2012 Belgian Grand Prix - Spa

[Chuckjr]

they cut the tyre open and then calculated the strategy based on the data they saw

Never heard they did that. I do remember Newey physically emoting during the first laps. The tv camera shots on him looked like he was being shocked with electricity at times. I do also remember RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.

As for the tire cut in half, thats just fantastic team work there. Well done RB.

[marcush.]

that was a pure and outright gamble ,playing with havoc.They sure had the option to adjust their cambers back to safe levels but of course that would have meant starting from the pitlane.
It´s always a big relief getting away with taking obnormal risks..but to call this exemplary for good teamwork ? I think it was a very good example of teams perceptions clearly muddied by their competitive eye -as it followed camber limits were introduced .Obviously the whole matter was a bit too political too as everyone had expected they would change their settings and start from the back ,but they opted to go the risk ..had Pirelli vetoed they would have been allowed to change cambers with no penalty ,yes?that was not what the competitors wanted.

[simieski]

RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.

I always considered that as a bit of a teflon shoulders cop out. They knew it was outside of normal operating safety margins and they also knew neither driver would ever refuse to race how it was. Nice cowardly way of paying lip service to your duty of care to the drivers.

[marcush.]

RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.

I always considered that as a bit of a teflon shoulders cop out. They knew it was outside of normal operating safety margins and they also knew neither driver would ever refuse to race how it was. Nice cowardly way of paying lip service to your duty of care to the drivers.

A driver cannot decide this.I still cannot understand this .I cannot understand how Mercedes back then decided to let the silver arrows start in LeMans after 2 flips of their cars in practise and warmup. and hoping for two diveplanes doing the trick..
You have responsibility for the safety of your drivers and spectators ..you just had to watch Newey (the guy in whos car Senna died )was completely derailled come race start...it took away a lot of respect i had for him .Racing is also about taking risks ..but especially on a track like Spa you should avoid taking risks you feel unable to calculate.
See Michelin in 2005 USA GrandPrix..they had doubts and evidence it was too big a risk and stood up for it.

[turbof1]

RB left it to the drivers to finally decide if they would go with it as is.

I always considered that as a bit of a teflon shoulders cop out. They knew it was outside of normal operating safety margins and they also knew neither driver would ever refuse to race how it was. Nice cowardly way of paying lip service to your duty of care to the drivers.

A driver cannot decide this.I still cannot understand this .I cannot understand how Mercedes back then decided to let the silver arrows start in LeMans after 2 flips of their cars in practise and warmup. and hoping for two diveplanes doing the trick..
You have responsibility for the safety of your drivers and spectators ..you just had to watch Newey (the guy in whos car Senna died )was completely derailled come race start...it took away a lot of respect i had for him .Racing is also about taking risks ..but especially on a track like Spa you should avoid taking risks you feel unable to calculate.
See Michelin in 2005 USA GrandPrix..they had doubts and evidence it was too big a risk and stood up for it.

Lol. Reminds me of Spa 2010, when drivers took eau rouge one handed with a stalled rear wing. Drivers and team will always take risk.

[MikeFromCanada]

I agree 100% with marcush. It is up to the teams to be trusted to provide their drivers with a safe vehicle to race in. It was very well known that running the tyres at that camber provided a significant safety risk, yet they still went ahead and let them race as is.

Sure you may say F1 is a dangerous sport and that you can never be 100% safe, but knowing full well that an area on the car is compromised and not doing anything about it is just being negligent. It is similar to having a hairline leak in the fuel lines and then coming on the radio saying "keep running, it's only 1 more lap to the finish, we should be okay". There should be no doubt when you are dealing with people's lives.

[turbof1]

I agree 100% with marcush. It is up to the teams to be trusted to provide their drivers with a safe vehicle to race in. It was very well known that running the tyres at that camber provided a significant safety risk, yet they still went ahead and let them race as is.

Sure you may say F1 is a dangerous sport and that you can never be 100% safe, but knowing full well that an area on the car is compromised and not doing anything about it is just being negligent. It is similar to having a hairline leak in the fuel lines and then coming on the radio saying "keep running, it's only 1 more lap to the finish, we should be okay". There should be no doubt when you are dealing with people's lives.

