2014 Japanese Grand Prix - Suzuka

[Richard]

What if the tea tray touches standing water? Wouldn't the supply of air under the floor be interrupted, and that would lead to a sudden loss of downforce?

[McMrocks]

What if the tea tray touches standing water? Wouldn't the supply of air under the floor be interrupted, and that would lead to a sudden loss of downforce?

possible but the sides of the floor (step-plane) are 5cm higher than the tea-tray. The diffuser gets the air from that area. And if the water is more than 5cm high you should really consider red-flagging that race.

We could also discuss whether the car have more df when driving through water (as water is heavier)

[Manoah2u]

But as someone pointed out. To cover Suzuka with cranes, would take over 50 cranes. Monaco can almost be done with less than 20. Due to the fact you can park a crane withing 5 feet of the actual track. Not possible at Suzuka. Its only really possible on a street circuit. So cranes will never work due to the size and surrounding areas of the tracks. The only way i can see it getting safer without throwing SC out every accident would be to heavily penalise the drivers if they are not going through yellow flags at half speed. To be honest, the way it is today is as good as it needs to be. Its a freak accident that makes people panic and over react. When really the blame is heavily at the drivers feet for losing control of his vehicle. 19 cars made it through that corner without a problem that lap. So he must have done something different.

I just hope the poor guy pulls through and we can see it as a lucky escape and can move on.

true, but you wouldn't need a crane for every corner imho, the fast dangerous corners are where you get the deal with it.
i'll admit i still think it's essentially not fixing the real underlying problem. It's like extending and asphalting an aircraft carrier so you can land a private jet there. The problem is; a private jet has nothing to do on an aircraft carrier so if it crashes on it because it's too short, then is the aircraft carrier the problem or the fact a private jet was forced to land there?

this entire race either never should have started, or should have started earlier, or should have been terminated some laps before. the entire race was just an accident waiting to happen, unfortunately, it indeed, did happen. If the race was terminated before, we wouldn't be having this conversation at all.
If after sutil crashed, there would have been an immediate call for a safety car, as it imho was begging for, then nothing would have happened either. Unfortunately, none of the things that needed to happen never happened, and the things that should not have happened, happened.

why? control. I think Honda's organisators for this track are to blame atleast partially. Game should have started before, but peeps only cared for $$ so we be waiting. How the FIA ever accepted such a thing is beyond me. I'd say f*ck em, pack your bags, and goodbye, have fun with your sold tickets without anybody showing up to race.

speed limiters are a great idea, and good solution, but despite that, these circumstances should just not happen.

[aral]

true, but you wouldn't need a crane for every corner imho, the fast dangerous corners are where you get the deal with it.
.

Unfortunatlely, accidents are not confined to corners! So what happens when a car crashes at a point away from a corner? Apart from that, Suzuka is something loke 5.8 kms long, so 50 cranes would mean one every 100m. And i have never seen mobile cranes with a 50 m reach.

[mrluke]

Aquaplaning is primarily about ride height.

Ehm, no. Aquaplaning has to do with loss of traction when water isn't dispersed sufficiently enough and causes the tire to lift and lose contact to the road surface. How much water can be dispersed depends on the state/type of tire (more specifically, its grooves), the amount of water on the surface, the speed of the vehicle and weight (+ downforce) of the vehicle among others. Worn tires offer less depth in the grooves which means less water that can be dissipated.

Top 2 google links...

http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/aquaplaning.html

Unlike aquaplaning in road cars, problem with an F1 car is that the water can build up both between the tires and track, and if there is really to much water, between the car's underbody and the track. In either case the grip between the tires and track is lost as the car runs on a film of water rather grippy asphalt - and there is no way to regain control once you start aquaplaning.

The other risk from aquaplaning in Formula 1 car can happen when the car is literally lifted off the track by the barrier of water between the track and its underbody. Teams want to run plank as close to the ground as possible for aerodynamic reasons, and with such little ground clearance the risk of aquaplaning increases.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111579

AUTOSPORT technical expert Craig Scarborough explains the factors that decide when a wet track is too wet for F1 running.

AQUAPLANING

Running in the wet can only be allowed up to a certain point for safety reasons. The biggest danger for drivers is aquaplaning, where the amount water on the track forms too big a barrier under the car.

Unlike aquaplaning in road cars, with a F1 the water can build up both between the tyres and track, and between the car's underbody and the track.

In either case the grip between the tyres and track is lost as the car effectively runs on a film of water rather grippy asphalt - and there is no driving tactic to regain control once you start aquaplaning.

While I appreciate aquaplaning can occur purely from the tyres it is the fact that the car gets lifted off the road which causes f1 cars the biggest problems. I suspect this is why we saw a caterham spin off the track behind the safety car on brand new tyres.

The weight of the vehicle has very little to do with it, boats arent exactly featherweights.


Ps I have had a mobile crane on site lift a 5t load 86/90m. It was a fairly big crane

[erlik]

I don't know if this has been posted but I found it on the internet. It is Magnussen almost losing his car in turn 7, 2 laps before Bianchi...

http://www.gfycat.com/LightheartedDescriptiveBullfrog

[Regle]

A car slides off the track due to aquaplaining (if it happens once, it can – it will happen again), heavy rain, degrading tyres, a tractor a few meters in the trajectory of the racing line -> no SC?

Aquaplaning is not only a function of the amount of water on the track, but speed as well and most definately the state of tyres. How do you judge if a car hasn't simply aquaplaned off the track because of either too much speed or inadequate tyres or both?

You don't. It doesn't matter why it has happened. It has happened and can happen again -> dangerous.

