Discussion:
Safety car
(too old to reply)
larkim
2019-07-14 16:41:10 UTC
Permalink
In these days of successful use of VSC, is there ever a need to throw a full safety car when conditions are bone dry, the stranded car is well off the track and it's clear the driver is not injured?

Halton would have benefited either way, but it did seem ott, even in the light of there being marshals right in line of the racing line.
John
2019-07-15 08:02:24 UTC
Permalink
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
larkim
2019-07-15 08:45:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think Hamilton
gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap pitstop simply because his
strategy timed things differently.

I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not cynical
enough to think the race director put the "show" into the mix when making the
decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but maybe there's a minimum
threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run off area, number of marshals involved
etc)
Sir Tim
2019-07-15 10:25:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by larkim
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think Hamilton
gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap pitstop simply because his
strategy timed things differently.
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not cynical
enough to think the race director put the "show" into the mix when making the
decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but maybe there's a minimum
threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run off area, number of marshals involved
etc)
I was surprised too, although I’m possibly a little more cynical than you
:-)
As I’m not completely au fait with the SC rules I’m not sure whether it
benefitted Lewis more than a VSC. Certainly Bottas was very unlucky but,
judging by Lewis’s last lap I think he might well have caught Valtteri
anyway.
--
Sir Tim
Mark
2019-07-15 11:24:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not
cynical enough to think the race director put the "show" into the mix
when making the decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but maybe
there's a minimum threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run off area,
number of marshals involved etc)
I was surprised too, although I’m possibly a little more cynical than you
:-)
As I’m not completely au fait with the SC rules I’m not sure whether it
benefitted Lewis more than a VSC. Certainly Bottas was very unlucky but,
judging by Lewis’s last lap I think he might well have caught Valtteri
anyway.
My view was that it was more than necessary, but I think that a more
conservative view has been pretty consistent since the death of Bianchi.
There was a heavy piece of machinery (as larkim notes) operating at a
point where others could (and did) slide off. If there had been any
accident even slightly reminiscent of the Bianchi crash (which occurred
under double waved yellows, if you recall) there would have been
questions asked.

I just suspect that this is normal if they can't clear cars from that
kind of position in the future.
larkim
2019-07-15 11:53:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not
cynical enough to think the race director put the "show" into the mix
when making the decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but maybe
there's a minimum threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run off area,
number of marshals involved etc)
I was surprised too, although I’m possibly a little more cynical than you
:-)
As I’m not completely au fait with the SC rules I’m not sure whether it
benefitted Lewis more than a VSC. Certainly Bottas was very unlucky but,
judging by Lewis’s last lap I think he might well have caught Valtteri
anyway.
My view was that it was more than necessary, but I think that a more
conservative view has been pretty consistent since the death of Bianchi.
There was a heavy piece of machinery (as larkim notes) operating at a
point where others could (and did) slide off. If there had been any
accident even slightly reminiscent of the Bianchi crash (which occurred
under double waved yellows, if you recall) there would have been
questions asked.
I just suspect that this is normal if they can't clear cars from that
kind of position in the future.
The only thing I'd qualify is that in a bone dry race, with no issue of
oil on the surface etc, VSC ought to allow a crane on the runoff area
with the best drivers in the world circulating at ponderous speeds.

Bianchi was in the gloom, wet and they were still going at a pace to try
to catch the SC.

Equally, I can see why they'd err on the side of caution - but that being
the case, I'd almost argue that there is no point at all to VSC if the
race control are going to be so ultra-cautious about it.

Once SC signal is thrown all cars have to "reduce speed", but the rules are
fairly vague ("All competing cars must reduce speed and form up in line behind the safety car") which isn't dissimilar to what the VSC rules say,
though obviously the VSC rules impose mandatory timings too ("All competing
cars must reduce speed and stay above the minimum time set by the FIA ECU at
least once in each marshalling sector and at both the first and second
afety car lines")

So it seems to me that SC is potentially more dangerous in that a car could
be compliant coming to that corner where the crane is and yet still have
"reduced speed" in line with the rules, even though their speed remains
high.

