Strange going-ons at Red Bull

[mcdenife]

All the sources close to the team and the initial team comments blame Webber.

Initial being the key word. The team has since been shown to be issuing contradictory messages (read Lying).

The obvious and reasonable explanation for this is that indeed the Red Bull drivers were under order not to fight each other when one of them was ahead.

Do you really believe this or are you just saying this because it involves a German driver. A more obvious explanation from the teams behaviour so far, is that the team wanted said German driver win.

Vettel was by no means executing that pass impudently, rashly, inpatiently and stupidly. He is much too intelligent for that.

What he has shown is that he lacks intelligence, not so much for the act as for the aftermath.

[WhiteBlue]

If Vettel had not turned to the right...would he have gotten past and avoided a collision?

This is difficult to answer as we do not know how much grip there was off the racing line and how deep Vettel would have been carried into the corner in order to completely clear Mark's car. It would be very speculative to answer that with confidence.

If so does that not make his move an unintelligent error?

No, it would only make it an unintelligent error if general racing rules had applied at Red Bull for team mates. I believe that was not the case. Red Bull wants their drivers to rather yield a position than risk to collide in a team mate passing situation.

Why is it Webbers responsibility to avoid a collision when there was arguably not enough time to move out of the way when he was already moving to the right anyway?

IMO, you are in error there twice. Webber had enough time to move away. He was not moving right but holding the line until the wheels touched or very shortly prior to that event. He had a very clear view of Vettel's car which was two meters further up the road. Vettel was coming right relatively slowly and Webber was steering straight when he should have conceded the racing line to his team mate.

Webber had every opportunity to avoid the crash but did not use it. QED

[Mysticf1]

This is difficult to answer as we do not know how much grip there was off the racing line and how deep Vettel would have been carried into the corner in order to completely clear Mark's car. It would be very speculative to answer that with confidence.

so he could have gotten past but not made the corner? THATS HIS PROBLEM!!!

[Chaparral]

Herr Whiteblue spokesman for Sebastien Vettel has spoken - so no other opinions are an option

IMO, you are in error there twice. Webber had enough time to move away. He was not moving right but holding the line until the wheels touched or very shortly prior to that event. He had a very clear view of Vettel's car which was two meters further up the road. Vettel was coming right relatively slowly and Webber was steering straight when he should have conceded the racing line to his team mate.

Webber had every opportunity to avoid the crash but did not use it. QED

Vettel isnt two metres up the road he may be a metre ahead on the 'dirty' side of the track and you know your not going to make the next corner stick and thats just plain stupid full stop - forget whatever is supposed to have come down the line from team management or not - you dont know I dont know

[WhiteBlue]

The obvious and reasonable explanation for this is that indeed the Red Bull drivers were under order not to fight each other when one of them was ahead.

Do you really believe this or are you just saying this because it involves a German driver.

I do take a position for Vettel here because he is a German driver and I believe that the majority of the press did not care to consider the true reasons for the accident. They only looked at the obvious aspects of the incident and made their judgement based on superficial impressions. It is legit in my view that users support the drivers of their own nationality. Naturally Chaparral, Mr. Moda or djos will support Webber. That is ok with me.

A more obvious explanation from the teams behaviour so far, is that the team wanted said German driver win.

I remain convinced that they wanted maximum points and they thought that the Vettel - Webber order would make max points more probable. Vettel had been the faster of the two Red Bull drivers on Saturday until his shock absorber linkage came loose and damaged his lower wishbone in the crucial last five minutes of Q3.

[Richard]

so he could have gotten past but not made the corner? THATS HIS PROBLEM!!!

Agreed

Often, a driver tries to get ahead of a slower car by entering the braking zone at a faster speed and then outbraking the slower car, often ending up missing the apex. The slower car often gets the better line and retakes the position.

The rumoured RB RoE seem to encourage a driver to approach the braking zone too fast and get a wheel ahead. Then the slower driver has to brake early to let the car that is "ahead" brake early and recover from what would otherwise be a certain trip off road. It encourages suicidal dives up the inside knowing the other chap will let you brake early and stay in front.

Remember all those moves at Hockenheim's hairpin? The car behind dives up the inside, crosses the nose of the car in front, but in most cases they lose traction on the exit and the move doesn't stick. Under RB RoE every one of those moves would stick. doh!

[Mysticf1]

I remain convinced that they wanted maximum points and they thought that the Vettel - Webber order would make max points more probable. Vettel had been the faster of the two Red Bull drivers on Saturday until his shock absorber linkage came loose and damaged his lower wishbone in the crucial last five minutes of Q3.

this doesnt hold water because a 1-3 vettel - webber is no different to a 1-3 webber vettel...nor a 1-2 either way..that doesnt even bring into account that if vettel was faster as we are told he could have defended against hamilton more effectively.

[WhiteBlue]

so he could have gotten past but not made the corner? THATS HIS PROBLEM!!!

Agreed

Often, a driver tries to get ahead of a slower car by entering the braking zone at a faster speed and then outbraking the slower car, often ending up missing the apex. The slower car often gets the better line and retakes the position.

