Deliberate crowding of a car?

[mattikake]

So what does that mean? Sounds a bit subjective. I take it's nothing to do with drivers having a close look at a rivals car in parc ferme?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula...

If they want to stop aggressive defending/overtaking, they should bring back gravel traps. Nothing is better an curbing uneccessary contact than instant retirement. These huge tarmac run-off areas are half the problem imo.

Edited by mattikake on Monday 20th December 11:21

[miniman]

Suspect it is in response to the Schumacher / Barichello pit wall incident.

[Munter]

To me it means if you're running side by side you should leave a reasonable space for the other car rather than push them right to the edge of/push them off the track.

If you wanted to focus the drivers on not leaving the circuit. Rather than re-introduce gravel traps I'd say you have to do a drive through if you cross the lines defining the circuit with all 4 wheels (without there having been contact with another car).

Edited by Munter on Monday 20th December 11:30

[The Wookie]

It basically means running someone to the edge or off of the track deliberately, most obviously on a straight.

Basically, as said, what Schumacher did to Barrichello

[mchammer89]

How about when the overtaking car takes the inside line and proceeds to edge the other car off the track? Is that illegal/frowned upon/expected?

It's something I really hate seeing drivers do, which once again is due to the huge tarmac run-offs.

[mchammer89]

Also, these two new regs? What a load of complete bullst.

"In addition back markers in a race must allow a faster car to pass at the first available opportunity.

Any driver who ignores the waved blue flags that indicate a slower car should move aside will be reported to the stewards.

Previously, stewards could only impose drive-through or time penalties on drivers or drop them down the grid if they were deemed to have infringed the rules.

The FIA also plans to introduce a curfew on team personnel at Formula One races.

The curfew will run from midnight to 0600 when practice starts at 1000 on Fridays, and from 0100 to 0700 when practice starts at 1100 on a Saturday."

[MiniMan64]

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

[mchammer89]

MiniMan64 said:

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

And what about the guys who want to do it?

Let the workers decide if they want to work or not.

[Scuffers]

mchammer89 said:

MiniMan64 said:

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

And what about the guys who want to do it?

Let the workers decide if they want to work or not.

nice idea, but let's be honest, who would be in a position NOT to work (and expect to keep their job)?

[MiniMan64]

mchammer89 said:

MiniMan64 said:

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

And what about the guys who want to do it?

Let the workers decide if they want to work or not.

Indeed.

Given how many people would like that job and how few spots there are available I'd most of them are stuck between a rock and a hard place in regard to what they're asked to do.

[Munter]

mchammer89 said:

MiniMan64 said:

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

And what about the guys who want to do it?

Let the workers decide if they want to work or not.

As I said in the other thread on this curfew. I think it's to avoid the health and safety lot. There have been a few mistakes in the pit lane (flying wheel anybody?). If someone has worked 24hours and ends up hurt for some reason...there's the potential for problems. Tired people, dangerous environment, organisers knew about it. Better to make a simple rule to ensure everybody has access to rest time, than end up in court.

[mchammer89]

Scuffers said:

mchammer89 said:

MiniMan64 said:

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

And what about the guys who want to do it?

Let the workers decide if they want to work or not.

nice idea, but let's be honest, who would be in a position NOT to work (and expect to keep their job)?

Well i'm in a (slightly) similar situation. I'm in the final year of my Motorsport Engineering degree, i've been to a pub 3 times since September because of the amount of work that i'm doing. There are a lot of all-nighters to get the work done. But I fking love what i'm doing, so it's not so bad. I suspect that these guys are in a similar situation.

Similarly if I were put in a situation where I was only allowed to work 9-5, it would put a lot more pressure on me to get the work done and the times I wasn't working would be taken up by stressing about how i'm going to go about getting the work done.

[plg]

mchammer89 said:

MiniMan64 said:

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

And what about the guys who want to do it?

Let the workers decide if they want to work or not.

It's about avoiding burnout... as anyone would be concerned at that level.

Oh, and "letting them choose" smacks of naivety I'm afraid.... "Sorry I do want to change the fuel feed system - it's Friday night and I'm tired - someone else can do it - or I'll do it in the morning" wouldn't exactly work? Some governance is needed, and it's a fair balance with the increase in number of races.

