Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Motorsport' started by SVT Cobra GT, Jun 14, 2016.
This race was stoopid. Even the people there stayed at home.
Better than Valencia? I thought so but the second half of the race did spread out to nothing really.
I'm all for stopping drivers being coached on their driving and which corner they're losing time, Rob Smedley used to do that for Massa a lot but to not allow errors in the settings and having the driver wade through many combinations seems dangerous and strange.
I think all of the drivers should be well aware of all the engine's mods
They probably are, but knowing what the exact problem is, and what setting you need to fix the problem is a completely different matter.
Hamilton did fix the problem as we saw from his fastest lap and the confirmation Ted received from Mercedes, it obviously wasn't as fixable as Rosberg's issue.
Boring race. Liked the track though. Did Rosberg do the "grand chelem" or whatever that's called (pole, lead every lap, FL, win the race) ??? I was switching between LM and F1 and didn't notice if he briefly lost the lead when he pitted.
Yes, he did - his second grand chelem after Russia this year. He's also (at the time of posting) the only driver to have done that at least twice and not have a championship to his name.
This race only works in a same spec race, I doubt Rosberg drove even close to the limit.
Also Kudos to Vettel for his strategy call.
He didn't there were times where he'd pull off 1:50s on the lap charts while others were pushing with a 1:46 or 45
Probably traffic for these.
Wouldn't have helped in this case - the mode that should have given more power had been incorrectly programmed so it was giving less. There was no way for either driver to know that. Rosberg didn't start in that mode but felt the power loss when he selected it later in the race, he was able to de-select it and continue as normal. Hamilton began the race in that mode (requiring more power earlier on) and didn't know it was faulty.
Imo the team should have been able to say that the mode was "faulty".
Did he begin in that mode? I think it the issue arose after the first pit stop not at the start.
This was the perfect example of why artificial entertainment (DRS, Gimmicky tires) doesn't make the racing more exciting. What a dull race.
Not sure, the BBC say it was from the start.
"THE RADIO HIT ME!"
The track looks interesting enough, but the race was meh. It looks like it would be nice for a WEC race.
No he seemed to have clear laps just coasted, from the lap charts
If a GT car gets in front of an LMP at turn 6, the LMP will be stuck there until turn 12, causing chaos.
A bit late to the party, but did anyone notice Rosberg literally touching the wall in quali (1:18 in vid below) Bloody lucky he didn't damage any suspension/tyres.
Also lol at Vettel's F-bomb in post race conference when he learned about Toyota's Le Mans heartbreak.
Having driven a mod version in rFactor, surprisingly I quite like this circuit. One of the best city circuit in years IMO. Turns 1-4 are meh, but from then on it's a proper driver's track
yeah I did which is why I said any driver could have had a bad end to quali like Hamilton, especially his team mate. Though after that tap, he put in a monster lap that was quite impressive.
And yet, going by Niki Lauda's comments after the race, Rosberg had the same issue and got on top of it. But we didn't hear a word of it. Hamilton was clearly getting frustrated, swearing a lot and losing his cool. Broadcasting that adds an element of drama - we're suddenly left wondering whether Hamilton can make it to end of the race, or if he's vulnerable to attack from behind. Did you notice the way they stopped broadcasting messages after it became apparent that Hamilton wasn't under threat from Bottas?
So, is the driver radio ban really a bad thing - or was this blown out of proportion by the broadcast looking to add drama?
BBC seem to have a good grasp of exactly why Hamilton couldn't rectify the problem as quickly as Nico, though I'm not sure about the tyre comments as much. If correct about poorly configured engine settings though then I think radio bans need looking at. There is no way either Nico or Lewis could have known specifically about the software configurations, and this is a reliability glitch that they should have been able to discuss freely.
Maybe a halfway solution is called for - rather than being able to tell Hamilton exactly how to fix the problem, tell him that the solution is less than ideal. It seems Hamilton was searching for a way to fix the problem and stay in his preferred mode, but in this case, the two were incompatible. Given that Rosberg was able to overcome the issue on his own, the inference is that other engine modes weren't compromised - so a reasonable fix would be to tell Hamilton that a solution is available, but the preferred option is not.
Also, I was under the impression that while the team cannot instruct the driver, the driver is free to ask questions and the team can reply, so Hamilton would be free to ask "will [this solution] work?" and the team can direct him yes or no; they can't tell him what to do, but can advise him whether he has figured out the solution. It appears that I was wrong, though.
Lewis should have just said "The seat's starting to feel hot, like the ERS is storing too much energy. I need to turn it down to finish the race" and tried to make it sound like a reliability problem, where they were allowed to then step in.
Pretty sure that the FIA get live telemetry, so they would know when a team and driver are trying to get around the ban. If Hamilton claimed that the temperature was rising, but it wasn't supported by the data, the FIA would know it.
The idea behind the radio bans, as I recall, was that driver coaching was getting out of hand. Drivers were being told when to attack and when not to best use the tyres and brakes. They were told which individual corners they were slower at than another driver, they were told about taking different lines into corners, using specific settings at specific times, braking later into corners and so on. It had got to ridiculous levels of performance coaching, and that needed to go, but as usual with the FIA they went too far.
F1 is still a team sport and drivers should not be expected to know the finest details of every technical setting on the car, especially when they're so complex these days. If a car has a problem, and a team can prove it, I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to fix it as a team, if it's possible.
As a fan it's not exciting for me to hear a driver struggle with technical settings on his car, making him slower, when they can be fixed with a simple instruction. They're racers, I want to see them racing.
This. The problem was not a lack of understanding the car / driving on Hamilton or Rosberg's part, so the communication required was additional information beyond the normal parameters of the Mercedes. Sounded very much like a technical "warmer... warmer.... cold!" instead, as that goes against Formula 1 as much as advanced driver coaching ever did...
The Fox commentators Hobbs, Matchett and Diffey seemed to imply Hamilton had not been reading his car/wheel instruction manuals as closely as he could have.
The "radio ban" seems to have had the effect of putting reading/scholarship skills on a par with pure driving skills. Not sure if this is the best idea, but it is a marginal differentiater of performance and achievement in life as well as in sport.
Sky indicated something similar during and immediately after, however the BBC source above has come a day later. If it was simply a lack of understanding then it is one thing, but since it sounds like it was a poor configuration in a certain engine mode then where would you expect to read about that? Something wasn't working on the car like it should, and because it was related to engine maps, the team were not allowed to talk to drivers about it. Seems daft when teams ARE allowed to tell drivers they have a slow puncture (for instance) which supposedly they should be able to feel from behind the wheel.
A slow puncture was speculated to have been the cause of Jim Clark's death at Hockenheim in '68. And he was renowned at the time for being the one driver most sensitive to his tire pressures. As a young lad and fan at the time , I was sorely devastated at his untimely death. So naturally I think teams are fully justified in warning their drivers of slow leaks. The question of optimizing insanely complicated engine electronics is another one altogether. Perhaps the best venue to settle who is purely the best driver (as opposed to technician) is at the kart track, where your tools are wheel, brake, and throttle. But even karts often have fuel richness adjustment on the fly - so who knows?