Formula 1 Grosser Preis von Osterreich 2017Formula 1 

  • Thread starter Jimlaad43
  • 255 comments
  • 12,880 views
Flaren89
I mean... Come on, do you remember Nurburgring 2007? Where Hamilton was put into the track and rejoining the race by the stewards? Wasn't there a rule where they couldn't?
Click to expand...

I believe, in esscence, the rule nowadays is that if you cannot rejoin the circuit if you require mechanical assistance. Marshals pushing is fine; being lifted by tractor is not. The rule was put in place after Hamilton's incident in 2007, but did not exist prior to that.

Flaren89
The same that made loss Senna, which Hamilton is "biggest fan", the title at Suzuka against Prost?
Click to expand...

I assume you're talking about 1989? The rule Senna was DSQ'd for, which no longer exists in that form, was shortcutting the course. When he rejoined he didn't return to the circuit at the point he left it, so was deemed to have shortcut the chicane, and was disqualified. The marshal intervention had no bearing on Senna's disqualification.
 
Spurgy 777
But as others have pointed out, a false start probably isn't determined by movement but by being outside of a certain area, which Bottas must of moved out of 0.2s after the lights went out, which seems a bit silly, but if that's the rules you can't really penalise him.
Click to expand...

Famine
I suspect that the situation here is that race control saw the box 1 and car 77 movement sensors recording movement after they recorded the race start button being pressed, so it's not a jump start.
Click to expand...

Disco_Volante
The Spanish broadcasters said that moving less than 0.2 seconds after the lights go off is illegal, and that moving more than 0.2 seconds after is legal.
Click to expand...

So according to the F1 website they say that Bottas did move before the start, however the tolerance limit is not set after the lights have gone out, but before - and he was within that (undisclosed) limit.

An FIA statement read: "The jump start system judges whether a car has moved a pre-set (very small) distance between the point at which the last red light comes on and the point at which the lights go out.

"We have found that need to allow for some very small movement, as drivers sometimes need to make clutch adjustments in preparation for the start. This system, which is dependent on the official timing provided by Formula One, has been in operation for some 20 years and has proved extremely reliable in that time.

“In today’s instance, Valtteri Bottas did not exceed this (very small) limit before the start was given.
Simply put: he made an exceptionally accurate and fortuitous judgement call, anticipating the moment the lights went out with great precision. Any movement prior to the moment the lights went out was within the tolerances allowed.
Click to expand...

So it seems it really was a jump start, but a perfectly legal one.
 
Last edited:
Alex Wurz described the situation pretty accurately on the Austrian TV.
He said that the sensors are positioned right where the T-Tray starts and that there is a tolerance to the movement they can see.
Every change in position that is shorter than 30 mm is within that space and doesn't set off the jump-start allert.
 
Ferraridriver27
Alex Wurz described the situation pretty accurately on the Austrian TV.
He said that the sensors are positioned right where the T-Tray starts and that there is a tolerance to the movement they can see.
Every change in position that is shorter than 30 mm is within that space and doesn't set off the jump-start allert.
Click to expand...
Based on this information I would argue that Bottas got the start inch perfect.
 
The race was so exciting that people now argue over 30mm. :lol

What bugs me personally is that this rule has been in place forever and people act like it's something new...

Wasn't a jump start and if it were it would have triggered an alert in race control. End of story.


And because I think Famine asked it, I think the guy that sets the starting lights off, or however you wanna call it, is Charlie Whiting - or maybe someone else who's job it is to just do that, it's not a different person each race though. There's also no determined time frame for it as far I know, the person who sets the start signal is only supposed to not take too long (probably around 10 seconds) because the engines might be overheating otherwise.


They explained this on RTL a couple of years ago, so I don't remember exactly, but that's the gist of it.
 
Liquid
It's a gut feeling I cannot prove, of course, but I'd say Bottas guessed when the lights were going out and got lucky.

And I doubt he's the only driver who tries that.
Click to expand...
They got Pastor Maldonado for a jump start a few years ago because his reaction times were too fast.
 
EDK
That's as severe a penalty as I recall F1 handing out in recent years for a driving infraction. Car infractions have obviously resulted in race DQ's at times, I recall Ricciardo 2014 Australia fuel flow issue as one that stands out.
Click to expand...

Forgot about Ricciardos fuel flow thing.

But that is a good point.

What is more worse smashing into someone or going over the fuel flow limits?

The FIA cant seem to make out their minds with rules.

One race they punish drivers hard for exceeding track limits, in an other they dont care.
 
prisonermonkeys
They got Pastor Maldonado for a jump start a few years ago because his reaction times were too fast.
Click to expand...

That was Spa 2012 if that's the one you're talking about (the race with THAT first corner smash). The team's explanation was that Maldonado's fingers slipped off the clutch.

As for today's race... what does Verstappen have to do to get a working car? Is the gearbox problem with Renault (Tag Heuer) or Red Bull?
 
