[Official] British Grand Prix 2021: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 10 of 23

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by GingerPixel

Nobody was injured and an already heated rivalry just hot hotter.

Whilst true that neither driver was injured - I have heard from someone at the track that a spectator did suffer minor injuries from the debris that flew into the crowd.

Talking of spectators:

Three men break into Silverstone only to emerge next to armed policing team

'Northants Police ARV tweeted: "That moment you and your mates scale a fence and scramble out of the hedge row to gain free entry to Silverstone GP, only to emerge straight into the path of an ARV and @northantsdogs PD Walt. 3 males detained and escorted off the premises by circuit security."'

[ascarracinguk]

my claim to fame?

As an 11 year old, Mark Webber broke my finger when he span his CLK GTR at Donington...

...its amazing how far a bit of gravel will go, fly through catch fencing and be able to hit you plumb on the knuckle...

I did get a signed Mercedes flag out of it at the end of the day though so not all bad

Also been hit by a tennis ball sized bit of rubber from Alan Mcnish in the R8....i have a feeling people dont like me

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

As an 11 year old, Mark Webber broke my finger

I have a Webber connection, but not as interesting as yours.

I was at the Austin TX WEC race (2015 or 2016... can't remember which). The drivers were meeting fans in a long line on the pit straight with fans on one side of a barricade and drivers on the other. They were walking left to right and handing out driver cards, chatting with fans, etc. Hartley and other Porsche drivers gave me a card, and then Webber was approaching me. He just totally ignored me and moved on to the next guy to my right. Note, there was not a crush of people like he just accidently skipped me due to the size of the crowd. He just pretended I didn't exist. There were large gaps in the line, so I moved down to the right into a gap. When Webber came up to me again, he just gave me a look and moved on past to the next guy. I should have tried a third time and ask if I am invisible, but I just went on with my day.

It left me puzzled. I must remind him of someone he doesn't care for. I have returned the favor and I am not quite a fan of him anymore either.

Richard

[S griffin]

Webber always has come across as a nice guy and the WEC has always seemed fan friendly. Maybe he was just having a bad day? But sorry you had that experience with him. I'm sure others have had a better experience with him. But yes, it is a mystery, it's as if you were camouflaged or something

[Peter Mallett]

All very strange, he used to own a pub near me. Very sociable but I guess sometimes people can blank someone for no reason. On the other hand he may have had good reason to think you were a stalker. You never know.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

It left me puzzled. I must remind him of someone he doesn't care for. I have returned the favor and I am not quite a fan of him anymore either.

I'd like to think that he's reading this now and thinking:

'I remember that day at Austin, where I thought XXXXX was trying to pester me and I kept ignoring them. They never seemed to take the hint - but now I realise it was someone else'

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Webber always has come across as a nice guy and the WEC has always seemed fan friendly. Maybe he was just having a bad day? But sorry you had that experience with him. I'm sure others have had a better experience with him. But yes, it is a mystery, it's as if you were camouflaged or something

I don't really hold it against him (well, maybe a tiny bit ). He clearly thought I had done something wrong for him to zero in on me like he did. He was treating everyone else fine. I have zero clue what it might have been. I think he thought I was someone else. At this point it is just a funny story for me.

Richard

[Anyopenroad]

Somewhat lost in the discussion is the admission by Mercedes that the damage to Hamilton’s left front would have caused a retirement had they not been able to fix it during the red flag.

Apart from further dismantling the nonsense claim that Hamilton deliberately drive into Verstappen, it does raise the question of why teams are allowed to work on cars during a red flag period. It’s not obvious to me why parc ferme rules do not apply. If a car is damaged a team should either retire it or fix it during a pitstop during the race.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

Somewhat lost in the discussion is the admission by Mercedes that the damage to Hamilton’s left front would have caused a retirement had they not been able to fix it during the red flag.

Apart from further dismantling the nonsense claim that Hamilton deliberately drive into Verstappen, it does raise the question of why teams are allowed to work on cars during a red flag period. It’s not obvious to me why parc ferme rules do not apply. If a car is damaged a team should either retire it or fix it during a pitstop during the race.

Good question that!

Ive always wondered the same.

Its the same as repairing a car after crashing on the outlap...think its happened a few times withh George and Max, and also repairs during red flag periods to multiple cars.

Actually, i think you can change tyres during red flag too? didnt stroll or gasly profit from that at Monza last year?

[Peter Mallett]

1976 Brands Hatch .......

But what was pleasing was the use of duct tape for the repairs.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

Somewhat lost in the discussion is the admission by Mercedes that the damage to Hamilton’s left front would have caused a retirement had they not been able to fix it during the red flag.

