2012 Abu Dhabi GP - Yas Marina

[Forza]

Renault believes a calibration problem with fuelling equipment is the most likely explanation as to why Sebastian Vettel did not have enough petrol in his car for qualifying for the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix. Vettel was stripped of his third place grid slot and thrown to the back of the grid at the Yas Marina circuit after post-qualifying checks discovered he only had 850ml of fuel on board his car after Q3 - whereas the rules demand a minimum of one-litre be present for a sample. At the time, both Red Bull and Renault were convinced that enough fuel had gone into the car for his final run, so neither could offer a clear answer in Abu Dhabi about why there was not sufficient present for the FIA tests. Post-event investigations conducted by both Red Bull and Renault have concluded that there was no mechanical problem with the car's engine or fuel system, or that Vettel had consumed more fuel than expected during his laps. Instead, Renault suspects that the fuelling equipment, referred to within the team as the 'robot', used on Vettel's car was at fault. Renault's head of trackside operations Remi Taffin said that he was awaiting a final report from Red Bull, but the likelihood is the fuelling equipment under-delivered on what it claimed had been put in the car.

"We now have gone very deep into the investigation and, if we look back at what we learned from Saturday qualifying to Sunday morning, we obviously eventually discovered that we were missing a bit of fuel in the cell," Taffin told AUTOSPORT.
"We have checked the numbers, we have checked what we have done with the fuel 'robot' and every single number says we should have had the fuel. So Red Bull are now checking with the supplier of their 'robot' to check out that we had the right delivery. This is in progress."

Taffin said that there had been no change to Red Bull or Renault's normal fuel strategy for Abu Dhabi qualifying compared to previous grands prix, and analysis of its data showed that consumption had been as normal.

"We have checked everything on our side and could not notice any problems, so we are now waiting on whether that fuel went in or not," he said.

Renault ordered car to stop
Taffin revealed that the first warning the team had that there was not enough fuel was when the data on Vettel's in-lap showed a lack of fuel in the collector. With Renault convinced at the time there was enough petrol in the tank, Taffin said it suspected a fuel system failure - which is why it ordered Red Bull to stop the car because it did not want to risk damaging the engine.

"We were sure at that point that we had the required level, so we did not understand why we had this drop in collector level," he said. "At the time we had a brief discussion on our intercom where we said we have this problem, it is bizarre, it is weird, and it should not be this way. We thought that there was a problem in the fuel system somewhere and, as we later explained to the stewards, we could not afford to have a fuel pump that is running dry – because it could seize and cause the engine to be broken. That is why, when we discussed it with the [Red Bull] engineers, we gave the call to stop the car."

Renault expects an answer from Red Bull about the fuel 'robot' issue before the weekend, and says there will be little problem ensuring there is no repeat problem in the future.

When asked if they would change procedures for the final two races, Taffin said: "I think first we have to wait for the answer. If there was nothing we can find as an explanation we will be surprised, but we will review things with Red Bull and try and find the best solution between us. It will be a common decision. We will not do something on our own."

[aral]

Have a look at the tyre tracks. There must have been many cars that have been even further off the track!

[Websta]

How far is too far? If they are half a car width away from the white line, will they be penalised? I don't see how they could be if everyone is outside the white lines anyway.

That said, the system is working at the moment anyway, so it probably doesn't need any alterations. Still very strange that there is this massive grey area in the rules.

[Cam]

I actually think that's appaling. There are clear rules that state you are not allowed to leave the track. IMO - every one of them should be policed and if necessary punished. If it happens due to driver error, then the lap time should be at least slower than a previous comparable lap (no advantage). If it becomes okay to leave the track at certain areas because everyone does it - how do you police the situations when one does it to overtake (i.e. Vettel overtaking Grosjean, then yielding back that place?).

IMO - things like this should be zero-tolerance, at least to the point that drivers will do everything to avoid leaving the track in knowing that events like these at least get investigated by the stewards.

There seems to be tolerance depending on the track. The pitlane entrance at India is a recent example where basically all the drivers went outside the lines, but it was deemed okay. Key term here 'justifiable reason' - if the stewards say its okay, well, its okay. I think its covered here quite well:

20.2 Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.
A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track.
Should a car leave the track the driver may rejoin, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any advantage.
A driver may not deliberately leave the track without justifiable reason.

Source
It would be appalling if the ruling was not consistent for all drivers, which it seems to be.

[raymondu999]

Yeah. Consistency IMO is the most important. If you're not going to keep all drivers within the track limits, at least be consistent about it. But as Websta said - how "far" is "too far?" Obviously if their inside wheels are 1cm on the outside of the track limits, such as in the example picture, ok, that's acceptable. But what about a driver that went hideously off line? What then? How do they define "too far" from "way too far?"

