Pirelli to change tyres from the canadian G.P

I'm not blind and I've been following it through many and sundry "scandals" over the years. I understand, I really do, what you're saying. However, the one area that's always been above reproach is Charlie's regulations. One of the beauties of F1 to me is that they DO NOT, ever, **** with the rules mid-season. Conversely, the rules *must* always be followed.

This isn't taxicab or sports car racing where if you do a better job you get hobbled. This is F1, damnit! This strikes to the very heart of the sport and is just plain wrong IMO.

OTOH, I can only guess they *need* Pirelli back next year and are hence letting this nausea pass without comment.

We're *way* outside the influence of lawyers here IMO - The waivers they have to sign are "significant". All that would be needed is Charlie to issue a statement something like, "after consulting with the supplier the FIA has recommended that they be allowed to bring *additional* tires in order to prevent future delams"..... No admission of "guilt", no dirty laundry, just a smart move.

For the good of a few teams, not the sport!

That we don't know yet which teams will benefit is irrelevant. I'd almost (but not quite!) enjoy seeing the Cans lock out the front row by 1/2 second or so. Then we'll hear some howls!

Cheers,
Ian

 

Ian, here's how I've come to peace with this. 2 things: Lotus, Ferrari, RB will continue to be very fast on race pace regardless. Pirelli are doing this for Pirelli, they don't want this type of press on them with tires literally falling apart and becoming track hazards. Some teams do not have this issue, but others certainly do and it's terrifying to their brand recognition.

 

The primary directive in F1 is "don't Eff with the Golden Goose".
Any rules or traditions that conflict with that are null and void.

 

Good of the sport;

There are in fact legal ramifications and dangerous precedents at stake. Depending on the jurisdiction their are legal rights that can't be waived no matter what is signed.

 

While you're probably correct that completely misses the point IMO. The damn playing field is moving under 'em mid-season, and that's not, nor has ever been, seen in the sport. I'm so pissed about it I can hardly see straight!

I'd friggin' love to see, I dunno, Caterham fall right into the middle of the sweet spot and come flying up the grid. Passing Mclaren, The Cans et al in the process. *That* would be awesome!.....

Understood. But, when they signed up they also signed to abide by the rules. Plainly, they are not.

Cheers,
Ian

 

F1 needing Pirelli is an interesting point. Do you guys think that's actually true? I would be rather surprised if F1 didn't have other tires companies wanting to be on board.


What was it that made Bridgestone and Michelin leave? Was that a Bernie decision or was that their own decision?

 

Fair comment.

However;

1 - The current structure throws off its tread. I don't think a chunk of rubber is going to maim anyone. In fact, they've been able to get to the pits on the things rather than the usual instant retirement.
2 - It's not all teams that have the problem. Those that do obviously haven't done as good of a job as those that don't.
3 - I understand Pirelli's frustration & PR disaster. But, again, we've seen less than a handful of occurrences. We used to see such failures pretty regularly. No big deal.

Cheers,
Ian

 

*Personally*, and I could be wrong, I think that's exactly the situation. To me anyway, there's no other explanation for them being allowed to do it without anyone protesting.

Last time the contract was up Hankook was briefly mentioned. AFAIK, it was just the two of 'em.

I'm pretty sure it was their own decision; Michelin got burnt and I don't think will ever return. Bridgestone realized, like Pirelli it seems, that they were on a hiding to nothing.

Goodyear? Maybe they could be tempted back; They have a long and successful history in the sport after all.

"Who-Frung-Rubber" out of China! We'd see some delams then! [No offense intended to our Chinese cousins here of course.]

Toyo? [Do they have the wherewithal?]

Any others?

Cheers,
Ian

 

LOL. Well, you know, there have NEVER been four stops in ANY grand prix before, especially at Barcelona.


....except in 2011, of course (and other times at other GP's)

 

I agree with this. The fact that the change is only focusing on the rear tires would seem to correspond to the move also (which, ironically, doesn't really help RBR if that in fact happens).

Also ironic is the fact that the delaminating tires actually allowed a car to stay in the race due to their structure. After the change, I'm assuming that a blown tire is basically a retirement.

 

1- really? A heavy hunk of rubber flying through the air mid race stands no chance of hitting another car or, heaven forbid, another driver?
2- It only takes one incident.
3- they've been explaining away deteriorating tires for quite a while now. The last thing they want now is explaining exploding tires with no one else to blame.

 

I assume everyone has read this?



Article 12.5.2 If in the opinion of the appointed tyre supplier and FIA technical delegate, the nominated tyre specification proves to be technically unsuitable, the stewards may authorise the use of additional tyres to a different specification

 

Yep, already quoted and commented on back in post #120.

Some very key words there too;

Additional tires, not different tires.

Charlie hasn't said a word......