Anyway, either way once the VSC or SC signal was shown, Bottas was screwed
in terms of the win given his pitstop offset with Hamilton.
Mark
2019-07-15 14:57:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by larkim
The only thing I'd qualify is that in a bone dry race, with no issue of
oil on the surface etc, VSC ought to allow a crane on the runoff area
with the best drivers in the world circulating at ponderous speeds.
Bianchi was in the gloom, wet and they were still going at a pace to try
to catch the SC.
Equally, I can see why they'd err on the side of caution - but that being
the case, I'd almost argue that there is no point at all to VSC if the
race control are going to be so ultra-cautious about it.
Once SC signal is thrown all cars have to "reduce speed", but the rules are
fairly vague ("All competing cars must reduce speed and form up in line behind the safety car") which isn't dissimilar to what the VSC rules say,
though obviously the VSC rules impose mandatory timings too ("All competing
cars must reduce speed and stay above the minimum time set by the FIA ECU at
least once in each marshalling sector and at both the first and second
afety car lines")
So it seems to me that SC is potentially more dangerous in that a car could
be compliant coming to that corner where the crane is and yet still have
"reduced speed" in line with the rules, even though their speed remains
high.
I don't think there is a foolproof solution, but I just think that they
take what might look like "stronger" action now when any element of risk
is involved.

I think that there is no perfect solution. All drivers want to minimise
the cost of all of these situations (whether a yellow flag or a safety
car), not least because of the fear that someone else might benefit
more/be penalised less.

If VSC is potentially more safe than SC, the double waved yellows
*should* be safer still. Bianchi should have been slowing and prepared
to stop. But I'm not sure the VSC *is* safer, at least not once the
train has formed. I can see how up to that point, there is more formal
focus on speed with clear deltas set. Similar deltas are monitored
during SC periods as I understand it.

I think the general view is that in terms of enforced slowing - at least
once the train has formed - the SC is the gold standard. Any breach at
that point would require overtaking which is very clear and easy to
police.

As a result, I think they are choosing VSC over double waved yellows,
and SC over VSC. In particular where there is a risk involving
maneuvring heavy equipment at the edge of fast corners, I think they
want to not only be cautious, but be seen to be cautious.
Post by larkim
Anyway, either way once the VSC or SC signal was shown, Bottas was screwed
in terms of the win given his pitstop offset with Hamilton.
Some you win...
Bigbird
2019-07-15 18:07:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by larkim
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not
cynical enough to think the race director put the "show" into
the mix >> when making the decision. VSC seems a very safe option,
but maybe >> there's a minimum threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a
run off area, >> number of marshals involved etc)
Post by Sir Tim
I was surprised too, although I’m possibly a little more cynical
than you :-)
As I’m not completely au fait with the SC rules I’m not sure
whether it benefitted Lewis more than a VSC. Certainly Bottas was
very unlucky but, judging by Lewis’s last lap I think he might
well have caught Valtteri anyway.
My view was that it was more than necessary, but I think that a more
conservative view has been pretty consistent since the death of
Bianchi. There was a heavy piece of machinery (as larkim notes)
operating at a point where others could (and did) slide off. If
there had been any accident even slightly reminiscent of the
Bianchi crash (which occurred under double waved yellows, if you
recall) there would have been questions asked.
I just suspect that this is normal if they can't clear cars from
that kind of position in the future.
The only thing I'd qualify is that in a bone dry race, with no issue
of oil on the surface etc, VSC ought to allow a crane on the runoff
area with the best drivers in the world circulating at ponderous
speeds.
Bianchi was in the gloom, wet and they were still going at a pace to
try to catch the SC.
Equally, I can see why they'd err on the side of caution - but that
being the case, I'd almost argue that there is no point at all to VSC
if the race control are going to be so ultra-cautious about it.
Once SC signal is thrown all cars have to "reduce speed", but the
rules are fairly vague ("All competing cars must reduce speed and
form up in line behind the safety car") which isn't dissimilar to
what the VSC rules say, though obviously the VSC rules impose
mandatory timings too
("All competing cars must reduce speed and stay
above the minimum time set by the FIA ECU at least once in each
marshalling sector and at both the first and second afety car lines")
So it seems to me that SC is potentially more dangerous in that a car
could be compliant coming to that corner where the crane is and yet
still have "reduced speed" in line with the rules, even though their
speed remains high.
No I don't think so. They all run to a delta which is why they take so
long to form up behind the SC and why the pit stop can seem a no
brainer.