Knowing Bernie always looks after the mechanics, I wouldn't be surprised if he's campaigned for it quietly following some lobbying.

[mchammer89]

plg said:

mchammer89 said:

MiniMan64 said:

The curfew one I can kind of understand, it's a 20 race season next year with a lot of fly-aways and there surely comes a point where expecting the pit crew to work 24/7 for a week then pack it up, spend 3 days travelling and then do it all over again is a little unresonable.

And what about the guys who want to do it?

Let the workers decide if they want to work or not.

It's about avoiding burnout... as anyone would be concerned at that level.

Oh, and "letting them choose" smacks of naivety I'm afraid.... "Sorry I do want to change the fuel feed system - it's Friday night and I'm tired - someone else can do it - or I'll do it in the morning" wouldn't exactly work? Some governance is needed, and it's a fair balance with the increase in number of races.

Knowing Bernie always looks after the mechanics, I wouldn't be surprised if he's campaigned for it quietly following some lobbying.

Surely the team bosses are in the best position to manage their crew. They won't want to have their workers burnt out for the same reasons you state. They want to take care of their staff as it's the performance and morale of their staff that governs the results they get. Personally I think it's a better idea for the management to lower the workload when necessary instead of imposing a "lowest common denominator" stlye limit. It's not naivety, it's thinking that the people in charge of their staff know what's better for them as opposed to a governing body which continues to impose nonsensical regulations.

[plg]

mchammer89 said:

Surely the team bosses are in the best position to manage their crew.

Yes, but in the absence of regulation, all parties keep pushing to break point. This is fairly light regulation in reality.

mchammer89 said:

They won't want to have their workers burnt out for the same reasons you state. They want to take care of their staff as it's the performance and morale of their staff that governs the results they get. Personally I think it's a better idea for the management to lower the workload when necessary instead of imposing a "lowest common denominator" stlye limit. It's not naivety, it's thinking that the people in charge of their staff know what's better for them as opposed to a governing body which continues to impose nonsensical regulations.

I haven't noted a single team boss come out against the regulations. In the staff/team boss dynamic, if the team bosses know what is best, then why haven't they come up with a voluntary arrangement? Or for that matter, campaigned to further lower pit speed limits to reduce risk of injury?

Oh, and can you imagine that Flavio gave a stuff about his team members and their welfare? He "ordered" a member of his team to crash at a fair speed and risk his life and the following drivers...

It's a good rule. For the simple reason that F1 bosses push the limits in every direction, including employee welfare. Have you ever been pit side during a GP weekend... trust me, those guy need some down time. This is an easy way to allow it.

[The Wookie]

mchammer89 said:

Surely the team bosses are in the best position to manage their crew. They won't want to have their workers burnt out for the same reasons you state. They want to take care of their staff as it's the performance and morale of their staff that governs the results they get. Personally I think it's a better idea for the management to lower the workload when necessary instead of imposing a "lowest common denominator" stlye limit. It's not naivety, it's thinking that the people in charge of their staff know what's better for them as opposed to a governing body which continues to impose nonsensical regulations.

Not sure the workload can be that easily predicted and dictated in motorsport.

Also, a car that's been rushed to the grid following an all nighter that has a 50% chance of finishing is more desirable than a car that hasn't been finished in time for the start, so arguably the welfare of the mechanics and the most effective management for the team are often mutually exclusive.

To be honest though, I wouldn't be surprised if the teams themselves have formed part of the campaign for this to happen. I think it was Ross Brawn that said something along the lines of 'I'll campaign to the teeth for better safety regulations and then design a car that scrapes the barrel of those regulations in the name of performance'. Basically its how teams resolve the ever present conflict of interest between performance and safety.

Edited by The Wookie on Monday 20th December 17:00

[taffyracer]

FFS, let the companies who invest the money and stand to lose/gain the most run their own businesses, they should be in charge of their own show, this just smacks of the wishy washy liberal nanny state that we have become where H&S types flourish, I hate all this unecessary regualtion bks, do we not use common sense anymore

Edited by taffyracer on Monday 20th December 18:36