bright on ambrose - Page 3

**GTRMagic** · 15 Apr 2003, 07:17 (Ref:569836)

Quote:

Originally posted by Crash Test
I thought the brake pedal slowed the car, preventing it from running into things... maybe I'm just going about this driving thing all wrong...

Well, I always thought brakes werent needed on a race car anyway, I mean the idea is to go faster not slower

mac · 15 Apr 2003, 07:30 (Ref:569839)

After the first hit. Have a look at the replay - as soon as Bright rejoins the track (in the middle of the left hand corner - where he would have been turning left) he goes straight ahead for a short period, until he hits Ambrose. The only reason he got round the corner was because Ambrose was on his outside.

Brakes would have worked, BUT as Bright began to turn he would have had NO idea of whether he could turn left or not. Hence understeering into Marcos.

Yes he finished second, but only because it was a safety car straight after this, during which he could easily cruise around. Have a look at the time after the incident through the last 2 corners. He is on full lock, and barely making it through 2 gradual corners.

I don't hear you conspiracy theorists *****ing about Murph's 3 drive throughs in Adelaide, or his 5 minute penalty at Bathurst, or Skaife's terrible drive through at Barbagallo last year. Grow up.

rocket · 15 Apr 2003, 08:02 (Ref:569857)

if you read past threads you would know there was a big uproar about murphys penality at bathurst & skaifs penality probably could of gone either way but he did gain a position after contact & that was why he got a penalty.
sure there have been incidents where drivers havent gotten a penality when they should of. we all want consistency in the penalities handed out but it isnt happening, if the rules are followed to the letter than bright would have been given a penalty & i believe he should get one as he did hit ambrose behind the B pillar.
you say "The only reason he got round the corner was because Ambrose was on his outside." & that is where bright is in the wrong even if his car is disabled it doesnt give him the right to continue using another car to get him around a corner, even if it ment he had to run of the track he SHOULD have backed off, the way his wheel was wobbling he would have realised quite quickly his steering was damaged

mac · 16 Apr 2003, 05:04 (Ref:570758)

I maintain that Bright would not have known that he could not turn left until he attempted to do so - at the next corner. He would not have known that he virtually needed to stop to get round one of the fastest corners on the track. And I suspect the stewards agree with me on that.

rocket · 16 Apr 2003, 06:45 (Ref:570799)

but when he re entered the track he had to turn left striaght away, now surely when he went to turn left at that point he would of realised something was wrong with the car & i presume from the way the wheel was pointing the car would have been pulling to the right.
anyway enough said about this & theres jack we can do about it anyway

mixxer · 16 Apr 2003, 07:26 (Ref:570815)

Well its just my 2 cents but with regard to the bright/Ambrose incident we could clearly hear Brighty "up it for the rent" pushing Ambrose with Ambrose's brake light's clearly visable well after they had initially made contact, we couldnt see if Bright's brake light's were on or not but the sound of the engine tells me I dont think he used the brake at all after the initial dive on the brakes when they first made contact.
My impression's on the initial contact are that we could hear Ambrose spinning up trying to get drive off that corner to get into the pits where as Brighty's car fairly lept out of that cnr in pursuit of Ambrose and he went down the inside with a lot of passing speed due to the wets he had on so I think the initial contact was a racing incident but everything after that was very suspect and should have resulted in Bright getting a penalty

:confused:

jetsetter · 23 Apr 2003, 10:25 (Ref:577842)

I don't know why everybody is jumping on Jason Brights case. Marcus Ambrose was coming into the pits and never once used an indicator. You can not just drive across the front of some one without indicating. If you ask me Marcus Ambrose was the lucky one, Failing to indicate is careless and reckless.

**GTRMagic** · 23 Apr 2003, 10:32 (Ref:577847)

And it took 4 hits to Ambrose's car and nudging him off the circuit to remind him to use his indicator next time???

The Tool Man · 23 Apr 2003, 11:49 (Ref:577890)

Quote:

Originally posted by Crash Test
I thought the brake pedal slowed the car, preventing it from running into things... maybe I'm just going about this driving thing all wrong...

Good One Tricky

I'll take the Brake Pedal out of the car tommorrow and just run into things to stop. When the Police ask me My answer will be " I Saw Jason Bright do it on televiosn and he's an expert driver!!!"

rocket · 23 Apr 2003, 23:53 (Ref:578807)

Quote:

Originally posted by jetsetter
I don't know why everybody is jumping on Jason Brights case. Marcus Ambrose was coming into the pits and never once used an indicator. You can not just drive across the front of some one without indicating. If you ask me Marcus Ambrose was the lucky one, Failing to indicate is careless and reckless.

is it compulsory for the drivers to use an indicator?????
i didnt think it was compulsory but more of a courtesy thing
but it still dosent give bright any reason to continue the push around the corner

rdmdog · 24 Apr 2003, 00:34 (Ref:578837)

Arent these cars fitted with data logging equipment that will prove things such as steering angle, throttle position, brake pressure etc?

No evidence MY AR&E!!

Not SO (ie Bright) guilty as sin!!!

**GTRMagic** · 24 Apr 2003, 00:46 (Ref:578843)

No permanent incar cameras as yet either, the technology is still not proven it seems...

Carrera cup seems to do ok with their Sony incar burner things

mac · 24 Apr 2003, 09:44 (Ref:579196)

Quote:

Originally posted by rdmdog
Arent these cars fitted with data logging equipment that will prove things such as steering angle, throttle position, brake pressure etc?

No evidence MY AR&E!!

Not SO (ie Bright) guilty as sin!!!

Yet with all of this to use as evidence, they still found him innocent .....

Oh, that's right, it's all a conspiracy.

Have you seen the telemetry and data? Maybe, just maybe, this information was enough to prove Bright's case, and subsequently exhonerate him.

But that doesn't fit into the evil Holden conspiracy theory, does it?

mixxer · 24 Apr 2003, 11:19 (Ref:579265)

no conspiracy theory in what I said, only fact apart from that I just take pix, own a holden and a ford and frankly dont give a stuff about all the sideline issues

rdmdog · 27 Apr 2003, 05:25 (Ref:581836)

MAC, "Yet with all of this to use as evidence, they still found him innocent .....

Oh, that's right, it's all a conspiracy.

Have you seen the telemetry and data? Maybe, just maybe, this information was enough to prove Bright's case, and subsequently exhonerate him......"

IF (?) this info was used to exhonerate Not So, then surely the stewards, who obviously in your opinion are above reproach, would not have said that there was no evidence to support finding either driver at fault, would they?

Mattracer · 28 Apr 2003, 07:29 (Ref:582544)

Perhaps they couldn't work out what they **** they were thinking either and said "whatever". Until they put a sensor on the drivers' brain waves it's their version against the stewards and it's up for us to argue about.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Bright DQ From Shoot Out	buza	Australasian Touring Cars.	12	24 Mar 2005 13:58
Bright to FPR	pete55	Australasian Touring Cars.	42	4 Oct 2004 05:54
Bright doesn't think much of us.	V8 Fan	Australasian Touring Cars.	26	4 May 2003 10:23
Rusty on Ambrose/Bright.	V8 Fan	Australasian Touring Cars.	15	3 May 2003 22:37
bright on ingall	rocket	Australasian Touring Cars.	19	1 Nov 2002 01:42