speeding behind safety car

[lebesset]

it will not have escaped anyone's attention that both button and hamilton were caught speeding behind the safety car
I don't know the rule , in fact I didn't know there was such a rule ....the safety car sets the pace and you follow the car in front of you so it seems to me to be anti intuitive

the two cars caught were not directly following each other as I remember it , so does anyone have any idea of how this came about for them , but not for the car [ or cars ] in between them ; seems a rather large coincidence that it was two cars from the same team ....maybe it was not on the same lap ?

[beelsebob]

Yeh, I can't figure this out either – they were line astern with a car between them... How did they get a penalty, but not the one between them?

[Roland Ehnström]

The Hamilton penalty must have been a mistake, since his car was stationary at the time - he was the reason for the safety car in the first place!

Button's penalty was probably from when he was sprinting out of the pits to join the queue behind the safety car. I was actually surprised that there was no red light at the pit exit for Button at that point (remember the incident in 2008, for example), has this rule been changed for this year? Normally the pit exit is closed (red light) as the field passes behind the safety car, no?

[beelsebob]

The Hamilton penalty must have been a mistake, since his car was stationary at the time - he was the reason for the safety car in the first place!

No, this was deemed to have taken place during the first SC period.

[Linda Hardy]

never knew there was such a thing as speeding behind the safety car, if they were speeding wouldn't they of hit the car in front of them, so does that mean the car in front was speeding also, and so on and so on, interesting one though.

Linda
http://www.facebook.com/GirlsLikeF1Too (not just for girls, anyone is welcome to join in, contains F1 news, pics, blogs etc)

[beelsebob]

never knew there was such a thing as speeding behind the safety car, if they were speeding wouldn't they of hit the car in front of them, so does that mean the car in front was speeding also, and so on and so on, interesting one though.

The issue is before the cars form up behind the safety car – they're given sector times on their dash/wheel that they must not dip under. Given that both Ham and But were in amongst other cars at the time, it seems odd that they dipped under, but the other cars didn't.

Conspiracy - were they given slower times than the other cars?

[747heavy]

.........
I don't know the rule , in fact I didn't know there was such a rule ....the safety car sets the pace and you follow the car in front of you ......

40.7
All competing cars must reduce speed and form up in line behind the safety car no more than ten car lengths apart.

In order to ensure that drivers reduce speed sufficiently, from the time at which the “SAFETY CAR DEPLOYED” message is shown on the timing monitors until the time that each car crosses the first safety car line for the second time, drivers must stay above the minimum time set by the FIA ECU.

[Callum]

The thing that confuses me is that for the first safety car none of the drivers were 'catching up' on the safety car. It was from a standing start.

Therefore if they were speeding behind the safety car then that surely means that the safety car was going too quickly??

[Pup]

It's doubly strange, since the minimum lap time should still allow the cars to catch up to the safety car under normal conditions. There should be no way at all that a car that's already up to the safety car should be in danger of catching a penalty.

Here are the lap times in question, btw, which someone posted on atlas -

Lap 1:
http://i.imgur.com/IF2eb.png
Lap 2:
http://i.imgur.com/C6v6c.png
Lap 3:
http://i.imgur.com/6Ek6x.png
Lap 4:
http://i.imgur.com/osgUc.png

[astracrazy]

At no point do Hamilton or Button post the quickest time around the track under the safety car?
Unless it is actual speed they have done (in terms of kph) but then it's going to be as fast at the ones in front.

Its strange. We would have heard more i feel if macca felt wrongfully treated.

can't find anything on the fia website for steward reports either - thought they had to be posted on there

edit: at the time i thought perhaps a problem with the two cars delta, it seemed strange that it was both mclarens

[beelsebob]

It's doubly strange, since the minimum lap time should still allow the cars to catch up to the safety car under normal conditions. There should be no way at all that a car that's already up to the safety car should be in danger of catching a penalty.

Here are the lap times in question, btw, which someone posted on atlas -

Lap 1:
http://i.imgur.com/IF2eb.png
Lap 2:
http://i.imgur.com/C6v6c.png
Lap 3:
http://i.imgur.com/6Ek6x.png
Lap 4:
http://i.imgur.com/osgUc.png

Well that actually somewhat confirms my conspiracy theory. None of these laps were the fastest of anyone on the grid. What's going on?

[andrew]

The Radio 5 commentary said was because they had gone faster than their delta time so are deemed to have been speeding.

[beelsebob]

The Radio 5 commentary said was because they had gone faster than their delta time so are deemed to have been speeding.

Right – but as the data above says, they at no point set the fastest delta times, so that must mean that they had higher delta times than the rest of the field.

[andrew]

It's not to do with teh fastest. I think it is based on a target time.

[Callum]

It's not to do with teh fastest. I think it is based on a target time.

But surely everyone would have the same delta time?