[Official] Hungarian Grand Prix 2020: Grand Prix Weekend Thread - Round 3

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I'm intrigued by rule t): t) Drinking fluid for the driver may be added at any time, however, the capacity of the container for any such fluid must not exceed 1.5 litres. What happens if it's a over by milliliter, DSQ?

Easy solution to this problem.... Homologated water bottles! This keeps team from having to spend budget on independent water bottle development. No more exotic materials, secret pressurized systems to deliver water faster. Does the size of the pipe from the bottle to the driver's mouth matter? Can you store extra water in this pipe? Should a flow meter be installed?

The you have the question of what exactly does "Water" mean?!? Are they talking pure distilled water? Mineral water? What mineral or electrolyte content is allowed? Is sports drinks allowed? Next will be the requirement that team will need to submit samples of the water before each race to ensure it is "water".



Richard

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Greem

How do you get it to hold more than its capacity, Mr Feynman?

There could be excess in the tube that conveys the liquid to the driver, or indeed the container, though appearing to contain 1.5 liters, might contain slightly more because there was a fault in the manufacturing process.

[Aysedasi]

Surely Red Bull don't have water in their water bottles......

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Surely Red Bull don't have water in their water bottles......

Rich Energy?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Surely Red Bull don't have water in their water bottles......

You clearly discovered Ferrari's secret last year. Water bottles full of fuel. During qualifying drivers will just swig a mouthful and then spit it into the air intake to increase engine performance.

Richard

[Aysedasi]

So simple, so ingenious.....

[wnut]

Good analysis of Bottas' jump start.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ipQheRkOy0

Bottas is anticipating the lights.

In drag racing there is a minimum reaction time to the lights, and if you are under the reaction time when the lights change then you are deemed to have red lighted.

F1 needs to take a look at this practise and stamp it out.

[Adam43]

I’m not sure why? They have a rule and are applying it consistently. It’s not damaging the racing. We don’t have this making much difference to the racing.

Would there be a difference in the racing? Maybe a tiny difference in variation in people’s starts? Maybe more penalties? I doubt there would be much difference if they just moved the tolerance point.

I know everything F1 does must automatically be wrong, but why change? Stamp it out makes it sound like it’s some major corruption within the sport.

Although if they did I’d be fine with that too as it really doesn’t matter.

[Aysedasi]

And there is no way you will 'stamp out' anticipation on any grid, anywhere.....

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

And there is no way you will 'stamp out' anticipation on any grid, anywhere.....

No, but the FIA could mandate that all F1 cars should be fitted with an electronic widget that only permitted the clutch to engage (which is also electronically controlled) at a time in sync with the red lights going out.

Not that I am advocating such a system, but I'm sure that it could be done.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

No, but the FIA could mandate that all F1 cars should be fitted with an electronic widget that only permitted the clutch to engage (which is also electronically controlled) at a time in sync with the red lights going out.

Not that I am advocating such a system, but I'm sure that it could be done.

A good idea Mike (great to know you're now on the mend), but I think that could lead to the drivers just waiting for this to kick in so that they all start at exactly the same time thanks to the widget.

[Adam43]

Isn’t that a driver aid?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

A good idea Mike (great to know you're now on the mend), but I think that could lead to the drivers just waiting for this to kick in so that they all start at exactly the same time thanks to the widget.

Thanks Viv.

But the widget and system could easily be set up on the same basis as the red lights, with varying delay settings. And the driver wouldn't be allowed any visual notification that the clutch was operable until the widget "opened" the clutch. Not too dissimilar to the old start programmes of the past, but in reverse so to speak.

Everything is run through the ECU anyway, so it's not beyond the wit of the FIA, or possibly McLaren who manufacture the ECUs for F1, to engineer the system. Not that I advocate the idea necessarily.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

No, but the FIA could mandate that all F1 cars should be fitted with an electronic widget that only permitted the clutch to engage (which is also electronically controlled) at a time in sync with the red lights going out.

Not that I am advocating such a system, but I'm sure that it could be done.

My objection is that would away the human element.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

My objection is that would away the human element.

I don't disagree for one moment; it is/was just my response to Ayse's post that you couldn't stop drivers from anticipating the start.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by wnut

Shows an incredible level of preparation that the RBR mechanics had the parts ready and adjusted to just slap on and go racing.