One big difference that can mandate a SC is the need for marshals or
equipment to go on track. Once they are all behind the SC there is a 2
min gap for marshals to work with. Perhaps not relevant in this case.
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Mower Man
2019-07-15 21:24:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think Hamilton
gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap pitstop simply because his
strategy timed things differently.
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not cynical
enough to think the race director put the "show" into the mix when making the
decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but maybe there's a minimum
threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run off area, number of marshals involved
etc)
I was surprised too, although I’m possibly a little more cynical than you
:-)
As I’m not completely au fait with the SC rules I’m not sure whether it
benefitted Lewis more than a VSC. Certainly Bottas was very unlucky but,
judging by Lewis’s last lap I think he might well have caught Valtteri
anyway.
I think Mark Hughes race report had an excellent explanation - or at
least a postulation - as to why the race unfolded as it did. Mark
reckons Lewis had a plan up his sleeve which was at variance with the
team from even before the moment the lights went out.

I've always thought LH was quick, but this is a much more calculating LH
than I thought we had.

If you didn't read or see it I post the link here -

http://tinyurl.com/yxdjp69h

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
~misfit~
2019-07-15 23:55:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sir Tim
Post by larkim
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think Hamilton
gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap pitstop simply because his
strategy timed things differently.
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not cynical
enough to think the race director put the "show" into the mix when making the
decision.  VSC seems a very safe option, but maybe there's a minimum
threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run off area, number of marshals involved
etc)
I was surprised too, although I’m possibly a little more cynical than you
:-)
As I’m not completely au fait with the SC rules I’m not sure whether it
benefitted Lewis more than a VSC. Certainly Bottas was very unlucky but,
judging by Lewis’s last lap I think he might well have caught Valtteri
anyway.
I think Mark Hughes race report had an excellent explanation - or at least a postulation - as to
why the race unfolded as it did. Mark reckons Lewis had a plan up his sleeve which was at variance
with the team from even before the moment the lights went out.
I've always thought LH was quick, but this is a much more calculating LH than I thought we had.
If you didn't read or see it I post the link here -
http://tinyurl.com/yxdjp69h
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Peter Windsor has a similar theory
Maybe Mark and Peter spent some
time theorising after the race? However I think that if they were right we'd have been treated to
some of the radio between pits and car where driver and strategists disagreed (as we were in the
final few laps).

I prefer my theory that Mercedes split their strategy and he was left out to cover Vettel, right up
until the safety car.
--
Shaun.

"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville

This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
Brian Lawrence
2019-07-15 17:37:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by larkim
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think Hamilton
gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap pitstop simply because his
strategy timed things differently.
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not cynical
enough to think the race director put the "show" into the mix when making the
decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but maybe there's a minimum
threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run off area, number of marshals involved
etc)
Does anyone know if the VSC lap delta is the same as the SC1-SC2 time
published on Friday evenings at each race?

That time for Silverstone was 1m 37.0s, whereas laps behind the SC were
mostly between 2m 05s & 2m 10s - HAM lapped in ~2m 20s once he started
following the SC.