Oh dear. That is not going to make some already upset people feel any better!

[BertMk2]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

Somewhat lost in the discussion is the admission by Mercedes that the damage to Hamilton’s left front would have caused a retirement had they not been able to fix it during the red flag.

Apart from further dismantling the nonsense claim that Hamilton deliberately drive into Verstappen, it does raise the question of why teams are allowed to work on cars during a red flag period. It’s not obvious to me why parc ferme rules do not apply. If a car is damaged a team should either retire it or fix it during a pitstop during the race.

Agreed, it was odd, I'd have thought at the very least you'd have to start from the pitlane.

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

But what was pleasing was the use of duct tape for the repairs.

I wondered about that - you'd have thought they'd have just swapped the whole front wing rather than go for the glue and duct tape approach.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

No. I think it only really started when discussion turned to considering the outcome of a collision rather than the driving that led to it when considering the penalty to be applied.

Masi had this to say:

Penalising Hamilton for severity of Verstappen’s crash not an option – Masi

'“One of the big parts [which] has been a mainstay for many, many years is that – and this came through discussions prior to my time between all of the teams, the FIA and F1 – the team principals were all quite adamant that you should not consider the consequences in an incident.

“So when they’re judging incidents, they judge the incident itself and the merits of the incident, not what happens afterwards as a consequence. And that’s been something that the stewards have done for many years and have been advised to do from the top down.”

Red Bull team principal Christian Horner was among those who agreed to the principle, Masi noted.

Factoring in the repercussions of a crash would make penalty calls even more complicated, he added. “If you start taking consequences in to account, there’s so many variables rather than judging the incident itself on its merits.”'

[Anyopenroad]

There is just too much randomness involved. A tiny tap can send a car careering off, into the air or continuing in its merry way with miniscule differences in angle, speed or place of impact. It is not possible to reliably connect the severity of the infraction with the severity of the outcome. There’s too much physics.

[chillibowl]

one has to be careful with handing out penalties based on the consequences if for no other reason then the consequences are not always immediately known.

if Max had been able to stay in the race after the contact but his car subsequently broke down 30 laps later would that have still been Hamilton's fault?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Good question that!

Ive always wondered the same.

Its the same as repairing a car after crashing on the outlap...think its happened a few times withh George and Max, and also repairs during red flag periods to multiple cars.

Actually, i think you can change tyres during red flag too? didnt stroll or gasly profit from that at Monza last year?

To give some context. The cars are released from Parc fermé conditions at the start of the formation lap. From this point, the teams are permitted to make changes to the cars.
When a Red Flag is produced, this means the race is suspended, but technically is still running at that point. This is simply because conditions mean it is unsafe to continue racing.

We regularly read posts asking for F1 to be more simple, and yet we also want the red flag rules to be more complicated?

The red flag rule is simple, it is unsafe to continue racing. That said, the regulations do limit the amount of work permitted under red flag conditions, and these are intended to make the cars safe to continue:
'Cars may be worked on once they have stopped in the fast lane but any such work is restricted to that listed in i) to ix) below and must not impede the resumption of the sprint qualifying session or the race.
i) Starting the engine and any directly associated preparation.
ii) The addition of compressed gases (see Article 4.5 of the Technical Regulations).
iii) The fitting or removal of permitted cooling and heating devices.
iv) Changes to the air ducts around the front and rear brakes during the race only.
v) Changes to the radiator ducts during the race only.
vi) Changes made for driver comfort.
vii) Changing wheels and tyres.
viii) Repair of genuine accident damage, including the replacement of assemblies containing such damaged parts.
ix) The aerodynamic set up of the front wing may be adjusted using the existing parts. No parts may be added, removed or replaced.'

In the case of Mercedes, they replaced the wheels and repaired the temperature sensor.
"We'd failed the rim where we'd had the contact on the front-left,” said the team’s trackside engineering director Andrew Shovlin, “so that would have been a DNF had it not been red-flagged. The rest of the damage was actually remarkably little,” he added. “It was a tyre temperature sensor that had got knocked loose, so it was waggling around, but amazingly, it's the least important part on the front wing – and it was the only one that broke."

Mercedes may have made the decision that a repair to the front wing meant that they didn't have to use a spare. Both to save this for any potential further damage during the race, and to keep their expenditure on spare parts down?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

To give some context. The cars are released from Parc fermé conditions at the start of the formation lap. From this point, the teams are permitted to make changes to the cars.
When a Red Flag is produced, this means the race is suspended, but technically is still running at that point. This is simply because conditions mean it is unsafe to continue racing.