[Cam]

good question. Maybe its a combination of "without gaining any advantage" + "without justifiable reason" = okay. You'd think the further offline they are the less advantage they get (unless its cutting a corner to reduce the travel distance).

I think in other sports (V8's for example) they warn the drivers when they do this and after so many times, they get a penalty. I can't recall hearing or seeing this in F1, maybe it's similar just no-one has pushed their luck that far.

[beelsebob]

To be honest, everywhere else this is very simple... you stay inside the white lines... If you're outside them, you're outside the track. The only reason it's different here is because they want the cars to scrape the barrier on the exit of turn 19. To my mind, keep the rules consistent, stop with the allowing it in certain places, and re-paint the white lines at turn 19 in abu dhabi, and ascari.

Problem solved.

[raymondu999]

Beelsebob - this is the penultimate corner, not Turn 19. This is Turn 20. Everyone was leaving the circuit there too.

[beelsebob]

Beelsebob - this is the penultimate corner, not Turn 19. This is Turn 20. Everyone was leaving the circuit there too.

Right, but the only reason that's allowed is because turn 19 was allowed a few years ago, and subsequently the "you can go over the lines at abu dhabi" thing has kinda expanded.

[Phil]

I guess if the stewards told the drivers at a briefing prior to the race "folks, it's alright to go wide (and leave the track) on turn 19" - then I guess it's okay. However, what happens then, if a driver goes wide in that corner, whilst overtaking someone? Will it be still okay? I would think not - hence, why I think there should be no exceptions. The track is defined by the white lines and as per the rules state explicitly, you shall not leave the track. If you do and you gain an advantage (which could be measured by the sector-time), it should at least be investigated so that drivers know they are playing with fire when they do so.

I guess there's also the point that a driver might slide beyond the confines of the track - but I think as long as stewards show their intentions of investigating and deciding on a per incident basis, there's some room for common-sense and fair judgement. Penalities could be anything from reprimand to drive-throughs I guess.

[andartop]

One must not fail to take into consideration the # 1 rule in F1:

"All breaches of the sporting & technical regulations may or may not result in a penalty, depending on the stewards' ultimate judgement."

Webber for example went way off the line while playing with Massa, cut through the chicane and rejoined the track at a time when it was very obviously not safe to do so (by anyone's standards), and no action was taken, while there are numerous examples in the past of drivers getting drive through penalties for doing exactly the same thing..

[RicerDude]

Have a look at the tyre tracks. There must have been many cars that have been even further off the track!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDY_F5VaIqs[/youtube]

Look at T1 and how far michael goes off the track. The drivers were doing it all weekend and noone got penalised.

[AnthonyG]

From what I understand leaving the track is accepted if it lengthens the lap. (in distance, not time)

[ESPImperium]

From what I understand leaving the track is accepted if it lengthens the lap. (in distance, not time)

That is true. Take Variante Ascari at Monza, it lengthens the track by a reported 8 meters if you go onto the run off on the exit of the 3rd corner of that section. However it may lengthen the lap, but it gains you up to half a second if you can straighten the Ascari complex up and also in terms of top end speed at the end at Parabolica it will give you time there.

However if you look at turn 4 at Hockenheim (The hairpin at the end of the back straight/bend) if you do a Vettel and do off the track there, you are shortening the track by up to 24m depending on how you take it and on what line. Also the last corner at the same track can gain you up to 12m in time if you were to go all 4 off the track, but the drag strip at the second to last and last corner there can gain you up to 7 tenths alone if you can get it right as its a brake from 5th down to 3rd then flat acceleration all the way around with you going onto the S/F straight in 5th gear if not 6th if you have the downforce and confidence.

Most of the time its track dependent.

One track that has risk reward at a section correct is Suzuka at the Degners, 1m over the line and youll just about get away with it if you have the skill and talent, however if you go 1.5m off the track, the astroturf will just suck you into the gravel. Also the exit to the second has a tramac run off, however is just far enough away so you go over gravel before you even get to it. Also the speed humps at spoon where Kimi got beached are a great idea, something that as soon as you touch them you unsettle the car and it spins around no questions asked. However what Austrailia did this year on the exit of turn 5 was great, speed humps that went so far along that it ruined your lap if you went over them as they were low enough to not beach but also high enough to make a mess if you got it totally wrong.

[Nando]

From what I understand leaving the track is accepted if it lengthens the lap. (in distance, not time)

That is true. Take Variante Ascari at Monza, it lengthens the track by a reported 8 meters if you go onto the run off on the exit of the 3rd corner of that section. However it may lengthen the lap, but it gains you up to half a second if you can straighten the Ascari complex up and also in terms of top end speed at the end at Parabolica it will give you time there.

It depends on how much you cut it. Fastest way is to cut it but you can´t cut it too much because then you are spending time going in the "wrong" direction that you´ll never catch up before Parabolica.