They're plainly not 'technically unsuitable'. Some guys make 'em last.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Well?

 

I assume you mean this little edit you slipped in (?)

The rule remains that these "different spec" tires must be supplied in addition to those already available. Not "instead of".

*If* Charlie had spoken on the matter and "suggested" they do something, then OK, I could go with it. But I can't see any way the originals can be taken away at the same time.

What if these new "super tires" are a couple of seconds slower? Fauxtus & Ferrari (for example) should be able to remain on their original choice. Not be forced to use some crap because The Cans & Pirelli PR are worrying.

Cheers,
Ian

 

It will be interesting to see how it shakes out. Until then its speculation.

 

IMO, no big deal. A big ol' chunk stuck in a wing might be a minor issue, but I don't think even the largest could hurt a driver. Maybe get their attention, but not significantly.

That's very true and I suspect what your Pirelli attorney buddies are concerned with.

They have never exploded!

We've seen less than a handful delam. Over two races. Again, no big deal IMO.

If it were a real problem I'm sure Charlie would have spoken by now. His total silence is ominous IMO.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Absolutely!

Of course, I'm pretty sure the status-quo will remain the same - The cream always rises eventually after all.

Those who got their designs somewhat right now being (possibly) penalized is my problem.

It's the precedent it sets that I really object to.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Rest easy.
The prime directive will abide.



As for the rest.

another Brit once wrote:
"A tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury.
Signifying nothing."

Or sumptin.

 

The latest in the saga (From: FIA declares Formula 1 tyre tweaks can only be for safety - F1 news - AUTOSPORT.com ) :

FIA declares Formula 1 tyre tweaks can only be for safety

Pirelli's planned mid-season Formula 1 tyre tweaks are set to be much smaller than originally anticipated after the FIA ruled that changes will only be allowed on safety grounds.

Sources have revealed that the governing body has told Pirelli that it is happy to accept - and is indeed keen for - alterations necessary to prevent a repeat of the rear tyre delaminations that have struck at the last few events.

But, in a blow to outfits like Red Bull hoping further tweaks would help them overcome tyre difficulties they have faced, the FIA has made it clear it will not tolerate further changes aimed at reducing the number of pitstops or decreasing degradation.......

 

Undertstand fully this ruling but with other non Red Bull drivers calling for change Im not pleased. The tires are much to influential this year. Oh well. The beat goes on.....

 

As Eric Boullier pointed out though, all of the teams were made well aware of the tyre specification long before the season started and it was them to design a car suitable for the tyres - not visa-versa.

It wasn't as if the cars were all designed and built and then Pirelli came along and then said: "And here are the tyres you'll all be using!"

In fact, if Pirelli made the changes they were planning on making before the FIA stepped in, then the above situation is pretty much what we would have!


When it comes to the cars and utilising the tyres so far this season:

Lotus have done an excellent job with their design.
Ferrari have also done a pretty good job.
Red Bull got it slightly wrong.
Mercedes seem to have made a complete mess of it!

And the rest of them seem reasonable (possibly helped by their performance limitations).

 

Knowing the tire specs and knowing their performance characteristics aren't the same thing.
Even Pirelli has stated that not being able to test them on this season's cars under representative conditions left them uncertain as to how they'd perform.

 

Very true. Don't mess with that goose!

Very true. Seems they laid an egg (of the turdish, not golden variety ) this year.

True, but the "excuses" began back at the first test;

"It's too cold, wait till we get some reasonable weather and they'll be fine."
"This time it was a little too hot and we were a little aggressive. They'll be fine."
"The surface here is a little too abrasive. They'll be fine everywhere else."
"We ran thousands of miles in the sims and on the rigs. They said we'll be fine."
"We don't have an up to date test car. We're ~3seconds off the pace, so we're struggling with loading 'em properly. But, they'll be fine."

There's more, but that about sums it up.

What has surprised me though is the time it's taken Charlie to react. Pirelli *must* have been aware of the now famous clause 12.6.3. I guess they figured they'd just "do it".[Patently not true as the rule specifies that approval of the stewards is needed - I suspect this got put in after the Indy disaster when there was talk of new rubber being flown in for the race. Stewards are different to Charlie as we know.....]

Further, they've backed themselves into a corner with their claims that "it's not for safety but to stop the ugly delams & 4 stoppers." Oops!.....

I feel for them, I really do. But I feel for the guys that got the designs right more.

The test car is a big problem; We know some are tire slaying monsters - Develop for those and anyone with such a monster is gonna be light years ahead. The inverse is also obviously true.

Fer sure, no easy answers.

Cheers,
Ian

 

There never are.
As to the guys who got it right, how much of it was luck? How much a descision to sacrifice speed for tire life knowing that whatever Pirelli came up with it would be fragile?
If the latter what does it say about the state of F1?