|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
12 Apr 2012, 10:26 (Ref:3057731) | #1 | ||
The Honourable Mallett
20KPINAL
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 37,234
|
Hamilton 5 Place Penalty?
I thought they could change gearboxes etc. on or befor Friday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mot...ox-change.html |
||
__________________
I've decided to stop reaching out to people. I'm just going to contact them instead. |
12 Apr 2012, 11:45 (Ref:3057765) | #2 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 479
|
Sounds a bit harsh to me , but then the rules of F1 totally confuse me these days ! From the telegraph article it sounds as though they know the box has a problem but are gonna leave it in during practice and then change for quali .
|
||
__________________
I know the where , I still don’t know the when . |
12 Apr 2012, 12:10 (Ref:3057778) | #3 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Gearbox has got to last 4 races, so regardless of what happens on a Friday, that box from the last race has got to start its third race on Sunday, and if it's damaged in some way, what's the point?
Didn't Kimi have to take a 5 place grid penalty for a gearbox problem? Rules is rules. |
|
|
12 Apr 2012, 12:20 (Ref:3057782) | #4 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 479
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
I know the where , I still don’t know the when . |
12 Apr 2012, 12:24 (Ref:3057785) | #5 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 673
|
I'm a little confused - I thought there was both an allocation for the season and a penalty if you had to change after Friday (which I thought is what Kimi was hit with) - same rules as with engines. Am I totally wrong?
|
||
__________________
Paul Norris |
12 Apr 2012, 12:32 (Ref:3057789) | #6 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 5,695
|
A gearbox must last 5 consecutive races, changes out of that sequence will result in a penalty.
In Hamilton's case they are having to change the gearbox after only 2 consecutive races hence the penalty. Engines have a limit per season, there is no consecutive rule, simply that if they have that number but can chop and change across the season, so Australia's engine could race twice more over the season and probably make at least one other Friday appearance as well. |
||
|
12 Apr 2012, 12:37 (Ref:3057790) | #7 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Gearbox has to last five races, not four, as I stated earlier.
FIA sporting reg 28.6 a) Each driver may use no more than one gearbox for five consecutive Events in which his team competes. Should a driver use a replacement gearbox he will drop five places on the starting grid at that Event and an additional five places each time a further gearbox is used. Any replacement gearbox must be fitted with the same gear ratios that were declared under d) below and will only be required to complete the remainder of the Event in question. Any change to the gear ratios declared under d) below will incur a further five grid place penalty. In either case a new five race sequence may start at the following Event. Unless the driver fails to finish the race (or is unable to start the race for reasons other than a penalty imposed by the stewards) the gearbox fitted to the car at the end of the Event must remain in it for the remainder of the five race sequence. Any driver who failed to finish the race at the first, second, third or fourth of the five Events for reasons which the technical delegate accepts as being beyond the control of the team or driver, may start the following Event with a different gearbox without a penalty being incurred. A gearbox will be deemed to have been used once the car’s timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane. |
|
|
12 Apr 2012, 14:13 (Ref:3057851) | #8 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 673
|
Thanks chaps - I'd missed the "consecutive" bit somewhere along the way.
Still think it's a little odd that they don't have the same rules for both gearbox and engine, but since when did F1 do things sensibly? |
||
__________________
Paul Norris |
12 Apr 2012, 15:17 (Ref:3057884) | #9 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 11,402
|
No worries, Lewis will go on a charge...
|
||
|
12 Apr 2012, 15:39 (Ref:3057893) | #10 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,547
|
A penalty in China should not present Hamilton with too much difficulty, Monaco even with DRS now that would be a different matter altogether.
|
|
|
13 Apr 2012, 00:55 (Ref:3058130) | #11 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 6,760
|
I don't understand why they haven't switched the gearboxes to the engine method either. It is vastly superior giving an allocation rather than mandating consecutive appearances.