We regularly read posts asking for F1 to be more simple, and yet we also want the red flag rules to be more complicated?

The red flag rule is simple, it is unsafe to continue racing. That said, the regulations do limit the amount of work permitted under red flag conditions, and these are intended to make the cars safe to continue:
'Cars may be worked on once they have stopped in the fast lane but any such work is restricted to that listed in i) to ix) below and must not impede the resumption of the sprint qualifying session or the race.
i) Starting the engine and any directly associated preparation.
ii) The addition of compressed gases (see Article 4.5 of the Technical Regulations).
iii) The fitting or removal of permitted cooling and heating devices.
iv) Changes to the air ducts around the front and rear brakes during the race only.
v) Changes to the radiator ducts during the race only.
vi) Changes made for driver comfort.
vii) Changing wheels and tyres.
viii) Repair of genuine accident damage, including the replacement of assemblies containing such damaged parts.
ix) The aerodynamic set up of the front wing may be adjusted using the existing parts. No parts may be added, removed or replaced.'

In the case of Mercedes, they replaced the wheels and repaired the temperature sensor.
"We'd failed the rim where we'd had the contact on the front-left,” said the team’s trackside engineering director Andrew Shovlin, “so that would have been a DNF had it not been red-flagged. The rest of the damage was actually remarkably little,” he added. “It was a tyre temperature sensor that had got knocked loose, so it was waggling around, but amazingly, it's the least important part on the front wing – and it was the only one that broke."

Mercedes may have made the decision that a repair to the front wing meant that they didn't have to use a spare. Both to save this for any potential further damage during the race, and to keep their expenditure on spare parts down?

Doesn't ix) mean that the whole wing couldn't be replaced?

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

one has to be careful with handing out penalties based on the consequences if for no other reason then the consequences are not always immediately known.

if Max had been able to stay in the race after the contact but his car subsequently broke down 30 laps later would that have still been Hamilton's fault?

Also don't forget, some jurisdictions will apply criminal law to accidents. Italy 1970 and 1994 comes to mind. Don't really think F1 or the FIA want to go down that route.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Doesn't ix) mean that the whole wing couldn't be replaced?

I think viii) meant that they could replace the whole wing in the circumstances 'Repair of genuine accident damage, including the replacement of assemblies containing such damaged parts.'

ix) seems to be there to prevent changing a whole wing if there is no damage present.

I do wonder if the budget cap was part of the reason for not changing the whole wing - and also with a near-full race distance still to complete, the risk of another incident?

[crmalcolm]

And to sum up how the important stuff in F1 is reported in 2021:

'Furious Max Verstappen unfollows Lewis Hamilton on Instagram after Silverstone smash'

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

Good question that!

Ive always wondered the same.

Its the same as repairing a car after crashing on the outlap...think its happened a few times withh George and Max, and also repairs during red flag periods to multiple cars.

Actually, i think you can change tyres during red flag too? didnt stroll or gasly profit from that at Monza last year?

I believe that allowing cars to be "repaired" on the grid during a red flag period stems from a time long in the past, when it was not uncommon for multiple cars to be damaged requiring the race to be suspended (red flagged) especially just after the start. It therefore made sense to permit those repairs to take place otherwise it might well have decimated the field.

Wasn't this a cause of a virtual "riot" by spectators at another British GP but this one at Brands, and didn't it involve some damage that needed to be repaired on Nigel Mansell's car? And didn't he then go on to win the race?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

And to sum up how the important stuff in F1 is reported in 2021:

'Furious Max Verstappen unfollows Lewis Hamilton on Instagram after Silverstone smash'

Good grief. That's some top level journalism there.........

[Beau2]

Spa 98 would have certainly been less interesting if drivers weren't allowed to use 'T' cars or make repairs under red flag conditions!

[Greem]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

one has to be careful with handing out penalties based on the consequences if for no other reason then the consequences are not always immediately known.

if Max had been able to stay in the race after the contact but his car subsequently broke down 30 laps later would that have still been Hamilton's fault?

For some people, yes!

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

And to sum up how the important stuff in F1 is reported in 2021:

'Furious Max Verstappen unfollows Lewis Hamilton on Instagram after Silverstone smash'

What’s worse? That he did, that someone bothered to check this, that you posted this, or that I and Aysedasi responded to your post.

Or to quote Obi-Wan. Who’s the most foolish, the fool or fool that follows the fool.