behind both of them. Max overtook Lewis 5 laps from the end at the end of the DRS zone. There was a scary collision between Lance Stroll & Fernando Alonso on the back straight after a Safety Car caused by Valtteri Bottas spinning out. After the retirement of Carlos Sainz after being hit on the first corner by George Russell & a third for Leclerc with Sergio Perez finishing fourth Red Bull clinched the Constructors Championship title.

Four races from the end of his career Sebastian Vettel led a couple of laps today, passing 3000 laps led in his career & also gaining the Driver of the day award.

Gotta love autocorrect - Carlos Saint

Also, Vettel passed the 3500 laps led mark (not 3000), and Verstappen won his 13th race of this season which ties him with Michael Schumacher (2004 - out of 18 races) and Vettel (2013 - out of 19 races) for most race wins in a single season so one would assume that with this season being a 22 race season, that he will surpass this record if he wins one of the last three races

 

[scragend]

However they should have pitted him and taped it up as soon as they knew about it.

Considering previous incidents with parts flying off of cars and hitting drivers, I do agree with the penalty, however I also agree it should have been given much earlier. Either during the race or directly after.

It shouldn't take a protest from another team about an unsafe car after the race for the FIA to do something about it.

True. Race control seem happy to give the "black and orange flag" for bits of front wing hanging off, so it wouldn't have been too much to ask for them to do the same here. Even if it just involved Alonso pitting and the team breaking the mirror off if they couldn't secure it.

Maybe race control just didn't notice it until it came off but, having let it go during the race, it seems harsh to penalise Alonso for it retrospectively.

 

[66701GBRF]

However they should have pitted him and taped it up as soon as they knew about it.

Considering previous incidents with parts flying off of cars and hitting drivers, I do agree with the penalty, however I also agree it should have been given much earlier. Either during the race or directly after.

It shouldn't take a protest from another team about an unsafe car after the race for the FIA to do something about it.

It is the race directors/stewards job to issue such flags and instructions. If they don't then that is down to them.

 

[357]

It is the race directors/stewards job to issue such flags and instructions. If they don't then that is down to them.

So you are saying it is OK to drive a car that the team know is unsafe, just because the director/stewards haven't seen it/haven't done anything?

Do you remember Felipe Massa suffering a skull fracture in a similar incident?

 

[66701GBRF]

I'm saying it is pretty naïve to think or expect a competitor to police themselves when it is too their own detriment. That is why sports have referees, stewards, umpires etc etc. For the record, I would have had no problem had they been summoned to the pits to sort it out or issued a penalty had they refused. But to do it so far after the race, and then only at the behest of another team, highlights the FIAs own incompetence. It is my understanding that HASS had sent messages to the race director during the race with no action forthcoming and that they also protested Perez with his damaged front wing. But action against RB was dismissed.

 

[357]

I'm saying it is pretty naïve to think or expect a competitor to police themselves when it is too their own detriment. That is why sports have referees, stewards, umpires etc etc. For the record, I would have had no problem had they been summoned to the pits to sort it out or issued a penalty had they refused. But to do it so far after the race, and then only at the behest of another team, highlights the FIAs own incompetence. It is my understanding that HASS had sent messages to the race director during the race with no action forthcoming and that they also protested Perez with his damaged front wing. But action against RB was dismissed.

So we agree then, the car was unsafe and the FIA should have sorted this during the race

I absolutely agree that for most things they won't "police" themselves if they have an advantage, but in this case it leaves an uneasy feeling, that mirror could have killed someone ...

 

[Bungle73]

True. Race control seem happy to give the "black and orange flag" for bits of front wing hanging off, so it wouldn't have been too much to ask for them to do the same here. Even if it just involved Alonso pitting and the team breaking the mirror off if they couldn't secure it.

Maybe race control just didn't notice it until it came off but, having let it go during the race, it seems harsh to penalise Alonso for it retrospectively.

Not sure what they were looking at? It was obvious from the race footage that was going to detach itself sooner or later.

So we agree then, the car was unsafe and the FIA should have sorted this during the race

I absolutely agree that for most things they won't "police" themselves if they have an advantage, but in this case it leaves an uneasy feeling, that mirror could have killed someone ...

I wouldn't have thought so. I wouldn't have thought a mirror would have much mass, hence its flapping around. The object that hit Massa was a metal spring.

 

[najaB]

I wouldn't have thought so. I wouldn't have thought a mirror would have much mass, hence its flapping around. The object that hit Massa was a metal spring.

I agree it was unlikely to kill anyone but, that said, it could leave quite a bruise.