The difference in lap time is around 30s, IF that's the time used.
Bigbird
2019-07-15 18:36:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by larkim
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think
Hamilton gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap pitstop
simply because his strategy timed things differently.
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not
cynical enough to think the race director put the "show" into the
mix when making the decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but
maybe there's a minimum threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run
off area, number of marshals involved etc)
Does anyone know if the VSC lap delta is the same as the SC1-SC2 time
published on Friday evenings at each race?
That time for Silverstone was 1m 37.0s, whereas laps behind the SC
were mostly between 2m 05s & 2m 10s - HAM lapped in ~2m 20s once he
started following the SC.
The difference in lap time is around 30s, IF that's the time used.
Have a look at the lap analysis

https://www.fia.com/events/fia-formula-one-world-championship/season-2019/eventtiming-information-15

Bottas is doing 2.20's for 3 laps behind the SC. At the same time other
drivers who also didn't stop have lap times which vary considerably.
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Brian Lawrence
2019-07-15 20:27:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by larkim
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think
Hamilton gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap pitstop
simply because his strategy timed things differently.
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not
cynical enough to think the race director put the "show" into the
mix when making the decision. VSC seems a very safe option, but
maybe there's a minimum threshold (e.g. heavy machinery in a run
off area, number of marshals involved etc)
Does anyone know if the VSC lap delta is the same as the SC1-SC2 time
published on Friday evenings at each race?
That time for Silverstone was 1m 37.0s, whereas laps behind the SC
were mostly between 2m 05s & 2m 10s - HAM lapped in ~2m 20s once he
started following the SC.
The difference in lap time is around 30s, IF that's the time used.
Have a look at the lap analysis
https://www.fia.com/events/fia-formula-one-world-championship/season-2019/eventtiming-information-15
Bottas is doing 2.20's for 3 laps behind the SC. At the same time other
drivers who also didn't stop have lap times which vary considerably.
Yes that's where I found the data above. I'd imagine that anyone with a
clear track can go faster until they catch up to the end of the train.

The race history chart helps, but it's still complicated.
Bigbird
2019-07-16 09:23:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Bigbird
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by larkim
Post by John
Made for a more exciting race, at least for third.
Yes, it benefitted the midfield races a bit, but I don't think
Hamilton gained any more under SC vs VSC - he got a cheap
pitstop simply because his strategy timed things differently.
I'm just curious as to why a full SC was thrown then - I'm not
cynical enough to think the race director put the "show" into
the mix when making the decision. VSC seems a very safe
option, but maybe there's a minimum threshold (e.g. heavy
machinery in a run off area, number of marshals involved etc)
Does anyone know if the VSC lap delta is the same as the SC1-SC2
time published on Friday evenings at each race?
That time for Silverstone was 1m 37.0s, whereas laps behind the SC
were mostly between 2m 05s & 2m 10s - HAM lapped in ~2m 20s once
he started following the SC.
The difference in lap time is around 30s, IF that's the time used.
Have a look at the lap analysis
https://www.fia.com/events/fia-formula-one-world-championship/season-2019/eventtiming-information-15
Post by Brian Lawrence
Post by Bigbird
Bottas is doing 2.20's for 3 laps behind the SC. At the same time
other drivers who also didn't stop have lap times which vary
considerably.
Yes that's where I found the data above. I'd imagine that anyone with
a clear track can go faster until they catch up to the end of the
train.
Faster but no faster tan the minimum time set for each sector by the
ECU.
Post by Brian Lawrence
The race history chart helps, but it's still complicated.
Exactly. Look at that and compare lap 21, 22 and 23. All the cars who
didn't pit were slow on lap 21 but many were much faster on lap 22 then
at SC speeds the next lap.

I don't understand what happened to create the differences between lap
21 and 22.

Take for example Perez

20 2:05
21 2:10
22 1:44
23 2:11

I may take a look at a replay of the live timing later and see if
anythings springs up from that. I think there may be something worth
noting.
--
Trump fact check:
The grand total as of Sunday: 4,913 false claims
Last week’s total: 31 false claims
That’s the 75th-worst week of his presidency out of 116 weeks so far.
Loading...