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I think it's the standard preparation of all the front-running teams to have parts ready to put on the car in the event of damage.

I'd be more surprised if they didn't have parts ready. Once the car is set up for Q, then the team know all of the settings and can prepare the spares appropriately. The impressive part (IMO) is the speed with which the work was completed.

Standard for professional teams and not just in F1 either. You'll find that F3, touring car, sports car etc etc teams all do the same thing.

Once the car setup is locked, all spare suspension components etc are adjusted to be the same as the parts on the car, so that in the event of a minor shunt, the parts can be replaced without the need get the car onto a setup plate again.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

My objection is that would away the human element.

I would agree entirely.

To me, as much as possible, everything that happens should be human initiated but technology should be used as much as possible to monitor/review those human actions.

In the case of the start, everything that happens to the car I would prefer to be the result of a human action. How that is monitored can use as much technology as you can come up with. Provided the outcome is the technology telling you whether the driver started to accelerate from their grid slot before the lights went out or not.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I don't disagree for one moment; it is/was just my response to Ayse's post that you couldn't stop drivers from anticipating the start.

I guess I should have added - if the ability to anticipate it is available to them.....

[wnut]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

I would agree entirely.

To me, as much as possible, everything that happens should be human initiated but technology should be used as much as possible to monitor/review those human actions.

In the case of the start, everything that happens to the car I would prefer to be the result of a human action. How that is monitored can use as much technology as you can come up with. Provided the outcome is the technology telling you whether the driver started to accelerate from their grid slot before the lights went out or not.

Just review the start through the on board cameras, and if you have jumped it, drive through penalty.

[Adam43]

Or have a sensor in the car and track? Much simpler and doesn’t require a human to look at each one. The accuracy is one frame with a camera.

20 different cars with 20 cameras all not in sync. means some have a frame advantage over others. The transponders have a much greater sample rate.

The way they do it now every single car has exactly the same timing and tolerance. Doing it by amera would be a backward step to something less accurate.

[Richard C]

Lots of ideas to solve a problem that really isn't a problem. Which sounds very "F1" in the end.

Richard

[sizzle]

At the risk of appearing like an ignoramus, Horner said Max put the car in the fence because he was "synchronising 8th gear". Can someone enlighten me a little more about this as I have heard it a couple of times lately where they are "synchronising the gearbox"..

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Or have a sensor in the car and track? Much simpler and doesn’t require a human to look at each one. The accuracy is one frame with a camera.

20 different cars with 20 cameras all not in sync. means some have a frame advantage over others. The transponders have a much greater sample rate.

The way they do it now every single car has exactly the same timing and tolerance. Doing it by amera would be a backward step to something less accurate.

Fair point.

The sampling rate though clearly needs a tighter tolerance so the camera feeds don't prove it to be inaccurate.
The tolerance should also provide a stationary period for reaction time to prevent anticipating the start.

I think that the wording of the jumped start rule should also allow a jumped start to be determined from any of the feeds available to the officials.

Failing the rules changing, can we expect the drivers to line up well back in the grid box and anticipating the lights?

I am sure there will be drivers who would be giving this a lot of thought in the face of this ambiguity, particularly if they are well down the grid and had a good chance of achieving a significant advantage.

The risks of the above scenario are pretty clear.

[S griffin]

I think what they have to detect false starts is fine. Let’s face it we’ve had wrong calls in this area in the past. I think that they need that leeway as drivers don’t always gain an advantage.

For me I’ve seen more blatant jump starts. Bottas hardly did much, just moved forward in his grid box, but not over it, hardly a crime and if anything lost more by starting late to make sure he was stationary when the lights went out. In my view the system is fine and we’ll hopefully be able to not over punish things

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I think that they need that leeway as drivers don’t always gain an advantage.

But who gets to decide that?

Sure Bottas didnt gain an advantage for himself but other drivers had to react to his mistake and potentially his team mate was able to get away from the pack more cleanly as a result.

With all due respect, an equal application of the rules is required in sports where as allowing someone to decide what should be punished or not, again with respect, is more akin to how professional wrestling works.

Advocating an unequal or arbitrary application of the rules is contrived imo..just saying.