Has there ever been any word as to why they haven't harmonised this? |
||
__________________
"The world is my country, and science is my religion." - Christian Huygens: 17th century Dutch astronomer. |
13 Apr 2012, 01:25 (Ref:3058138) | #12 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
Gearbox has to last 5 races, if not 5 places penalty next race...
|
||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
13 Apr 2012, 02:59 (Ref:3058155) | #13 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
||
|
13 Apr 2012, 15:39 (Ref:3058470) | #14 | ||
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Quote:
It's a 'team' sport. |
||
|
13 Apr 2012, 16:33 (Ref:3058485) | #15 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 750
|
I dont see how it could possibly be unfair or undeserved when all the other cars in the field are following the same rule and are subject to the same penalties if they break them. This particular rule is very black/white and straight forward to understand
|
|
|
13 Apr 2012, 20:09 (Ref:3058565) | #16 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
Absolutely.
|
||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
13 Apr 2012, 21:47 (Ref:3058626) | #17 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 53
|
No doubt it's all cleverly boxed off in the Regs, but being an armchairist, my only query would be on safety issues - previously (& possibly now?), there have been Regs to allow components to be changed if their use could be considered dangerous, and a gearbox with a failing bearing could just about sometimes occasionally be a bit on the dangerous side of safe.
Being an old git, stuff like this makes me think back to Colin Chapman making components that lasted 1/2 a lap longer than Race distance (if the driver was lucky)...and also to Jim Clark, who had to manage without the assistance of chemical biological physicists telling him his gearbag was about to go bang. |
||
|
13 Apr 2012, 23:03 (Ref:3058658) | #18 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
It would be perfectly possible for an F1 team to fit a gearbox to the car that would last all season. I'm not absolutely sure how much the gearbox of a Mercedes tractor unit weighs, but they are often semi-automatic, and you could probably find the correct ratios in there somewhere.
|
|
|
14 Apr 2012, 11:10 (Ref:3058857) | #19 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
F1 regulations. So, so awful. Thought up by actual retards.
|
|
|
14 Apr 2012, 11:30 (Ref:3058870) | #20 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
Why so angry?
Yes, I do believe that the teams, including McLaren, did have a big hand in coming up with those regulations. It was thought that reliability was more important than performance (can't really argue with that when it comes to gearboxes), and that throwing in a new gearbox every time the car was rolled back into the garage was taking the 'conspicuous consumption' thing a bit too far. Likewise the engines. The engineers are now having to think about how they can make an engine more reliable, rather than when they just threw in another 'grenade' when the gearbox got changed. |
|
|
14 Apr 2012, 11:44 (Ref:3058879) | #21 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
And the sport is worse for it.
Yes, I am angry. Absolutely livid. Because I hate grid penalties, they are an absolute joke. I have been consistent on this very point for years and it is nothing to do with the fact it is a McLaren involved. It is an absolute nonsense and an inherently unfair rule as well because, whilst a penalty at China is not totally fatal, the same thing at Monaco would write an entire weekend off for something that may have occurred because of something beyond anybodies control. But still, at least all this penny pinching is helping teams like HRT and Marussia close the gap on the top teams at an inexorable rate. |
|
|
14 Apr 2012, 11:48 (Ref:3058883) | #22 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
All that McLaren need do is make a more reliable gearbox, which is completely within their control. Simples.
|
|
|
14 Apr 2012, 11:52 (Ref:3058888) | #23 | |
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
Gearboxes, or indeed any component, do not always break because of a design fault.
|
|
|
14 Apr 2012, 14:34 (Ref:3058955) | #24 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
That's not so simples but there you go...
|
||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
14 Apr 2012, 15:40 (Ref:3058986) | #25 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,144
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Hamilton's Spa penalty - fair?/ Massa Handed Win..Merged | ralf fan | Formula One | 1005 | 18 Sep 2008 14:20 |
10 place penalty for Hamilton and Rosberg | alonso11 | Formula One | 299 | 24 Jun 2008 02:06 |
Five place penalty for Kovalainen | Down F0rce | Formula One | 107 | 23 Jun 2008 16:42 |
Vettel gets 5 place penalty | Marbot | Formula One | 13 | 19 May 2008 20:11 |