[Race] 2017 FORMULA 1 PETRONAS MALAYSIA GRAND PRIX

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by jimclark

I disagree that the close racing is due to the aero configuration. It is the fact that there is only one chassis, one body, and two well controlled engines. 'Damn well better be close but I'm not interested when I know that it closer be because they are the same. Amateurish to please the masses.
In their own way, NASCAR and BoPing is the same bs to "even" the playing field. I don't want to see the "playing field" (I've raced many things and never considered it "playing" anything...) "evened". I want to see the best design and race the best, otherwise I'd just follow those series.

Prior to wings and ground effects, the racing was no closer (so much for your aero reason) and that's fine with me. We're watching the best ply their trades.....whoever comes out on top deserves it.

It just so happens to be a fact, whether that's one chassis or multiple chassis, that downforce produced by the aero on the upper surface of the car produces more drag and therefore a bigger wake, making it very hard to get close to the car in front. That's why F1 brought in DRS and if that's not manufactured I don't know what is?

Prior to wings and ground effect, I'll need to watch some old races. .

[Number4]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It just so happens to be a fact, whether that's one chassis or multiple chassis, that downforce produced by the aero on the upper surface of the car produces more drag and therefore a bigger wake, making it very hard to get close to the car in front. That's why F1 brought in DRS and if that's not manufactured I don't know what is?

Prior to wings and ground effect, I'll need to watch some old races. .

DRS is manufactured amateurish BS which balances performance to even the playing field in order to please the masses.

[Adam43]

I'll go with amateurish and probably please the masses. But it doesn't balance performance. Quite the opposite.

[Number4]

Originally Posted by Adam43

I'll go with amateurish and probably please the masses. But it doesn't balance performance. Quite the opposite.

Damn it! I went a quote too far.
How about this...........

DRS is manufactured amateurish BS which UNbalances performance to even the playing field in order to please the masses.

[Adam43]

[TrapezeArtist]

Just one further thought on the Vettel/Stroll thing: the Williams is a lot stronger than the Ferrari.

And on a different subject, I reckon that little ding-dong between Stroll and Massa would have brought a smile to Sir Frank's lips. Super hard racing and not a touch. (Or maybe just a little touch.)

[TrapezeArtist]

I just spotted this: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...n-crash-damage

American litigation culture comes to F1!

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Just one further thought on the Vettel/Stroll thing: the Williams is a lot stronger than the Ferrari.

And on a different subject, I reckon that little ding-dong between Stroll and Massa would have brought a smile to Sir Frank's lips. Super hard racing and not a touch. (Or maybe just a little touch.)

When was this?

Or do you mean when Massa was instructed to let him by after Stroll complained on the radio that it wasn't fair?

[Adam43]

What was the conversation?
(I missed it as I was getting ready to go out and only heard a comment from Brundle about Stroll saying somethingabout the pitstop)

[peebee2]

Massa jumped Stroll during the stops. Stroll complained on the radio that it wasn't fair. Short delay presumably while contract was checked. Team radios Massa to move over. All so clumsy Vandoorne got by (presumably not in his contract, LOL).

It's going to be "fun" for whoever is chosen to be their second driver next year!

[Number4]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

I just spotted this: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...n-crash-damage

American litigation culture comes to F1!

Seems perfectly fair. I posted earlier about Walter Brun suing Montreal when a loose drain cover destroyed his Group C Porsche. That was 1990. I can't find out if he was successful or not.

F1 signed off the track, and it was sub standard welding that destroyed an expensive race car. It could easily have been fatal.

I'm sure I could weld a drain cover shut so that you would need a back hoe to ever open it again. The city council will want the minimum weld so they only need a grinder to open it again.

[sizzle]

Originally Posted by Number4

It could easily have been fatal.

If he had been 300mm to the right and it tore through the tub you may well have been right.

[chavez]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

I just spotted this: https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/13...n-crash-damage

American litigation culture comes to F1!

Insurance not covering it?

[Ospi]

Originally Posted by chavez

Insurance not covering it?

I think insurance companies draw the line just before formula 1.

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Ospi

I think insurance companies draw the line just before formula 1.

Really?

I can't imagine anyone moving multi million dollar pieces of equipment around the world without insurance.

[steve_r]

I'm sure the track itself will have some kind of liability insurance.

[S griffin]

It's not acceptable when things like this happen, they need to double check these things in future

[Ospi]

Originally Posted by chavez

Really?

I can't imagine anyone moving multi million dollar pieces of equipment around the world without insurance.

I don't know for sure how it works with f1 but I believe they have insurance for transportation etc etc but not once the cars are actually in track. Happy to be proven wrong though.

[Aysedasi]

I'd be very surprised if the track isn't covered against such an obvious negligence claim.

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I'd be very surprised if the track isn't covered against such an obvious negligence claim.

Not entirely sure but I don't think it would be negligence. The track was inspected before the event and there's no evidence that they were aware of the problem but chose not to act.

[Aysedasi]

I suppose it depends on the level of scrutiny that an event of this nature demands, doesn't it, bearing in mind the inherent danger that can be caused by any track failure. A poorly welded drain cover that wasn't spotted sounds like it has potential to me. What are the chances that they actually inspected them?

[Peter Mallett]

Well the problem arises where one sees a problem but does nothing about it knowing there may be severe consequences. And there is always the caveat that motorsport is dangerous. Unless someone has a specification for the welding and it wasn't followed then this probably falls into the unfortunate accident pile.

[Number4]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Well the problem arises where one sees a problem but does nothing about it knowing there may be severe consequences. And there is always the caveat that motorsport is dangerous. Unless someone has a specification for the welding and it wasn't followed then this probably falls into the unfortunate accident pile.

Manholes and drains have been welded, bolted and tethered for so long that no doubt a rule has been broken by the track owners.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Number4

Manholes and drains have been welded, bolted and tethered for so long that no doubt a rule has been broken by the track owners.

The owners prepared the track and presented it to the FIA for inspection.
The FIA inspection team accepted the track.


I suspect part of the problem is that it is pretty well impossible to weld a cast grating to a cold rolled frame!

The actual problem is probably with the FIA preparation spec that the gratings be "welded down".

[Lancsbreaker]

Does this clip change anyone's mind about the Stroll / Vettel incident? :

https://wtf1.com/post/theres-finally...rolls-onboard/