The Official 2016 Bahrain Grand Prix Thread **Spoilers**

[Dr Z]

N0ddie said:

ZX10R NIN said:

That's exactly what was on the table Q1&2 new format Q3 old style, but you can thank Mclaren & Redbull for it not being in place as they vetoed it.

The problem wasnt just the anti-climax of Q3. The whole thing was a disgrace.

Red Bull and McLaren quite rightly vetoed it as any qualy that still has any elements of the new format should be binned. Go back to 2015 format and leave it alone. Now that would get unanimous team support.

As mentioned, Pirelli and Force India were opposed to going back to the 2015 format so no unanimity there. It is apparent that Force India were opposed to it for purely selfish reasons. In Q1 and Q2 the teams didn't have the time to optimise their car and track time available to put in their best lap time as it was a stampede at the start of the sessions.

Getting it wrong for their first lap had more severe consequences, and teams like Red Bull and McLaren need all the help they can in order to maximise their potential on the Saturday to have a proper go at the races on Sunday. The midfield is already very tight, so getting it slightly wrong means you end up 5 or 6 places back than if you were able to give it a proper go at a hot lap like in 2015. Again, I believe for selfish reasons. Teams will always be selfish.

It is the FIA's responsibility to consult and take on board opinion from the competitors, but ultimately act in the interests of the sport and the fans, not giving any governing power to the competitors. But also not get drawn into introducing contrived sporting rules that demean the sport's standing and insult the intelligence of the fans. If we had a governing body that has its priorities right and acts in rationality, we wouldn't need the teams to act as a bullst filter in not allowing ill-thought out rules, by use of their voting powers.

I also don't understand why there has to be unanimity for the rules to be ratified. Unanimity is reasonable when the entities given governing power are independent of the sport. When competitors/suppliers are involved, surely a majority vote should be enough? Sorry for the OT, but I fear this issue will come to a head in Bahrain this weekend.

[CraigyMc]

Roo said:

Reports on twitter that Alonso may not race.

link?

ETA: It's from the Sun, who are reporting that Alonso has to pass a medical on Thursday. This is standard procedure...

Edited by CraigyMc on Wednesday 30th March 13:10

[ZX10R NIN]

N0ddie said:

ZX10R NIN said:

That's exactly what was on the table Q1&2 new format Q3 old style, but you can thank Mclaren & Redbull for it not being in place as they vetoed it.

The problem wasnt just the anti-climax of Q3. The whole thing was a disgrace.

Red Bull and McLaren quite rightly vetoed it as any qualy that still has any elements of the new format should be binned. Go back to 2015 format and leave it alone. Now that would get unanimous team support.

I liked the fact that the drivers had to perform if they didn't there was a price to pay, Australia was hard for the teams because of it's length Bahrain won't be anywhere near that due to it being a shorter lap & the fact they know what they have to do.

Personally I liked the new Q1&2 it failed spectacularly in Q3 but the proposal the teams rejected seemed to give the best of both, I'd also like to get rid of the blue flag rule, I still think they should use them to let drivers know leaders are approaching but it should be down to the drivers to work their way past.

[anonymous-user]

ZX10R NIN said:

I liked the fact that the drivers had to perform if they didn't there was a price to pay, Australia was hard for the teams because of it's length Bahrain won't be anywhere near that due to it being a shorter lap & the fact they know what they have to do.

Bahrain fastest qualy lap last years was 10 seconds longer than Melbourne. Spa takes another 23 seconds to complete a lap in qualy. Imagine the mess if this system is still in place for Spa, even in the dry. If it's wet they will only get one run.

[Mikey G]

Alonso out of Bahrain, Stoffel in.

[suffolk009]

Just seen the news on BBC website. The doctors are unhappy with a scan of his chest.

I assume their reserve Stoffel will be racing.

[Vaud]

Hairline fracture of rib(s)... Historically drivers have raced with worse but surprised it has taken 2 weeks to emerge?

[bishbash]

N0ddie said:

Galileo said:

I heard that Alonso's power unit was FUBAR, and he will be starting with a new upgraded engine.
My question is; because it was destroyed in a accident rather than 'used up' will it come out of his engine allowance, or not?

Still comes out of the allowance.

Mikey G said:

Alonso out of Bahrain, Stoffel in.

