2008 Formula One Singapore Grand Prix

[fpv_gtho]

I agree, the safety car rules are crap, but of the 2 penalties i still think they were more deserving the other way around.

I dont think a monetary fine wouldve done it for Massa's shunt. These guys are rolling in it, McLaren are down $100m from last year yet theyve still got one hand on both titles for this year. If you want to hit these guys where its going to hurt, and hence they'll take notice, its on track. Its unfair on the drivers unfortunately but monetary fines only line the FIA's pockets.

[LeonOfTheDead]

I agree, the safety car rules are crap, but of the 2 penalties i still think they were more deserving the other way around.

I dont think a monetary fine wouldve done it for Massa's shunt. These guys are rolling in it, McLaren are down $100m from last year yet theyve still got one hand on both titles for this year. If you want to hit these guys where its going to hurt, and hence they'll take notice, its on track. Its unfair on the drivers unfortunately but monetary fines only line the FIA's pockets.

no point for the team at the end of the race would have worked imo
since the whole F1 circus is rolling in it, monetary fines should all be devolved for charity...will never happen

[Wouter Melissen]

The situation with Massa, in turn, wasn't his fault, IMO. They should've fined the team or the operator of their system, but not give him a drive-through.

It may not have been his fault, but it is most certainly his responsibility to drive safely regardless of where he is on the track or in the pitlane. The lollipop man and/or other systems are there to assist him, but in the end it's the driver who pushes the pedal. The reason why he almost t-boned another car is completely irrelevant, the only thing that matters is that the almost t-boned another car. The penalty was fair and perhaps even lenient, considering his earlier and very similar offense at Valencia.

[f6fhellcat13]

after his accident, Massa was exactly where Sutil hit the barrier, so if Sutil wanted to avoid to hit Massa he should have brake so to make a more closed turn, not a larger one. Massa was there and probably he distracted Sutil, but he was perfectly avoidable.
.

No, because at the time Sutil crashed Massa was out on the circuit again on the tight racing line forcing Sutil too wide and into the barrier.

[henk4]

No, because at the time Sutil crashed Massa was out on the circuit again on the tight racing line forcing Sutil too wide and into the barrier.

Massa came in from a gap on the right hand side of the corner, and then rejoined the track by crossing and going to the right side, away from the racing line. Furthermore there are people called marshalls who wave certain colours of flags. I am sure when Massa spun out a marshall must have waived a yellow one for Sutil, so he most likely was warned.

[RacingManiac]

Sutil would have either hit Massa(if he hadn't moved) or the barrier there. He wasn't going anywhere either way. It was unlikely that he could've gone toward the inside of the corner since when we saw him he had already lost control of his car(understeered off). He may have been startled by the fact that Massa spun off, but when ever he reacted to that fact was already too late. Massa moving away IMO wouldn't be the cause of his accident...

I agree with wouter that driver should be responsible for any incidents involving driving, but at the same time the current regulation and how the cars are built do not facilitate that. Which is why they use all the system to help the driver out. I very much doubt that with either position of the rear view mirror that the driver can see anything down the side of the car for anything more than a few meters behind. They can't turn their head to see it because of the HANS, and their side vision is further obstructed by the raised cockpit surround(even higher now in 2008 than before as well). So effectively their FOV is probably at most 120degree dead ahead. So they HAVE to rely on the pitsystem that they employ now in the pit when they are moving at pedatrian speed and dealing with odd angle direction of traffic. They can only put the responsibility down to the driver if they actually allow driver to see their surrounding, which right now is next to impossible.

[Wouter Melissen]

I agree with wouter that driver should be responsible for any incidents involving driving, but at the same time the current regulation and how the cars are built do not facilitate that. Which is why they use all the system to help the driver out. I very much doubt that with either position of the rear view mirror that the driver can see anything down the side of the car for anything more than a few meters behind. They can't turn their head to see it because of the HANS, and their side vision is further obstructed by the raised cockpit surround(even higher now in 2008 than before as well). So effectively their FOV is probably at most 120degree dead ahead. So they HAVE to rely on the pitsystem that they employ now in the pit when they are moving at pedatrian speed and dealing with odd angle direction of traffic. They can only put the responsibility down to the driver if they actually allow driver to see their surrounding, which right now is next to impossible.

But in the end he is still responsible, so if something happens, the driver will have to be punished. Teams should only be punished in extraordinary circumstances like for example the spy-gate thing.

