Could a chicane have been built safely?

[Woolley]

Does anyone else see the irony of making a temporary chicane out of old road tyres? Might have been better to use them on the cars...

[NJDMONEY]

Drilling the surface for bollards or kerbs was out of the question. Part of the chicane would have had to be on the oval racing surface.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by N I Tram

Midland choosing to race will not have made Toyota happy - quite the opposite. If they'd've stuck with their original pledge to have the tyre barrier built, leaving only Ferrari willing to race, there's no way they would have refused to build a barrier - and I think those who said it was safe can be trusted on that.

As for 'those who are chatting on the message board don't stand to gain or lose a cent either way', I know seveal tenthers went to Indy - and they've been robbed big time by all of this.

I agree with all that smoke pouring out of the Jordan

[Brian W Keske]

Originally Posted by mac

....... change tyres and suffer the penalty, come through pitlane each lap, or reduce the speed through the turn and have it monitored by the FIA.

If you are refering to a 'points penalty', the fans would have recognized they were seeing an exhibition, not a World Championship race that meant anything. Thus, there would have been an 'outcry' anyway.

Pitlane; see above

Reduce speeds for the Michelin cars; see above

If....if...a chicane could be built, at least all the cars would have been running under the same configuration, and the fans would have witnessed a real points paying World Championship round that meant something.

[fog_shadow]

not really. you drive the car as fast as you safely can. reducing speed on turn 13 to within safe limits is still racing. they could use their superior grip advantage on the other part of the track.

michellin teams were just being a bunch of stuck up wussies.

shadow

[Brian W Keske]

But Michelin obviously did not trust the drivers to slow down 'enough'.

Does this not all come down to a liability issue after Michelin admitted they had a problem?

If Michelin accepted/approved a chicane solution, I would also suspect they would have absorbed the liability under that condition also.

At least, if I were the FIA, I would have gotten that in writing.

Regardless, none of us know how slow the drivers were suppose to slow down, and if it would have looked obvious, again, I think the fans would have cryed foul. But again, Michelin did not seem comfortable putting this decision in the drivers hands.

[Gt_R]

I believe the FIA was willing to assist in monitoring the speeds of the Michelin drivers and have excess speed discouraged.

[Not Rated]

Originally Posted by Brian W Keske

Does this not all come down to a liability issue after Michelin admitted they had a problem?

If Michelin accepted/approved a chicane solution, I would also suspect they would have absorbed the liability under that condition also.

At least, if I were the FIA, I would have gotten that in writing.

Exactly. But it's not clear who would have been culpable in the event of an accident. According to the FIA press release:

"A chicane would have forced all cars, including those with tyres optimised for high-speed, to run on a circuit whose characteristics had changed fundamentally – from ultra-high speed (because of turn 13) to very slow and twisting. It would also have involved changing the circuit without following any of the modern safety procedures, possibly with implications for the cars and their brakes. It is not difficult to imagine the reaction of an American court had there been an accident (whatever its cause) with the FIA having to admit it had failed to follow its own rules and safety procedures."

So it seems, FIA would have had to bear the responsibility.

[djb]

Originally Posted by Woolley

Does anyone else see the irony of making a temporary chicane out of old road tyres? Might have been better to use them on the cars...

muy bien senor!!

(howdy btw)

[Brian W Keske]

Originally Posted by Not Rated

So it seems, FIA would have had to bear the responsibility.

But, would they not have beared the responsibility with one of their own options? : To tell the drivers to 'slow down', even saying they would monitor than section of the track for the 'correct slowness'?

To me, that would have been insane for the FIA to agreed to. They immeduiatly take the responsibility to allow, and monitor, a 'part' of the car that has been deemed unsafe by said manufacturer. Was the FIA going to release Michelin of any responsibility following an accident if a driver ignored the 'slowness issue' and then injured himself by stuffing it into the wall? I have to doubt it.

Again, it has been stated that temp. modifications have occured before in history of F1. These cars, drivers, and teams negotiate far worse than a chicane during the history of a season. If they are capable of the speeds around Monaco, (as example; with all the obstructions which surround them), I'm sure they could negotiate weaving through a chicane prior to attaining speed. They are all professional.