[langwadt]

But as someone pointed out. To cover Suzuka with cranes, would take over 50 cranes. Monaco can almost be done with less than 20. Due to the fact you can park a crane withing 5 feet of the actual track. Not possible at Suzuka. Its only really possible on a street circuit. So cranes will never work due to the size and surrounding areas of the tracks. The only way i can see it getting safer without throwing SC out every accident would be to heavily penalise the drivers if they are not going through yellow flags at half speed. To be honest, the way it is today is as good as it needs to be. Its a freak accident that makes people panic and over react. When really the blame is heavily at the drivers feet for losing control of his vehicle. 19 cars made it through that corner without a problem that lap. So he must have done something different.

I just hope the poor guy pulls through and we can see it as a lucky escape and can move on.

true, but you wouldn't need a crane for every corner imho, the fast dangerous corners are where you get the deal with it.
i'll admit i still think it's essentially not fixing the real underlying problem. It's like extending and asphalting an aircraft carrier so you can land a private jet there. The problem is; a private jet has nothing to do on an aircraft carrier so if it crashes on it because it's too short, then is the aircraft carrier the problem or the fact a private jet was forced to land there?

this entire race either never should have started, or should have started earlier, or should have been terminated some laps before. the entire race was just an accident waiting to happen, unfortunately, it indeed, did happen. If the race was terminated before, we wouldn't be having this conversation at all.
If after sutil crashed, there would have been an immediate call for a safety car, as it imho was begging for, then nothing would have happened either. Unfortunately, none of the things that needed to happen never happened, and the things that should not have happened, happened.

why? control. I think Honda's organisators for this track are to blame atleast partially. Game should have started before, but peeps only cared for $$ so we be waiting. How the FIA ever accepted such a thing is beyond me. I'd say f*ck em, pack your bags, and goodbye, have fun with your sold tickets without anybody showing up to race.

speed limiters are a great idea, and good solution, but despite that, these circumstances should just not happen.

If the conditions were so bad that they should stop why where so many on inters? There were two two crashes, unfortunately due to unbelievably unlucky circumstances one of them very serious, in an all wet race on a fast and challenging track. Sounds like the drivers were coping with the conditions.

[Phil]

Top 2 google links...

I was aware that the plank hitting standing water may cause aquaplaning as well, but I, for the most, part disagreed with your point of it being the primary reason for aquaplaning, especially the situation in which Bianchi went off. I could have definately worded it better though. Given that it was always going to be a wet-race, I pretty much assume most teams would have accounted for that to some part with the ride height so that it wouldn't become an primary issue. I suspect more cars would have gone off if they had aquaplanned due to the plank floating atop a layer of water and the race would have been red-flagged earlier.

If the car aquaplans due to the plank, it would make little difference if a car is on worn or new, or intermediate or full extreme wet tyres (though thanks to the suspension, the 4 tires assuming adequate thread/state would make some contact, albeit with less grip, to the surface) - something I doubt was (yet) a predominant factor when the Suzuka race ended. Just IMO of course.

[komninosm]

There´s no automatic deployment of the DRS.

I meant there's an automatic mechanism that enables the deployment of DRS (with a button press), not that DRS is deployed automatically.

[Just_a_fan]

Given that it was always going to be a wet-race, I pretty much assume most teams would have accounted for that to some part with the ride height so that it wouldn't become an primary issue.

I don't think the teams do raise the car's suspension for wet racing. The change in ride height comes from the tyres being of a larger diameter. Wet set up is more to do with downforce levels and suspension compliance to improve corner exit traction. At higher speeds, as the downforce increases, the plank gets closer to the road surface and any water thereon. That's why generally we see drivers losing control in faster corners (such as with Bianchi) but not when they're running behind the safety car at slow speed (unless they get heavy on the throttle and spin up the rear tyres).

Perhaps the FIA should mandate a minimum plank ride height for wet races - easily monitored using ride height sensors. Trickier in dry-to-wet races though.

[AnthonyG]

Regarding this accident, the best thing to do is to harder enforce slow driving at double yellow.

[lebesset]

Regarding this accident, the best thing to do is to harder enforce slow driving at double yellow.

I believe that is the crux of the matter

charlie whiting held a meeting on friday with the team principals and described the events at susuka ; all actions carried out on the track after the sutil crashed were exactly as per instructions

but with regard to the behavior of the drivers following the deployment of the double yellows he said that some drivers slowed down a lot but some only slowed down a little ; he refused to make any public comment as to how much bianchi slowed

if the drivers won't follow the double yellow rules [ be prepared to stop !]then they will have to be forced to do so ...surely preventing the cars leaving the track is the real solution , and it appears that this is the first approach being analysed

[NathanOlder]

He did a bad job, a life is on the line right now. How can you call that fantastic?

Talking about Charlie,
Are you still pointing your finger at CW for this ? or have you accepted that it was a freak accident and maybe, just maybe Jules wasn't be as cautious as he should have been. It would appear, he put his life at risk, as well as the marshals at suzuka. Charlie did what he needed to do, he just needed the drivers to do as they were instructed. unfortunately some drivers didn't

[langwadt]

He did a bad job, a life is on the line right now. How can you call that fantastic?

Talking about Charlie,
Are you still pointing your finger at CW for this ? or have you accepted that it was a freak accident and maybe, just maybe Jules wasn't be as cautious as he should have been. It would appear, he put his life at risk, as well as the marshals at suzuka. Charlie did what he needed to do, he just needed the drivers to do as they were instructed. unfortunately some drivers didn't

A race driver is going to go as fast as the (enforcement of) rules will allow, that's why we have a speed limit in the pits.
No one is going to slow down and give up seconds unless they know every one else is forced to do the same

So unless the FIA defines and enforce how to drive when there's is a caution, the drivers will be driving as fast as they can

It might also be an idea to extend the yellow zone to the next flag post, so that there's less incentive to race past an accident to get the best position for the green