[RacingManiac]

BTW about the light system, after Valencia Matra pointed out that it is operated entirely by human, not automated. But from the interview after the Singapore race, I get the impression that there is a fully automated mode they they normally employ, but opt not to use for that botched pitstop because it was under the safety car and the amount of traffic that usually streams into the pit. The human mode in this case failed because the fueler had fumbled and pressed his switch too early. IMO control system wise there are obviously not enough fail-safe built into the design. At the very least I think they need a cutoff switch that overrides the light if the nozzle is intact, regardless if the switch is pressed by the operator. Then there could be another switch, either operate via a vision system(a position detecting camera), or a light switch that overrides the system if a car is within certain proximity of the pit stall to prevent the Sutil incident. The 2nd issue though I think could be down to the choice of Ferrari not having it, since sometimes they might actually want the driver to cut people off....

[LeonOfTheDead]

But in the end he is still responsible, so if something happens, the driver will have to be punished. Teams should only be punished in extraordinary circumstances like for example the spy-gate thing.

I think the in this specific case, Massa has done what he could. He saw the green light and started, and until he was out of the pit stop position, he couldn't see anything in it's mirrors, because of the crew. and then there was the problem of their restricted point of view, as RM pointed out. But when he was on the pit lane he didn't hit the other car, because he saw it right when he had the possibility to do that. so the only responsible, imo, it's the team and their stupid system. I would punish them because the system is dangerous, and prove to be so in more than one occasion. It happened that a driver started even if the lollypop-man was still there to say "stay here kid", but if that man was there in this occasion, we would have the possibility to blame Massa without any doubt.

[LeonOfTheDead]

BTW about the light system, after Valencia Matra pointed out that it is operated entirely by human, not automated. But from the interview after the Singapore race, I get the impression that there is a fully automated mode they they normally employ, but opt not to use for that botched pitstop because it was under the safety car and the amount of traffic that usually streams into the pit. The human mode in this case failed because the fueler had fumbled and pressed his switch too early. IMO control system wise there are obviously not enough fail-safe built into the design. At the very least I think they need a cutoff switch that overrides the light if the nozzle is intact, regardless if the switch is pressed by the operator. Then there could be another switch, either operate via a vision system(a position detecting camera), or a light switch that overrides the system if a car is within certain proximity of the pit stall to prevent the Sutil incident. The 2nd issue though I think could be down to the choice of Ferrari not having it, since sometimes they might actually want the driver to cut people off....

AFAIK the system was automatic in this occasion, and as I pointed out before, it's quite sure it didn't work well because when Massa started there still was fuel running, and the pit stop was already lasting more than a regular one.

[RacingManiac]

But in the end he is still responsible, so if something happens, the driver will have to be punished. Teams should only be punished in extraordinary circumstances like for example the spy-gate thing.

Then they need to revised the rule to allow driver to be in the loop. Right now he cannot see anything until it is way too late....They either have to make the car have bigger mirror, or reduce the side surround....

[RacingManiac]

autosport.com - F1 News: Ferrari to look into pitstop system

The interview I was referring to:

quote:
""Unfortunately there was a mistake," said Domenicali. "It was not an electronic system, it was run manually, because normally in that condition when there are a lot of cars coming in that safety car situation. "

[Wouter Melissen]

I think the in this specific case, Massa has done what he could. He saw the green light and started, and until he was out of the pit stop position, he couldn't see anything in it's mirrors, because of the crew. and then there was the problem of their restricted point of view, as RM pointed out. But when he was on the pit lane he didn't hit the other car, because he saw it right when he had the possibility to do that. so the only responsible, imo, it's the team and their stupid system. I would punish them because the system is dangerous, and prove to be so in more than one occasion. It happened that a driver started even if the lollypop-man was still there to say "stay here kid", but if that man was there in this occasion, we would have the possibility to blame Massa without any doubt.

But that is not relevant. What happened is relevant, not how it happened.

[LeonOfTheDead]

autosport.com - F1 News: Ferrari to look into pitstop system

The interview I was referring to:

quote:
""Unfortunately there was a mistake," said Domenicali. "It was not an electronic system, it was run manually, because normally in that condition when there are a lot of cars coming in that safety car situation. "

oh thanks, didn't know about it.
but I still think that the lollipop is a safer solution. As I wrote before, the lolli-man could make a mistake, and raise it up too early, but, since its position is quite forward that of the driver, it would have some time (just a second probably) to stop again the driver as happened before. while with the light system, when a driver starts because he sees the green light, even if the light then actually turns red again it's too late for the driver to still see it.

[faksta]

Was there a lollipop man during Ferrari's second pit stops? I've read somewhere that there was, but can't remember seeing him...