And if Michelin would have held the FIA 'harmless' with the chicane solution, I would tthink it preferable to the 'slow down' option where the FIA would have accepted responsibility.

But we were not privy to the discussions, so who knows,...but it would have been interesting to be the 'fly on the wall'.

In hindsight, there was obviously no good solution within the time all party had to make this decision, and redirect responsibility. But to me, it seems like these issues, in this case, went to the extreem. No matter what the rules, these situations could occur even with everyone following the stated rules at any race. There is always risk in racing. It seems 9 of 10 teams, plus Michelin, were willing to accept the risk of the chicane.

[mac]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Schumacher: Honestly I understood from talking to one of the drivers that despite turn 13, they would have had the problem anyway, with chicane or without chicane.

People seem to be ignoring this for one reason or another. Michael has said this on more than one occasion now.

Do we really know that a chicane would have definitely prevented the situation?

I still believe Michelin deliberately proposed a ludicrous idea that it knew the FIA could not impose in an attempt to deflect blame from themselves ....... allegedly.

[Not Rated]

Originally Posted by Brian W Keske

But, would they not have beared the responsibility with one of their own options? : To tell the drivers to 'slow down', even saying they would monitor than section of the track for the 'correct slowness'?

To me, that would have been insane for the FIA to agreed to. They immeduiatly take the responsibility to allow, and monitor, a 'part' of the car that has been deemed unsafe by said manufacturer. Was the FIA going to release Michelin of any responsibility following an accident if a driver ignored the 'slowness issue' and then injured himself by stuffing it into the wall? I have to doubt it.

Well but Michellin said that there is a speed at which the tyres were safe, correct? Enforcement is easy--impose a speed limit on turn 13 and black flag any Michellin car that violates it. Simple. Or even simpler, let them pass through the pitlane every lap, which has a well defined speed limit. That is what the FIA suggested so it seems reasonable that they would bear the reponsibility for any resulting accident.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by mac

People seem to be ignoring this for one reason or another. Michael has said this on more than one occasion now.

Do we really know that a chicane would have definitely prevented the situation?

I still believe Michelin deliberately proposed a ludicrous idea that it knew the FIA could not impose in an attempt to deflect blame from themselves ....... allegedly.

Now we are getting somewhere IMHO I don't think those tyres would have lasted ten laps chicane or no chicane.. How many practice laps had Toyota run when their Michelin tyres failed?

[Not Rated]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Now we are getting somewhere IMHO I don't think those tyres would have lasted ten laps chicane or no chicane.. How many practice laps had Toyota run when their Michelin tyres failed?

And Michellin vetoing all three FIA proposals will suddenly start to make perfect sense.

[Tf105]

here's my 2 cents.. i think safety and the fans should have came first... not changing the track would make the race a dull race if the 7 teams had to pit like every lap or drive thru the pit lane at reduce speeds ot just take it slow thru turns 12/13... I say build the chicane.. make it a level playing field... when i first join this forum i read that the new regulations were to even the sport to stop ferarri's domination... FIA should only had considered the safety and the fans.... who di hell wanna see jordans and marnadis try to take on ferrari....that's not sportmanship... in my opinion also.. i think all teams shud have pulled out... or just build the chicane..screw the FIA

second note... in my opinion the win was Toyota's... they had the most speed... no where during the race did Michael beat Trulli's qualifying time..heck he barely beat Zonta's 13th if he did at all and he had a clear track
but anyway POLE POSITION BABY

[Brian W Keske]

I suggest everyone read this article. Very provoking....from a guy with motorsport tire experiance:

Link

Probably deserves it's own thread actually.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Brian W Keske

I suggest everyone read this article. Very provoking....from a guy with motorsport tire experiance:

Link

Probably deserves it's own thread actually.

Thank you Brian that was worth reading to say the least.

[alfasud]

It's interesting to see that Red Bull seemed to have had doubts about the safety of a chicane.... you have to go to www.redbullracing.com then select the "A black day for F1" link:

It is hard to see what other possible solution would have saved this race, once Michelin informed its seven teams that it felt their tyres would not be safe running a race distance around this track, unless a chicane was used to slow the cars through the final Turn 13 on the famous Brickyard banking. The FIA turned down this proposal, which was flawed in any case, as it might well have then caused another problem for the cars’ braking systems.