Mosley's Interview in Autosport
Discussion
Anyone else read it yet ?
Mosley's lost the plot - period
He basically says that the chicane option was never an option and he doesn't understand why the Michelin teams wouldn't slow down around the banking (and run high, so not to impede - the bridgestone runners, eg Ferrari) or the other option would be for the michelin runners to go through the pitlane on every lap (at pit lane speed).
Of course no one would of thought that would of been a farce !!!
He thinks both of these options were workable !
Mosley's lost the plot - period
He basically says that the chicane option was never an option and he doesn't understand why the Michelin teams wouldn't slow down around the banking (and run high, so not to impede - the bridgestone runners, eg Ferrari) or the other option would be for the michelin runners to go through the pitlane on every lap (at pit lane speed).
Of course no one would of thought that would of been a farce !!!
He thinks both of these options were workable !
woof said:
or the other option would be for the michelin runners to go through the pitlane on every lap (at pit lane speed).
cos that wouldnt be at all dangerous, 14 cars steaming through with all that re-fuelling equipment on the sidelines. a staggering idea from the safety Conscious FIA president.. i agree, the mans a loon with an agenda that becomes less hidden each time his mouth moves
Well I actually think the guy gave a pretty good account of himself and the decisions made.
The running through the pit lane option I had not heard about before but that coupled with the option of running at low speed through final turn shows that compromises were willing to be made.
(Both, ludicrous ideas but at least they were trying!)
This isn't arrive and drive karting where they'll feed you back into the lap charts at the point you left with a broken engine. It's a serious, high-profile sport.
The FIA were right to uphold the regulations as they did. If they hadn't, a precident would be set that would have all manner of ramifications.
The running through the pit lane option I had not heard about before but that coupled with the option of running at low speed through final turn shows that compromises were willing to be made.
(Both, ludicrous ideas but at least they were trying!)
This isn't arrive and drive karting where they'll feed you back into the lap charts at the point you left with a broken engine. It's a serious, high-profile sport.
The FIA were right to uphold the regulations as they did. If they hadn't, a precident would be set that would have all manner of ramifications.
steviebee said:
The FIA were right to uphold the regulations as they did. If they hadn't, a precident would be set that would have all manner of ramifications.
You mean instead of having F1 made to look like its run by a bunch of tossers (partly true
) in the country where most of its sponsors come from and effect F1 like has never happened before? C'mon, Max Mosley (and by your comments, yourself too) don't seem to realise the bigger picture.
Michelin could not allow there tires to run under race circumstances. That was a fact, nothing could have changed that. They made a mistake yes, but were big enough to own up to it. What was essential from that moment onwards was to get 20 cars racing in some form or another. Whether this meant a non-championship race or whatever doesen't really matter.
If that had happened, the whole situation would be FAR less worse than what actually happened
mindgam3 said:
Michelin could not allow there tires to run under race circumstances. That was a fact, nothing could have changed that. They made a mistake yes, but were big enough to own up to it. What was essential from that moment onwards was to get 20 cars racing in some form or another. Whether this meant a non-championship race or whatever doesen't really matter.
If that had happened, the whole situation would be FAR less worse than what actually happened
Spot on!
Personally i think the man's lost it!
a regulation was pushed through to make teams run on one set of tyres for the whole weekend, at quite short notice really, then, when there was a tyre issue with Kimi, Mr Moseley had a go at MaClaren for keeping thier driver out on unsafe tyres, saying that they should have put his safety first and pulled him out of the race, but when ALL the teams running Michelins are in a situation where they know the tyres won't last, he refuses to accept a problem even exists and moans that the teams didn't put thier drivers at risk!
If a Chicane was out of the question then why did almost every track suddenly gain them in 1994? Safety reasons wasn't it!
