Proportional tolerance

[Aluminium]

With Alonso and Ocon in F1 receiving large and cumulative time penalties [edit Alsonso’s was later overturned] relating to almost indiscernible digressions even with the HD TV close ups is there time for a rule to be made (in engineering terms) for reasonable tolerance in tiny indiscretions that video evidence can highlight unreasonably?

This should not used for hyping up artificial situations or allowing cheating, but in the case of milliseconds or millimetres, cumulative penalties could be seem to be possibly disproportionate and throw up computer-like unintuitive and unfair to real-life errors.

Edited by Aluminium on Tuesday 21st March 10:00

[SpudLink]

Isn’t this already applied? For example the rules do not allow movable aero surfaces, but are applied in a way that accepts a certain degree of wing flexibility.

[PhilAsia]

SpudLink said:

Isn’t this already applied? For example the rules do not allow movable aero surfaces, but are applied in a way that accepts a certain degree of wing flexibility.

Particularly acceptable on Red Bulls!


NB......I am getting in before the "...Particularly acceptable on Mercs!..." and is posted in jest pffffttt pfffftt

[Aluminium]

A wing’s flexibility is measurable numerically, I am interested in the margins of human ‘error’ not being penalised if imperceptible apart from studying a video many times.

[Oneball]

Nope. The penalties for breaking the rules have to be disproportionate. If they were proportionate the teams would break the rules as the gain could be more than punishment. For example a millisecond jump start might give you a lead into the first corner which is a far greater advantage than a millisecond. So a proportionate punishment of a millisecond wouldn’t stop the teams doing it. Same for penalties or pit lane speed or not slowing under yellows or weight limits etc etc.

[HustleRussell]

Aluminium said:

With Alonso and Ocon in F1 receiving large and cumulative time penalties [edit Alsonso’s was later overturned] relating to almost indiscernible digressions even with the HD TV close ups is there time for a rule to be made (in engineering terms) for reasonable tolerance in tiny indiscretions that video evidence can highlight unreasonably?

This should not used for hyping up artificial situations or allowing cheating, but in the case of milliseconds or millimetres, cumulative penalties could be seem to be possibly disproportionate and throw up computer-like unintuitive and unfair to real-life errors.

Impossible to tell whether you're talking about positioning the car within the grid box or the later pit box transgressions? Or all?

[Aluminium]

HustleRussell said:

Impossible to tell whether you're talking about positioning the car within the grid box or the later pit box transgressions? Or all?

Both those examples, to try to be more specific for example any human error that would not be perceptible by the naked eye.

[vulture1]

We already have it.
The only penalty used to be a drive through.
Now we have 5 seconds
10 seconds etc
For minor things that a drive through or stop gonwould be too harsh for.