F1 - Ban in-car radios ?

[AJI]

Is the answer to 'control' team ordering to ban in-car radios?


Banning the radios would mean drivers would not get such easy coded messages to let team mates passed.


I think the 'safety' argument in favour of in-car communications these days doesn't hold up as much as what it used to; due to the more efficient posting of marshals/flags/trackside light systems etc. (Along with the usual rapid depployment of safety cars).

So what do you think?

[10 Pence Short]

To what end? If the teams want to sort team order and race manipulation they don't have to do it through the radio.

[yazza54]

Radio is useful and helps safety, if theres been a massive crash and you have notification of it then that is potentially life saving info.

The FIA just need to hit the teams hard and ban team orders.

[AJI]

yazza54 said:

Radio is useful and helps safety, if theres been a massive crash and you have notification of it then that is potentially life saving info.

The FIA just need to hit the teams hard and ban team orders.

But couldn't the safety issue be addressed with big flashing automated lights on the dashboard?
(This happens already doesn't it?)

[FourWheelDrift]

One team order that is never questioned is "Don't take out your team mate"

So it's safe to say Red Bull don't have team orders

[AJI]

10 Pence Short said:

If the teams want to sort team order and race manipulation they don't have to do it through the radio.

But surely it makes it much easier to it hand out the orders at the right time in the race if with radios?
Surely there could be coded instructions on pit-boards also...but what about if they restricted information on pit-boards to only show the usual 'pit', 'lap no', 'time difference' information and no other?

With monitoring of pit board info for further coded instructions?

[german tony]

What about informing the drivers where there is debris on the circuit? Or when it's likely to rain?

[AJI]

german tony said:

What about informing the drivers where there is debris on the circuit? Or when it's likely to rain?

Yellow flag for debris and for rain....maybe driver's eyesight?

[10 Pence Short]

You also have to consider the drivers being told about impending mechanical issues. A driver may have overheating brakes that require an adjusmtment in the car or a change of driving style. If you cannot communicate with the driver then you're either going to have a car crashing due to malfunction, or being told to retire via the pit board. The present system allows injured parties to limp home.

To have had 2 serious incidents of this rule in the past 10 years is not evidence on any scale to suggest radios be banned.

[AJI]

10 Pence Short said:

You also have to consider the drivers being told about impending mechanical issues. A driver may have overheating brakes that require an adjusmtment in the car or a change of driving style. If you cannot communicate with the driver then you're either going to have a car crashing due to malfunction, or being told to retire via the pit board. The present system allows injured parties to limp home.

To have had 2 serious incidents of this rule in the past 10 years is not evidence on any scale to suggest radios be banned.

Again, this could be done with dashboard lights.
A standard mechanical or impending mechanical failure light on the dashboard.

Let the drivers be more in control of their race. IMO.

[mrmr96]

AJI said:

Banning the radios would mean drivers would not get such easy coded messages to let team mates passed.

Not true.
1. Radios are useful for the myriad of reasons outlined in the thread.
2. Even if radios were banned communication of 'team orders' could easily be done via the pitboard, with a coded symbol or other 'tell tale'.

Besides, there's nothing to stop the team creating a 'code book' where saying something seeminly innocuous and fuel related like "Change to mix 2" actually means "Let Alonso win", for example. This 'code' could be employed via the pitboard or radio, where you simply agree ahead of time that innocuous communications have a hidden meaning. It would then be MUCH more difficult for anyone to prove whether there were team orders or not.

Frankly I was amazed when Massa's radio message was so so blatent, plus it had an apology in the 2nd message. Surely they would have worked out a simple "Mix 2" type code ahead of time? (Although I guess sitting down to explain the code to the drivers would be an awkward conversation. But it could be done pre-season and in a reciprocal manner so as not to upset the drivers too much.)

Edited by mrmr96 on Monday 26th July 12:22

[10 Pence Short]

AJI said:

10 Pence Short said:

You also have to consider the drivers being told about impending mechanical issues. A driver may have overheating brakes that require an adjusmtment in the car or a change of driving style. If you cannot communicate with the driver then you're either going to have a car crashing due to malfunction, or being told to retire via the pit board. The present system allows injured parties to limp home.