H20HYBRID_GT
There's also no determined time frame for it as far I know, the person who sets the start signal is only supposed to not take too long (probably around 10 seconds) because the engines might be overheating otherwise.
Click to expand...
The start sequence is randomised. Charlie Whiting has no control over when the lights actually go out. Once he is satisfied that the grid has formed properly, he activates the start procedure. From that point on, his job is to abort the start if something goes wrong.

When all five lights are on, they will stay on for anywhere between three and seven seconds. It's done that way so that drivers cannot accurately predict the start.
 
prisonermonkeys
The start sequence is randomised. Charlie Whiting has no control over when the lights actually go out. Once he is satisfied that the grid has formed properly, he activates the start procedure. From that point on, his job is to abort the start if something goes wrong.

When all five lights are on, they will stay on for anywhere between three and seven seconds. It's done that way so that drivers cannot accurately predict the start.
Click to expand...


Oh yes, that's what they said, thanks. I knew I was missing something, I couldn't imagine Charlie Whiting standing there counting to 3 every race lol. And yes, it has to be an automated process otherwise it would be way too predictable.
 
H20HYBRID_GT
What bugs me personally is that this rule has been in place forever and people act like it's something new...
Click to expand...
It's never been tested like this before. Bottas was just hundreths of a second away from jumping the start. Want to see what his start looked like? Get a stopwatch and start it and stop it as quickly as possible. Chances are you will have pressed the button twice in two tenths of a second - and that's just you moving your thumb. Now imagine Bottas having to balance the throttle and clutch while responding to a visual stimulus several metres away.
 
Akmuq
Highlight of today's race was Magnussen getting passed the censors.
Click to expand...

Hi Kmag,

Unfortunately, a message you posted contains words which are not considered appropriate for broadcast on the world feed:

🤬 this..
Click to expand...

The world feed uses an automated swear filter, and bypassing this filter is against our rules. Your post may have been edited or removed from public view, but its original content remains accessible to site staff for our records. Please review our Acceptable Use Policy for more information.
Click to expand...
 
A shame the race wasn't a few laps longer, but at least it didn't end a couple of laps earlier! Suspected it might be a straight forward result after Hamilton's penalty, but Bottas did a great job both in qualifying and the race. Really proving why Ferrari need to replace Raikkonen in 2018. Not much else to talk about really though...
 
Pezzarinho17
Really proving why Ferrari need to replace Raikkonen in 2018.
Click to expand...
They're making the same mistakes that they did a few years ago when they kept renewing Massa's contract. Ferrari are probably the most conservative team when it comes to changing their line-up because they only take established drivers and the usually only do multi-year deals. It's a problem because they're eyeing off Max Verstappen, but unless they want to pay a king's ransom to get him, he won't be available until 2019. If they really want to replace Räikkönen, they might have to do something radical - like taking Charles Leclerc for a year. If he works out, they may not need Verstappen.
 
prisonermonkeys
It's never been tested like this before. Bottas was just hundreths of a second away from jumping the start. Want to see what his start looked like? Get a stopwatch and start it and stop it as quickly as possible. Chances are you will have pressed the button twice in two tenths of a second - and that's just you moving your thumb. Now imagine Bottas having to balance the throttle and clutch while responding to a visual stimulus several metres away.
Click to expand...

Didn't someone post there have been much quicker, legal starts though?

Also I just did.
http://i.imgur.com/oxrunMK.jpg

It's easy. But I can't do it any faster to be honest.
 
I'm still baffled as to where they got the 0.2 second reaction time. The to clearly shows him moving the moment the lights go out.
 
DQuaN
I'm still baffled as to where they got the 0.2 second reaction time. The to clearly shows him moving the moment the lights go out.
Click to expand...

Tolerances. The car is allowed to move a certain amount before registering as having moved. I think Alex Wurz said it is 30mm of travel that is allowed before the car is registered as having moved.
 
As far as boring races go this one was one of the best. There are title implications, pit stop strategies, midfielders doing alright and of course the last lap battles for 1st and 3rd.
 
Grayfox
Forgot about Ricciardos fuel flow thing.

But that is a good point.

What is more worse smashing into someone or going over the fuel flow limits?

The FIA cant seem to make out their minds with rules.

One race they punish drivers hard for exceeding track limits, in an other they dont care.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's part of my overall point, I want consistency.

I'm not a fan of the time penalties (those that do not require an extra stop), as they allow too much strategic flexibility.

It seems like they have an idea of the type of penalties one might receive in particular circumstances. It would be nice if that was published, so fans would know what to expect.

An analogy is American football. Nearly all penalties are standardized. Certainly some are subjective in the judgement of whether they occurred, but we know if a lineman is caught holding, that will result in a 10 yard penalty and repeat of the down.

There's nothing like that in F1 (or motorsport in general), which is one of the reasons we end up in discussions like this.
 
Pezzarinho17
Tolerances. The car is allowed to move a certain amount before registering as having moved. I think Alex Wurz said it is 30mm of travel that is allowed before the car is registered as having moved.
Click to expand...

That doesn't sound right to me though. In a sport where everything is calculated to thousanths of a second, how can a start system be out by 0.200 seconds?!
 

Latest Posts

Back