The rumoured RB RoE seem to encourage a driver to approach the braking zone too fast and get a wheel ahead. Then the slower driver has to brake early to let the car that is "ahead" brake early and recover from what would otherwise be a certain trip off road. It encourages suicidal dives up the inside knowing the other chap will let you brake early and stay in front.

Remember all those moves at Hockenheim's hairpin? The car behind dives up the inside, crosses the nose of the car in front, but in most cases they lose traction on the exit and the move doesn't stick. Under RB RoE every one of those moves would stick. doh!

I see some merit in that point. A suicidal late braking maneuver for the inside would be irresponsible. But that hypothetical situation did not apply. Fact is they were not even close to the braking zone when they were colliding in Turkey. It was a simple dispute for the racing line were Vettel was significantly ahead. If it was 2m or 1.5 meters is not really relevant in this case IMO.

[mcdenife]

I do take a position for Vettel here because he is a German driver and I believe that the majority of the press did not care to consider the true reasons for the accident. They only looked at the obvious aspects of the incident and made their judgement based on superficial impressions. It is legit in my view that users support the drivers of their own nationality. Naturally Chaparral, Mr. Moda or djos will support Webber. That is ok with me.

It is one thing to support a driver for nationalistic reasons it is quite another to take a position on events, particularly this incident, solely based on that. And the majority of the press based their judgement, regarding the team support for Vettel over Mark, not on the incident but on what the team subsequently did afterwards and what later transpired.

I remain convinced that they wanted maximum points and they thought that the Vettel - Webber order would make max points more probable. Vettel had been the faster of the two Red Bull drivers on Saturday until his shock absorber linkage came loose and damaged his lower wishbone in the crucial last five minutes of Q3.

So you are saying the team decided on saturday he should win because he was faster on that day? In case it has escaped your notice, the race was on sunday, not saturday.

[WhiteBlue]

this doesnt hold water because a 1-3 vettel - webber is no different to a 1-3 webber vettel...nor a 1-2 either way..

A 1-3 Vettel-Hamilton-Webber was the most likely result IMO as Vettel was faster than Webber and would have opened a gap that Webber failed to open.

that doesnt even bring into account that if vettel was faster as we are told he could have defended against hamilton more effectively.

Unfortunately Vettel's speed potential would have only worked in free air and not stuck behind Webber. So his chances of fending off Hamilton were equal to Webber's chances. But as I said before he could have fended off Hamilton to pass him if he was running in front of Webber.

[Mysticf1]

I see some merit in that point. A suicidal late braking maneuver for the inside would be irresponsible. But that hypothetical situation did not apply. Fact is they were not even close to the braking zone when they were colliding in Turkey. It was a simple dispute for the racing line were Vettel was significantly ahead. If it was 2m or 1.5 meters is not really relevant in this case IMO.

If not even close to the braking zone, there was even less need for Vettel to move over and plenty of time for him to pass Webber COMPLETELY before moving onto the racing line.

how far ahead Vettel was is completely irrelevant your completely right.

A 1-3 Vettel-Hamilton-Webber was the most likely result IMO as Vettel was faster than Webber and would have opened a gap that Webber failed to open.

what would have happened if both redbulls hand not changed positon, hamilton would have picked them both off? Webber showed he could defend against hamilton in the first stint...what changed? Wasnt vettel up to the same task?

this is all pointless guessing and clear signs of a team cracking under the pressure.

[Richard]

....

IMHO you're miles over the line for civilised discourse. Discuss the post, not the poster. If you believe discussion is futile then move onto another discussion.

[xpensive]

....

IMHO you're miles over the line for civilised discourse. Discuss the post, not the poster. If you believe discussion is futile then move onto another discussion.

Not at all, I'm with Chap all the way here.

[WhiteBlue]

It is one thing to support a driver for nationalistic reasons it is quite another to take a position on events, particularly this incident, solely based on that.

You are distorting my motifs there. Supporting a driver of the same nationality isn't nationalistic. I don't like this kind of accusations. Please remain fair in the discussion!

So you are saying the team decided on saturday he should win because he was faster on that day? In case it has escaped your notice, the race was on sunday, not saturday.

Obviously I'm not saying that. It is your rhetoric trick putting such words in my mouth. It would be rather foolish to believe that a team makes a decision on Saturday who should win a race based on qualifying speed.

What I say is that Vettel was faster. He had been faster on Saturday with equal material compared to Webber and that did not suddenly change over night as the parc ferme rules conserve the Saturday conditions for race day. I already explained why Red Bull had reasons to get their faster driver in front.

[Chaparral]

....

IMHO you're miles over the line for civilised discourse. Discuss the post, not the poster. If you believe discussion is futile then move onto another discussion.

Why Richard - I know this guy and his ways - he just clogs up a forum with his diatribe - I seem to remember you PMing me a while back about asking me about "attacking" Whiteblue what should I assume from that - your a follower
give me a break ace