[Rules] Time to scrap the safety car?

[BootsOntheSide]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Why is that unfair? The yellow comes out, the cars all slow and maintain position, no overtaking, the SC picks up the leader and all follow the SC until it's safe to race again; it can't be fairer or safer than that.

A 40 second lead becomes a 2-second lead, in an instant. All too often it's brought out just to close the field up, rather than for any need to create a safe zone. If a crash leaves no debris on the track and nobody is injured, double-waved yellows should be enough, unless the drivers are imbeciles.

Don't forget that we've seen the rule directly used to rig race results, and plenty of crashes and penalties as a direct result of its deployment. Singapore 2008, Monaco 2010, Canada 2008, Valencia 2010, need I go on?

If we have to keep the safety car, use the American systems of closing the pits until the full line is formed, except for essential stops to repair damage. With no refuelling there is even less need for such a complex and random system.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by BootsOntheSide

A 40 second lead becomes a 2-second lead, in an instant. All too often it's brought out just to close the field up, rather than for any need to create a safe zone. If a crash leaves no debris on the track and nobody is injured, double-waved yellows should be enough, unless the drivers are imbeciles.

Don't forget that we've seen the rule directly used to rig race results, and plenty of crashes and penalties as a direct result of its deployment. Singapore 2008, Monaco 2010, Canada 2008, Valencia 2010, need I go on?

If we have to keep the safety car, use the American systems of closing the pits until the full line is formed, except for essential stops to repair damage. With no refuelling there is even less need for such a complex and random system.

Unfortunately losing a 40 second lead is the downside but like alot of things in life it's a compromise, though I have seen many a leading driver able to re-establish their lead and it has to be remembered that once there is a full course yellow, the safety of the marshalls is paramount as they clean up the track.

As for rigging results, I'm not aware of it ever being called into question in IndyCar racing, though I'm not so naïve to claim it hasn't happened and if those races in F1 have been rigged, as you claim, it says more about the nature of F1 rather than the use of the SC per se.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Why is that unfair? The yellow comes out, the cars all slow and maintain position, no overtaking, the SC picks up the leader and all follow the SC until it's safe to race again; it can't be fairer or safer than that.

If a race leader decides to push hard, doesn't save his tyres or fuel and builds up a great lead, he'll lose everything. His lead is gone, but so is his fuel and are his tyres. All hard work is gone, only because the FIA wants to 'spice up' the racing.

Unfortunately losing a 40 second lead is the downside but like alot of things in life it's a compromise, though I have seen many a leading driver able to re-establish their lead and it has to be remembered that once there is a full course yellow, the safety of the marshalls is paramount as they clean up the track.

I fail to see the compromise here. Any way, before the Safety Car was introduced I can't remember many races in which we actually needed it. Mexico 1987 maybe.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

If a race leader decides to push hard, doesn't save his tyres or fuel and builds up a great lead, he'll lose everything. His lead is gone, but so is his fuel and are his tyres. All hard work is gone, only because the FIA wants to 'spice up' the racing.



I fail to see the compromise here. Any way, before the Safety Car was introduced I can't remember many races in which we actually needed it. Mexico 1987 maybe.

As I've said before it's worked well states side for many years.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

If a race leader decides to push hard, doesn't save his tyres or fuel and builds up a great lead, he'll lose everything. His lead is gone, but so is his fuel and are his tyres. All hard work is gone, only because the FIA wants to 'spice up' the racing.

Well if he pushed that hard and it destroyed his tires, he's gonna pop one and his race will be finished anyway.

[wnut]

The real problem comes when the SC traps the first 3 cars and the rest of the field dives into pits and does their stop.
Then the order is reversed completely!
Alternatively the leader is allowed to race off and pit while the next cars are trapped and positions 10 to 24 are also able to pit!
Then we end up with a randomly scrambled order!
Car 1 followed by cars 10 to 24 with cars 2 to 9 at the back of the field.

Then someone else gets an advantage through overtaking under the yellow and is not penalised!

Now that is just wrong!

I am also 100% behind Woolley that the emergency staff are not being properly protected at present!

The American system seems to be the only one that is feasible.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

I am also 100% behind Woolley that the emergency staff are not being properly protected at present!

The American system seems to be the only one that is feasible.

That's what it's down to. The SC keeps the pack under control while the marshalls do the clean up; how else are the marshalls going to do get racing back to green?

Also, how does a Code 60, with overtaking, guarantee the safety of the track marshalls?

[ensign14]

Originally Posted by Matt

Well if he pushed that hard and it destroyed his tires, he's gonna pop one and his race will be finished anyway.

No, cos with his 50 second lead he can come in for a stop and emerge with a 20 second lead. If the SC comes out at just the wrong time, his race is ruined.

We've already seen the damage the SC can cause to races. Senna was killed in part at least because of the SC. We had Singaporegate that was solely caused by the availability of the SC. It is anti-racing.

[Dave Brand]

Originally Posted by ensign14

It is anti-racing.

Incidents happen & have to be cleared up without compromising the safety of those involved. Whatever action is taken to ensure that safety, be it the safety car, red flagging the race, whatever, there will be winners & losers. Sometimes life just ain't fair!