That's the point: you obviously can't trust the teams on that. Spa 2010 AND 2011 were a clear example of that. Don't get me wrong: when there is something technically wrong with car that could be harmfull to the driver they will let him pull over, but if the car is technically without flaws but has elements that could put the driver in danger anyhow they will not act, even when there are events where that system proved to be harmfull. Remember the Renault Lotus of last year from which the sidepod exploded just outside the pitstraight? They didn't removed or even changed their front exit exhaust approach at all, only some more heat protection. Biggest example of all would be ground effect: teams never made sure the car was enough protected to make sure the driver would be ok when he lost control at the amazing cornering speeds they got. Even the exception confirms the rule: the introduction of carbon fibre chassis was hailed as a great improvement of safety for the drivers, but at the same time made the car much lighter and thus faster.

Teams will not trade speed for safety.Pretty much understandable given the competitive nature of F1. It's rather the FIA who needs to ensure safety.

[marcush.]

I can tell you ...as long as the car moves a real driver will go on ...Mansell started a grandprix with fuel leaking into the cockpit he actually took a bath in in ...and paid a huge price in his latewr life for it...You just cannot rely on the clear state of mind when a driver is in race mode..but i do not even think about this little fact ..It´s a matter of judgement on the side of the team what is safe and what is not.
Todays a not properly fixed wheel is a reason to fine the team for a unsafe realease but you tell me a team that does not even understand the tyre they are using -testemony this years races -would decide if the blistering that is obviously is happening is dangerous or not .The fact they did not suffer blowouts is not a proof they were right ,it´s a proof they were lucky .
The question is how much in terms of absolute laptime will you gain with additional cambers ? I´m rather sure it´s not a world maybe a tenth ?

[turbof1]

I can tell you ...as long as the car moves a real driver will go on ...Mansell started a grandprix with fuel leaking into the cockpit he actually took a bath in in ...and paid a huge price in his latewr life for it...You just cannot rely on the clear state of mind when a driver is in race mode..but i do not even think about this little fact ..It´s a matter of judgement on the side of the team what is safe and what is not.
Todays a not properly fixed wheel is a reason to fine the team for a unsafe realease but you tell me a team that does not even understand the tyre they are using -testemony this years races -would decide if the blistering that is obviously is happening is dangerous or not .The fact they did not suffer blowouts is not a proof they were right ,it´s a proof they were lucky .
The question is how much in terms of absolute laptime will you gain with additional cambers ? I´m rather sure it´s not a world maybe a tenth ?

Again given the competitive state of F1, the teams WILL take that tenth anyday! A half too, especially in a year like this were half a tenth could easily mean 3 places on the starting grid. Pirelli tyres are relative safe you know; tyres will not just blow up b/c the camber is set too extreme. They will blister alot, taking away a lot of tyre performance. Could end up wrong though at a corner like eay rouge.

[zyphro]

Could end up wrong though at a corner like eay rouge.

Which was what they were fearing could happen.

[turbof1]

Could end up wrong though at a corner like eay rouge.

Which was what they were fearing could happen.

Yes indeed. Well this year the risk should be reduced anyhow, given the medium and hard tyres are being used.

[FrukostScones]

My questions for the Spa Grand Prix:

1. Will it snow?
2. Will it rain?
3. Will the temps be higher tha 20 C?
4. Will Alonso qualify in the TopTen?
5. Will Alonso win?
6. If a Lotus wins, will it be protested and disqualified because of SuperF-ducky-DRS after the race?
7. Will HAM get a penalty?
8. Will Massa show that he is the true Spa-Master?
9. Will Schumacher collide with Coulthard again?
10. Will Schumacher win, or will Rosberg race to a undisputed Mercedes victory?
11. Will Perez shine again in the wet?
12. Will Kobayshi overtake Hamilton without crashing?
13. Will Maldonado finish the race (on the podium)?
14. How many red flags will we have during qualifying and race?
15. Will Webber again try to kill him-self?

[bhallg2k]

Has there ever been a snow race?

[DaveKillens]

Felipe: I don't know, it doesn't snow in Brazil

Fernando: it snows in the Asturias... bring it on.

[FrukostScones]

Has there ever been a snow race?

http://forums.autosport.com/index.php?s ... =snow&st=0