So does the engine that Stoffel will use come out of Alonso's allowance? Is the allowance tied to the driver or the teams entry, you always hear it mentioned as the drivers allowance, but that doesn't seem right.

[Vaud]

bishbash said:

So does the engine that Stoffel will use come out of Alonso's allowance? Is the allowance tied to the driver or the teams entry, you always hear it mentioned as the drivers allowance, but that doesn't seem right.

You are right - it is driver, not car entry. I had to go and check - sporting regs, 23.4.

"Unless he drives for more than one team (see 23.4(g) below), and subject to the additions described in b) and c) below, each driver may use no more than four power units during a Championship season."

[kambites]

Interesting. So if a team was pushing for the constructor's championship and ran out of engines towards the end of the season, it might actually be worth swapping a reserve driver in rather than taking the grid place penalty?

[Vaud]

kambites said:

Interesting. So if a team was pushing for the constructor's championship and ran out of engines towards the end of the season, it might actually be worth swapping a reserve driver in rather than taking the grid place penalty?

It would seem so.

I guess it would be balanced by how "up to speed" that driver was, but in theory yes - and you could run four races in maximum attack with the four engines?

[em177]

I'm more of a MotoGP man than F1 these days, and when you see what they go through and jump straight back on the bike the next day I get the impression if Alonso really wanted to race he would?

[ukaskew]

em177 said:

I'm more of a MotoGP man than F1 these days, and when you see what they go through and jump straight back on the bike the next day I get the impression if Alonso really wanted to race he would?

This was an FIA mandated examination (which always happens prior to the next race after a big crash), so no.

This appears to have caught McLaren off-guard, so presumably it's something they haven't seen in their own medicals since the crash. If he had any thoughts of not racing it would have made sense to prepare Stoffel a little earlier.

[Sixpackpert]

Even the FIA are using Ronglish now!!

"Governing body the FIA said Alonso's chest scans "showed insufficient resolution of the signs to allow him to compete"

[CraigyMc]

CraigyMc said:

Roo said:

Reports on twitter that Alonso may not race.

link?

ETA: It's from the Sun, who are reporting that Alonso has to pass a medical on Thursday. This is standard procedure...

Just to make me look like a tit, Alonso will not be racing, Stoffel will be driving in his place.

Apparently there's something in the chest scans the doctors don't like.

[Dr Z]

Sixpackpert said:

Even the FIA are using Ronglish now!!

"Governing body the FIA said Alonso's chest scans "showed insufficient resolution of the signs to allow him to compete"

Clear as mud! I think what they meant to say was, there was insufficient healing [or resolution] of the [fracture/injury] from the previous radiograph nearer to the crash to allow Alonso to race. A normal reading of the release suggests that they had technical difficulties obtaining radiographs of sufficient resolution to rule out an injury.

That's FIA for you.

[HarryFlatters]

Vaud said:

bishbash said:

So does the engine that Stoffel will use come out of Alonso's allowance? Is the allowance tied to the driver or the teams entry, you always hear it mentioned as the drivers allowance, but that doesn't seem right.

You are right - it is driver, not car entry. I had to go and check - sporting regs, 23.4.

"Unless he drives for more than one team (see 23.4(g) below), and subject to the additions described in b) and c) below, each driver may use no more than four power units during a Championship season."

Has this changed since last year? The engine that K-Mag blew up in Australia last season came out of Alonso's allowance.

Or at least I thought it did...

[Vaud]

HarryFlatters said:

Has this changed since last year? The engine that K-Mag blew up in Australia last season came out of Alonso's allowance.

Or at least I thought it did...

No it's unchanged from last year (at least it's not shown as a change/mark-up on the FIA 2016 sporting regs document whereas other changes are)

[ERIKM400]

em177 said:

I'm more of a MotoGP man than F1 these days, and when you see what they go through and jump straight back on the bike the next day I get the impression if Alonso really wanted to race he would?

Not true. In MotoGP they don't just crash and jump back on the bike the next day.
Every rider that has a significant crash will have to visit the FIM Medical Director and the FIM CHief Medical Officer for the event and undergo a complete medical check up before they are allowed to race again.
Same procedure as in F1.
In case of injury or doubt they will go on the "unfit to race" list untill the next event.

[suffolk009]

Stoffel's race number is 47. Just FYI.