To have had 2 serious incidents of this rule in the past 10 years is not evidence on any scale to suggest radios be banned.

Again, this could be done with dashboard lights.
A standard mechanical or impending mechanical failure light on the dashboard.

Let the drivers be more in control of their race. IMO.

Completely impractical. There is absolutely no advantage in banning pit to car communications and lots of disavantages.

It's a bad idea.

[AJI]

mrmr96 said:

AJI said:

Banning the radios would mean drivers would not get such easy coded messages to let team mates passed.

Not true.
1. Radios are useful for the myriad of reasons outlined in the thread.
2. Even if radios were banned communication of 'team orders' could easily be done via the pitboard, with a coded symbol or other 'tell tale'.

Besides, there's nothing to stop the team creating a 'code book' where saying something seeminly innocuous and fuel related like "Change to mix 2" actually means "Let Alonso win", for example.

1. I have put forward alternatives to the myriad of reasons outlined.
2. Again, if pit board info was restricted and monitored it could be an alternative.
The 'code book' would be much harder to implement if there were no radios.

Let the driver decide if fuel mixtures need altering. (Could that work?)

I'm just throwing up ideas and alternatives here, I guess from the replies so far that many are happy for the teams to have as much control over the races as they do?

[AJI]

10 Pence Short said:

Completely impractical. There is absolutely no advantage in banning pit to car communications .......

Apart from the easy medium to voice team orders?


(Again, just voicing an opinion).

Edited by AJI on Monday 26th July 12:28

[mrmr96]

AJI said:

I guess from the replies so far that many are happy for the teams to have as much control over the races as they do?

Just because your idea's stupid doesn't mean I'm happy for races to be rigged.

The rules say 'no team orders'. If there are team orders then teams need to be punished _properly_, i.e. in such a way as it's a proper deterrent. (i.e. a big points penalty, not a paltry €100k fine.) So no need to ban radios and have more flashing cockpit lights - all we need to do is properly enforce the rules which already exist.

Edited by mrmr96 on Monday 26th July 12:30

[AJI]

mrmr96 said:

Just because your idea's stupid ...

hahaha
calm down calm down....
its not supposed to be an aggressive argument here, I'm just throwing up ideas.

I feel yet again I've wasted 3+ hours watching a rigged 'race'. With team orders it becomes a procession, and I have no interest in watching a race that has no element of 'race' in it.

mrmr96 said:

all we need to do is properly enforce the rules which already exist.

Which hasn't happened in the German GP.
A 100,000dollar fine in my view is not an enforcement of the rules against a multi million dollor operation that is Ferrari.

[10 Pence Short]

It is a daft idea, to be honest. It's like completely banning mobile phones because terrorists use them to communicate. The benefits of having them makes it worth the risk of misuse.

[mrmr96]

AJI said:

mrmr96 said:

all we need to do is properly enforce the rules which already exist.

Which hasn't happened in the German GP.
A 100,000dollar fine in my view is not an enforcement of the rules against a multi million dollor operation that is Ferrari.

I agree.

[Scuffers]

10 Pence Short said:

It is a daft idea, to be honest. It's like completely banning mobile phones because terrorists use them to communicate. The benefits of having them makes it worth the risk of misuse.

well said.

stupid knee-jerk idea

[spunkytherabbit]

mrmr96 said:

Frankly I was amazed when Massa's radio message was so so blatent, plus it had an apology in the 2nd message.

I think you'll find Smedley did that deliberately. He knew it was a st thing to ask Flipper to do, and as DC pointed out, it was a REALLY st thing to ask Smedley to do it. Smedley removed any notion of doubt about what the public and FIA were hearing and left the little package at his boss's feet to deal with. As should have happened to start with. Question is, will Smedley have any come back internally?

As for banning team radio... don't think it'd help. What it actually did here was expose what was going on. I also think it should remain for comedy value. Who else DIDN'T laugh out loud at Alonso's petulance talking to the team in previous races?!