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

As I've said before it's worked well states side for many years.

Did it really work well? The use of the Safety Car is inherently unfair, regardless the details.

Originally Posted by Matt

Well if he pushed that hard and it destroyed his tires, he's gonna pop one and his race will be finished anyway.

But he can't refuel.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Did it really work well? The use of the Safety Car is inherently unfair, regardless the details.



But he can't refuel.

By details do you mean the safety of the track marshalls, whilst they clean up the track?

If he can't refuel, then the driver shouldn't have charged off with total disregard to fuel consumption.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ensign14

We've already seen the damage the SC can cause to races. Senna was killed in part at least because of the SC. We had Singaporegate that was solely caused by the availability of the SC. It is anti-racing.

I thought his accident was caused by the steering column partially buckling, rendering steering useless, not the SC.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

By details do you mean the safety of the track marshalls, whilst they clean up the track?

No, the specific rules. Like whether the pit lane is close, etc.

If he can't refuel, then the driver shouldn't have charged off with total disregard to fuel consumption.

In other words, drivers shouldn't do were they get paid for: pushing it to the limit.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

No, the specific rules. Like whether the pit lane is close, etc.

In other words, drivers shouldn't do were they get paid for: pushing it to the limit.

That's a really good rule, as it allows the SC to collect the field, otherwise it would be a mad free for all to the pits and most importantly it lets's the marshalls get on with the job of clearing up.

I've been following racing for a few decades now and it's the driver who doesn't constantly push it but who looks after his car, fuel, tyres, etc. that usually comes out on top; push it too hard and something will break.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I've been following racing for a few decades now and it's the driver who doesn't constantly push it but who looks after his car, fuel, tyres, etc. that usually comes out on top; push it too hard and something will break.

And that's why pushing it too hard is synonym for going over the limit. Any way, during the race a driver roughly choose between three strategies. Assuming the race has 100 laps and a driver can consume 100 litres, the three tactics are:

1. A fuel consumption per lap that equals the average of 1 litre per lap.
2. A fuel consumption that's lower than average in the first stages and higher in later stages of the race.
3. A fuel consumption that higher than average in the later stages of the race and lower the later stages in the race.

Due to the Safety Car a driver is highly discouraged to choose the third possible strategy.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Assuming the race has 100 laps and a driver can consume 100 litres, the three tactics are:

1. A fuel consumption per lap that equals the average of 1 litre per lap.
2. A fuel consumption that's lower than average in the first stages and higher in later stages of the race.
3. A fuel consumption that higher than average in the later stages of the race and lower the later stages in the race.

Due to the Safety Car a driver is highly discouraged to choose the third possible strategy.

I'm not quite with you on the third strategy.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I'm not quite with you on the third strategy.

Why not?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Why not?

quote:
A fuel consumption that higher than average in the later stages of the race and lower the later stages in the race.

It contradicts itself. How can you have fuel consumption that's higher than average in the later stages of the race and lower in the later stages in the race; that is what you meant to say?

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

quote:
A fuel consumption that higher than average in the later stages of the race and lower the later stages in the race.

It contradicts itself. How can you have fuel consumption that's higher than average in the later stages of the race and lower in the later stages in the race; that is what you meant to say?

That's a mistake from me. It should had been:
"A fuel consumption that's higher than average in the first stages of the race and lower the later stages in the race."

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

That's a mistake from me. It should had been:
"A fuel consumption that's higher than average in the first stages of the race and lower the later stages in the race."

That's fairenough. The SC will certainly help with fuel consumption as the car will have to reduce speed and so use less fuel.

[mattt]

They tried out another system today after FP2, getting rid of the Delta time and getting the drivers to drive at "Safety Car Speed" and then the safety car pops out in front. Step in the right direction? We shall see.


Don't have a link for this atm as i heard it on the circuit radio.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

That's fairenough. The SC will certainly help with fuel consumption as the car will have to reduce speed and so use less fuel.

But that counts for everyone, doesn't it? Hence, the race leader will have a lot less fuel left to burn, while he has lost his big lead.

[Matt]

So his car will be lighter and will be able to go faster than the rest of the cars, thus being able to pull out another big lead.

You can't win this one.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

But that counts for everyone, doesn't it? Hence, the race leader will have a lot less fuel left to burn, while he has lost his big lead.

The driver should have chosen a different strategy. I don't think any experienced driver would charge off and burn up so much fuel that he would jeopardise his race in the event of a full course yellow.

The use of the SC is ultimately for the safety of the track marshalls and to help any emergency services that are needed. As much as it would be extremely annoying to lose a big lead, I think any driver would agree that the safety of the marshalls and the use of emergency services outweighs anything else.

If, as it's been claimed, the SC is used in F1 to spice up the racing, then that's a situation F1 needs to clear up and is something that's risen out of the missuse of the SC, not use of the SC per se.

[Peat]

The new rules are just another example of F1 big-headedness.

If they were sensible, they would adopt a rule like IndyCar. Yellows out, Pits closed. Once everyone is in a line, the pits open. Simple.

But no, they have to create something overly complicated each time.