http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/88166 Drivers call for safety car rule changes Formula 1 drivers are urging teams to reconsider the sport's safety car rules following the chaos caused by backmarkers in the Brazilian Grand Prix. A thrilling battle for the leading positions at Interlagos after the safety car period was ruined by the top men losing time trying to work their way through heavy traffic. The situation has prompted calls for a rethink of the safety car rules - and a possible return to the old regulation that meant backmarkers were waved through so all the leading men were in race order at a restart. Force India's Adrian Sutil told AUTOSPORT: "I think it was a complete mess. I was a fan of the rules from last year, that you could lap yourself back, it was all good. "We have seen so many problems caused by lapping cars after safety cars. Singapore for example, the [Mark] Webber/[Lewis] Hamilton incident happened because Webber had to lap another car, a Virgin, and he went out of the corner slower and created chaos. "That was very similar in Sao Paulo, even worse. I had no clue where I was, I was also getting lapped by [Fernando] Alonso, but nobody told me, I had no blue flags. I was trying to understand who was behind, if it was [Felipe] Massa or Alonso because Massa was still behind me [in the race order]. Then I thought 'okay I think I have to let him by.' It was just a mess." He added: "Especially when it comes to the end of the season and drivers fight against each other for the championship it's just a shame if first and second are split by three or four cars, it's unfair. After a restart you have a possible chance to pass the other cars, but with cars in between it's just not good. Hopefully they will try to make any changes for next year. "Last year the teams agreed to change it back again like it is this year. The drivers have power and if we all say we don't want it, we also can talk to our teams to make complete agreement and then push for it. It has to be discussed first with everybody, but at the end we are racing and if we think the other rules are better, why not?" Rubens Barrichello said: "I would love to see Formula 1 a bit more flexible because in Brazil there was no doubt that it would have been a lot better to see the backmarkers coming back, and I was one of them in a way. But then they would argue that in Monaco in a wet race, how are you going to do it? "So the flexibility that I want is that you might envisage something for one race and not another, that is all. But for the show it would have been better." Robert Kubica added: "I think it would be better [with the old rules], but it is very difficult. There are positives and negatives. It will take longer time because drivers need to re-catch the pack, but it is complicated for the fans. Everybody after the safety car would like to see the fight." Nick Heidfeld, who was given a penalty for holding up the leaders while being lapped in the closing stages of Brazil said: "We have discussed it in briefings. We had it in the past and there was a dangerous situation once so that is the danger, but the danger is also if there are lapped slow cars in the middle of the field trying to let you by and you don't see them. Yes I would prefer the restart to be the proper order." Ferrari team principal Stefano Domenicali said after the Brazilian Grand Prix that he believed the safety car rules should at least be discussed. "I think that for sure at the restart we knew that it was impossible to attack," he said. "We have seen what Fernando was able to do in the last couple of laps, in free air, he was really able to attack and when we saw it was not possible to attack we saved what we could do to keep the position. "We saw with the backmarkers not a really good situation with everyone, not in particular against anyone, but to see that this is a problem also for safety. It is something that we need to discuss and talk for the future because it is not really good." But not all the drivers believed that the Brazilian situation meant that a rules rethink was needed. Nico Rosberg said: "I don't think it is an unmanageable situation as long as it is clear for everybody. That is the one area where everyone needs to improve so that all those drivers are informed very quickly that they are being lapped by me, for example.
Difficult issue, lots of pros and cons to each side. I rather prefer the current system - after all, those who are chasing the leader already benefit from the SC big time, and if there wasn't a SC period, they'd have to lap the backmarkers on the track, too. Reducing the gap between the leader and those following to zero due to the SC and removing all the slower cars in between (which the leader already did lap and thus lose time there) is not really fair.
This issue is, in effect, why NASCRAP is so boring. Build up a big lead, yellow comes out and ruins the race. And NASCRAP has 5-10 yellows per race. The leading distance means nothing if it can be eliminated by a back marker crashing. Since everyone has the same ECU. They could make a regulation that when a safety-car-like incident happens, a signal is broadcast, and all the cars go to pit-lane speed--rather instantaneously--with no need for a safety car itself. Thus, the lead distance is retained, and when the track is race-ready again, the race begins around the whole track instantaneously, by the broadcast of another signal.
+1 on all points. "A very well argued case Sir!" Fixed it for you I like your idea though! - One problem may be can they run like that for any period of time? [I dunno, but am sure it could be done if they wanted to.] Cheers, Ian
then there would be the problem of dead spots on he track and the signal not getting through to some teams. Wont work. Dont worry, all the seasons will come down to the last 2 races.
No different to today - The "SC" car sign comes out, their radios & emails light up and the driver has "n" time to activate the limiter - What he does before crossing the line every time he enters the pits. [OK, he knows it's coming in the pits, but it could be done IMHO] We respectfully beg to differ. Whether it *will* happen is another debate. I don't understand the implication in your last comment? Cheers, Ian
Personally, I liked the time when there was no safety car. I think it's an 'American thing' coming from Oval racing that was imported in Europe. If there is an accident, drivers should be made to slow down to 'pit lane speed' (rev limitors?) with no overtaking between two points around the location of the accident (signaled by yellow flags), and be allowed to continue normal racing and overtaking on the rest of the circuit. With the telemetry existing now in racing, it would be very easy to monitor speeds and penalise those who exceed it in the accident zone. I can't see why the whole race has to be 'neutralised' around the circuit, when the incident is localised at only one point. That negates the advantage gained by the leaders, and end up being in favour of the rest of the field. Also, the idea of 'bunching the field' to add some spice to a race when the leader is miles ahead seems grossly unfair to me. Some races have been completely ruined by safety car periods. I remember one year at Le Mans, where several cars overheated after several laps behind the safety car and some broke down - the leader among them; Le Mans is a 13km circuit, and the incident at most covered 200metres!! By using safety car and neutralising the race, organisers leave the door open to manipulation like we have seen at Singapore 2008, when a Renault driver (Piquet Jr) was inticed to crash just to create a safety car period to serve his team mate's pit strategy (Alonso). I suspect it's not the only incident of the kind.
I prefer the current rules. It spices things up and it's a definite gamble. Last year rules mean that the driver who worked hard to establish a gap has to do it all over again after a SC period.
I may be missing the whole point, but one thing that I haven't seen discussed is the rule about the leader following the safety car. In Hungary, Vettel was penalized for not following closely enough. In Brazil and Abu Dabi, the safety car disappeared into the distance (again with Vettel in the lead both times), yet no penalty??? What am I missing? gp
I think the Hungarian penalty was deemed, by all that had an unbiased view, to be excessive and was corrected for the other races.
It really doesnt matter what some deem to be a "fair" rule as far as an established lead evaporating. Those with backmarks in front of them want a clear path. Backmarks want to regain position. The only one with a real gripe is the leader. And that changes hopefully race to race. Its good for the show. Change it back