As far as i'm concerned they should have run with the chicane, then allowed Ferrari to protest the result in the courts at the end of the season, then allow all the teams to be punished just enough to allow a red car with a squre headed driver to claim another world crown.
then Max would be happy and at least we would have seen a race and maybe even kept a US GP on the books.
sorry
rant over!
a regulation was pushed through to make teams run on one set of tyres for the whole weekend, at quite short notice really, then, when there was a tyre issue with Kimi, Mr Moseley had a go at MaClaren for keeping thier driver out on unsafe tyres, saying that they should have put his safety first and pulled him out of the race, but when ALL the teams running Michelins are in a situation where they know the tyres won't last, he refuses to accept a problem even exists and moans that the teams didn't put thier drivers at risk!
If a Chicane was out of the question then why did almost every track suddenly gain them in 1994? Safety reasons wasn't it!
As far as i'm concerned they should have run with the chicane, then allowed Ferrari to protest the result in the courts at the end of the season, then allow all the teams to be punished just enough to allow a red car with a squre headed driver to claim another world crown.
then Max would be happy and at least we would have seen a race and maybe even kept a US GP on the books.
sorry
rant over!
I've just thought of something.
What happens the next time a serious safety issue appears??
Are those responsible now going to be totally frank and forthcoming in light of the actions of "Mad" Max and the FIA or are they going to say "well Michelin played safe and look at what happened there".
So much for fostering (as far as safety issues go)a open and frank arena.
Discuss.
MoJo.
What happens the next time a serious safety issue appears??
Are those responsible now going to be totally frank and forthcoming in light of the actions of "Mad" Max and the FIA or are they going to say "well Michelin played safe and look at what happened there".
So much for fostering (as far as safety issues go)a open and frank arena.
Discuss.
MoJo.
mojocvh said:
I've just thought of something.
What happens the next time a serious safety issue appears??
Are those responsible now going to be totally frank and forthcoming in light of the actions of "Mad" Max and the FIA or are they going to say "well Michelin played safe and look at what happened there".
So much for fostering (as far as safety issues go)a open and frank arena.
Discuss.
MoJo.
I strongly suspect that Michelin will not risk a repeat of this fiasco, it has cost them heavily in both money and damage to reputation. You can bet that from now on at least one set of tyres supplied to the Michelin teams will be absolutely bullet proof. Other parts suppliers are probably being a bit more conservative as well. This can only be good for safety. Earlier this season the FIA instructed both Michelin and Bridgestone to ensure that their tyres were safe under all conditions, and look what happened. Perhaps draconian action was needed to get the point across.
I don't honestly think that the Michelin tyres would have been safe even with a chicane, Michelin seemed unsure as to the cause of the problem and could not guarantee their tyres for even a minimal amount of laps. They had failures during practice after very few laps and at corners other than the infamous turn 13. At one stage of the weekend we heard that the tyres would be safe if the pressure was increased, then the Barcelona spec tyres were the solution, and finally a chicane was required. What was really needed was a more conservative design.
The best solution to the tyre issue would be for a single tyre supplier. Then F1 would once again be more about car and driver and less about tyres, the tyres could be stronger because all teams would have the same products, and testing could be reduced because the choicce of compounds could be limited. Designers spend countless hours shaving thousands of a second off a lap time, but the difference between a good and bad tyre choice can be worth seconds a lap. Bring back slicks and a single supplier.
The link is already on another thread, but if anyone hasn't yet read the blurb on the front of the Minardi website about this incedent, I recommend you do. Team principal says he has no confidence in Mosley and says he ought to resign.
p.s. Apparently Michelin advided the teams that their tyres would be safe if the chicane was put in place.
>> Edited by ATG on Friday 1st July 21:50
p.s. Apparently Michelin advided the teams that their tyres would be safe if the chicane was put in place.
>> Edited by ATG on Friday 1st July 21:50
steviebee said:
The FIA were right to uphold the regulations as they did. If they hadn't, a precident would be set that would have all manner of ramifications.
Somebody on here who speaks some sense on this matter, there's a novelty.....
If the FIA had acceded to the demands of the competitors, and that's what they are, then a precedent would indeed have been set, and openned the floodgates to possible anarchy throughout motorsport.
When I was a competitor I would have loved to have been able to demand the rules 'bent' to suit me, but everyone competes knowing what they are, and if you balls up that's your problem. Just because it's prima donna F1 it shouldn't be any different, it's a motorsport competition, not a threatrical show!
Mosley's certainley not the best man for the job IMHO, but is doing a good job here in backing the FIA reps who upheld the rules on the ground at the time, as was their job.
Throughout the last half century of Grand Prix's, drivers have had to drive around equipment problems all the time, and I think there were enough who would have done so at Indy, it was their bosses and Michelin, who, no doubt under fears of litigation, said NON!
aeropilot said:
If the FIA had acceded to the demands of the competitors, and that's what they are, then a precedent would indeed have been set, and openned the floodgates to possible anarchy throughout motorsport.
It would have been wrong for the FIA to impose a change on the regs that had previously been agreed with the event. However, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't change the regs with the agreement of all concerned, when it is clearly in the best interests of the sport.
For example, on a much much smaller scale, at sprints we are occasionally asked whether we agree for a competitor who has breached the technical regulations to be allowed to compete. If we all agree then they get to play, if anyone refuses then they don't. Seems eminently reasonable to me, and I don't see why the US fiasco couldn't have been resolved in the same way. By all accounts I've seen there were no particularly safety grounds to reject the chicane idea, it is just that Max has clung firmly to the principle that the regulations cannot be changed under any circumstances.
GreenV8S said:
By all accounts I've seen there were no particularly safety grounds to reject the chicane idea, it is just that Max has clung firmly to the principle that the regulations cannot be changed under any circumstances.
Max has convienently forgotten Barcelona 1994 when they threw up a temporary tyre chicane on the back straight due to saftey concerns (1994 knee jerk reactions to Senna's accicent).
aeropilot said:
Just because it's prima donna F1 it shouldn't be any different, it's a motorsport competition, not a threatrical show!
Actually it's both, and in truth, more of the latter.
Without the fans (both in attendence and on TV) there is no F1, and there would be no motorsport competition. If you basically tells the fans to shove it and ignore the theatrical show, then you soon will have no motorsport competition.
Yes, you want to emphasize the competition as much as possible, but if you do so to the extreme detriment of the show, as occurred in Indy, then you just @#$%ed up royal.
david_s said:
p.s. Apparently Michelin advised the teams that their tyres would be safe if the chicane was put in place.
Doesn't make it true.
??
IIRC The break down in the tyre wall was because of the extra heat generated on the curve by the diamond cut in the track.
The tyres were perfectly ok on the rest of the track.
The reason that they could at no point go full throttle on the curve was because the heat generated was enough to blow the tyre on its first outing - which means that the teams couldn't just keep changing tyres to get around the problem.
So yes, by putting in the chicane - Michelin's statement was true.
tinman0 said:
ATG said:
p.s. Apparently Michelin advised the teams that their tyres would be safe if the chicane was put in place.
Doesn't make it true.
??
IIRC The break down in the tyre wall was because of the extra heat generated on the curve by the diamond cut in the track.
The tyres were perfectly ok on the rest of the track.
The reason that they could at no point go full throttle on the curve was because the heat generated was enough to blow the tyre on its first outing - which means that the teams couldn't just keep changing tyres to get around the problem.
So yes, by putting in the chicane - Michelin's statement was true.
Actually the latest version of events was that it was some kind of aerodynamic bouncing (compage!)that caused the problem. And it took them two weeks to find this out.
The tyres did not blow on first outing and they did not all fail at the same point of the track. From the latest Michelin reports it is clear that at the time of the race they had no idea what was causing the problem, so on what basis did they decide that a chicane would have made the race safe? On Saturday it was a problem limited to a few teams and increasing the tyre pressures would solve the problem, then the Barcelona spec tyres were the answer and finally a chicane. My point is that if they didn't know what the problem was, how could they decide upon a solution?
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff