Anyone else a F1 watcher? What a fiasco. The bloody idiots at FIA.
I'd like to see it almost anywhere but Indy.
...lew...

Anyone else a F1 watcher? What a fiasco. The bloody idiots at FIA.
I'd like to see it almost anywhere but Indy.
...lew...


Yeah I saw it......too many faults to blame any single entity but the
entire shooting match from FIA through the F1 'overlords' (Ecclestone &
Moseley), Clerks of the Course and Michelin should all take some flak.

Undoubtedly the tires were 'unsafe' to run but something could and
should have been done to put on a race for the fee paying fans instead
of a six car 'parade'.

Unfortunately the statement from the FIA about Michelin 'should have
known better and brought the correct tires to the race' is garbage as
they were allegedly denied access to the track for testing purposes
after the resurfacing work was carried out and Bridgestone had all the
race data from their sister company to work with after the recent Indy
500 race. Unfair by anyone's standards!

It was just a good job there was all that fencing (metal content) around
the course otherwise it might have turned really nasty with disgruntled
fans storming the track!


--
Larry Green

"Larry Green" wrote in message
. ..


Anyone else a F1 watcher? What a fiasco. The bloody idiots at FIA.
I'd like to see it almost anywhere but Indy.
...lew...


Yeah I saw it......too many faults to blame any single entity but the
entire shooting match from FIA through the F1 'overlords' (Ecclestone &
Moseley), Clerks of the Course and Michelin should all take some flak.

Undoubtedly the tires were 'unsafe' to run but something could and
should have been done to put on a race for the fee paying fans instead
of a six car 'parade'.

Unfortunately the statement from the FIA about Michelin 'should have
known better and brought the correct tires to the race' is garbage as
they were allegedly denied access to the track for testing purposes
after the resurfacing work was carried out and Bridgestone had all the
race data from their sister company to work with after the recent Indy
500 race. Unfair by anyone's standards!

It was just a good job there was all that fencing (metal content) around
the course otherwise it might have turned really nasty with disgruntled
fans storming the track!



I agree Larry and some of the signs the fans were holding up were pretty
unfriendly.
I wonder what the refund policy will be.

--
John R. Carroll
Machining Solution Software, Inc.
Los Angeles San Francisco
www.machiningsolution.com

Anyone else a F1 watcher? What a fiasco. The bloody idiots at FIA.

Undoubtedly the tires were 'unsafe' to run

The only team with a problem was Toyota, who were running lower
pressures and non-approved alignment settings compared to the other teams.

but something could and
should have been done to put on a race for the fee paying fans instead
of a six car 'parade'.

Michelin had flown in alternate tires, whose use would have DQ'd any
team using them. They could have used those and run the race knowing
they would be DQ'd and the result would be the same, and the fans would
have a race. Imperfect, but entertaining.

Unfortunately the statement from the FIA about Michelin 'should have
known better and brought the correct tires to the race' is garbage as
they were allegedly denied access to the track for testing purposes
after the resurfacing work was carried out

First I've heard of this. But then F1 has some severe restraints on team
testing outside of their events, in the interest of cost containment.

It was just a good job there was all that fencing (metal content) around
the course otherwise it might have turned really nasty with disgruntled
fans storming the track!

The SAFER barriers are new this year, resulting from Ralf Schumacher's
crash there last year which put him out for the remainder of the season.
Ironically, this year he had the exact same crash in the same spot,
but with a much better outcome. Perfect test.

I agree Larry and some of the signs the fans were holding up were pretty
unfriendly.

Many of those fans have given up vacation time and thouands of dollars
to see a GP race firsthand. They were denied, and they had a right to be
livid.

I wonder what the refund policy will be.

Depends on how much Tony George can get the F1 people to cough up. I bet
Tony refunds some or all, and sues F1 for that loss plus future losses.

The only team with a problem was Toyota, who were running lower
pressures and non-approved alignment settings compared to the other teams.

Not quite right- turns out there were something like 8 other tires that
exhibited similar yet not quite as "dramatic" damage as the 'yota gang

but something could and
should have been done to put on a race for the fee paying fans instead
of a six car 'parade'.

Michelin had flown in alternate tires, whose use would have DQ'd any
team using them. They could have used those and run the race knowing
they would be DQ'd and the result would be the same, and the fans would
have a race. Imperfect, but entertaining.

From what I understand about the alternate tires, they were of similar
construction to the defective ones, so unless they could pinpoint the
problem( which michelin stated they couldn't), the tires would be no better

Unfortunately the statement from the FIA about Michelin 'should have
known better and brought the correct tires to the race' is garbage as
they were allegedly denied access to the track for testing purposes
after the resurfacing work was carried out

First I've heard of this. But then F1 has some severe restraints on team
testing outside of their events, in the interest of cost containment.

It was just a good job there was all that fencing (metal content) around
the course otherwise it might have turned really nasty with disgruntled
fans storming the track!

The SAFER barriers are new this year, resulting from Ralf Schumacher's
crash there last year which put him out for the remainder of the season.
Ironically, this year he had the exact same crash in the same spot,
but with a much better outcome. Perfect test.

I agree Larry and some of the signs the fans were holding up were pretty
unfriendly.

Many of those fans have given up vacation time and thouands of dollars
to see a GP race firsthand. They were denied, and they had a right to be
livid.

I wonder what the refund policy will be.

Depends on how much Tony George can get the F1 people to cough up. I bet
Tony refunds some or all, and sues F1 for that loss plus future losses.

Pat

From what I understand about the alternate tires, they were of similar
construction to the defective ones, so unless they could pinpoint the
problem( which michelin stated they couldn't), the tires would be no better

They were the same construction and compound as used at Barcelona, so
the teams had setup info on hand. And Michelin was willing to stand
behind them unlike the tires in question.

Rex B wrote in message
...
They were the same construction and compound as used at Barcelona, so
the teams had setup info on hand. And Michelin was willing to stand
behind them unlike the tires in question.
Can you provide a pointer to the statement that michelin was willing to
stand behind the tires they were bringing over from barcelona? From what
I've read, they seem to be saying the opposite. Pat

patrick mitchel wrote:
Rex B wrote in message
...

They were the same construction and compound as used at Barcelona, so

the teams had setup info on hand. And Michelin was willing to stand
behind them unlike the tires in question.

Can you provide a pointer to the statement that michelin was willing to
stand behind the tires they were bringing over from barcelona? From what
I've read, they seem to be saying the opposite. Pat

That is what the TV commentators were saying during the race.

patrick mitchel wrote:

From what I understand about the alternate tires, they were of similar
construction to the defective ones, so unless they could pinpoint the
problem( which michelin stated they couldn't), the tires would be no better

I've read in the news, that Michelin testet new tires in their research
center in USA (till Sunday 2 o'clock in the morning) and that those
would have been OK, and they were (or would have been) at the track.
The problem was a too soft side wall.

Anyhow, F1 is getting worse and worse. I've been watching it for
decades, but 'am loosing interest.


Nick
--
Motormodelle / Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
todays SPAMfeed: 

Actually, this season has shown some interesting and close racing, as
opposed to the Ferrari domination for the last 6 years.
- -
Rex Burkheimer


Nick Müller wrote:

Anyhow, F1 is getting worse and worse. I've been watching it for
decades, but 'am loosing interest.

Actually, this season has shown some interesting and close racing, as
opposed to the Ferrari domination for the last 6 years.
- -
Rex Burkheimer


I'll second that.......nice to see racing (apart from the recent farce)
instead of a Ferrari led parade.

--
Larry Green

Rex B wrote:

Actually, this season has shown some interesting and close racing, as
opposed to the Ferrari domination for the last 6 years.

It's not that I miss the ferrari-victories. I'm happy that there are new
faces like Alonso or Ice-Man. But all the rule-changes (one set of
tires, modified qualifying (how often did they change it in the last two
years?), etc) took the tactics out of racing. And that's kind of boaring
for me.

Especialy the tire rules are stupied. How can one know what weather will
be 2 days later? Cold? Hot?
Also the qualifying: The single "unordered" qualifying gave equal
chances to everybody. But now what when it's raining?


Nick
--
Motormodelle / Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
todays SPAMfeed: 

"Larry Green" wrote in message


I'll second that.......nice to see racing (apart from the recent farce)
instead of a Ferrari led parade.

I haven't been watching F1 over the last couple of years. Does your comment
mean that there is actual passing taking place, or just a different order to
the parade?

Peter

Especialy the tire rules are stupied. How can one know what weather will
be 2 days later? Cold? Hot?

I think the rule requiring they run on the same set of tires they
qualify on adds a lot of interest. I'd be OK with allowing a single
tire change after, say 20 laps.
I think there is an exception for rains. If it's like other series,
the race officials have to declare it a rain race, then it's OK to
change to rains.
On the other hand, they are running grooved tires already

Also the qualifying: The single "unordered" qualifying gave equal
chances to everybody. But now what when it's raining?

Nobody likes that. It will almost certainly change before the season
goes much farther.
Of course, the season may be effectively over already! FIA has
summed all the Michelin teams to a hearing on June 29, to answer for a
list of "Crimes".

Peter Grey wrote:
"Larry Green" wrote in message

I'll second that.......nice to see racing (apart from the recent farce)
instead of a Ferrari led parade.


I haven't been watching F1 over the last couple of years. Does your comment
mean that there is actual passing taking place, or just a different order to
the parade?

Yes, there is passing, even two-abreast racing through several corners.
You should have seen the late-braking banzai passes at the chicane at
Monaco. Edge-O-the-seat stuff. Drama, even.

With the tire rules, it's iffy whether the leaders will make it to the
checker before the tires give out. Nick Heidfield had the entire field
covered a couple races ago, but flat-spotted a tire late in the race,
then the suspension failed from the vibration on the final lap.

Rex

Rex B wrote:

I think the rule requiring they run on the same set of tires they
qualify on adds a lot of interest.

Not to mine. :-)


I think there is an exception for rains.

Shure! But there are races (the Francorchamps race) that are legendary
for their crazy weather. Why can't the team decide when it's time to
change tires? No, I don't like that modus, but there are other opinions.
:-)


Of course, the season may be effectively over already! FIA has
summed all the Michelin teams to a hearing on June 29, to answer for a
list of "Crimes".

Uhh!? What rumors did you hear?

Nick

--
Motormodelle / Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
todays SPAMfeed: 

Of course, the season may be effectively over already! FIA has
summed all the Michelin teams to a hearing on June 29, to answer for a
list of "Crimes".


Uhh!? What rumors did you hear?

Nick

By Nikki Reynolds - Motorsport.com

The FIA has made public the list of charges it intends to face the Michelin
teams with at a World Motor Sport Council meeting in Paris on June 29th.
After the seven Michelin-shod teams withdrew from the US Grand Prix, citing
safety grounds in regard to tyres, the FIA summoned them to appear before a
hearing. Extracts of the FIA document reached the press so the governing
body decided to publish it.

The charges are being bought under Article 151c of the International
Sporting Code, which pertains to acts prejudicial to the interest of
competition or motor sport in general. The list of charges the teams --
Renault, Williams, BAR, McLaren, Toyota, Red Bull and Sauber -- have to
answer to in breach of Article 151c, in regard to the United States
Grand Prix, is as follows:

http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...?ID=189387&F=N

Rex B wrote:

http://www.motorsport.com/news/artic...?ID=189387&F=N

Thanks.
In my oppinion, the only one who will have to suffer from this fiasco
(in the long run) is the FIA itself.
_If_ the teams meet and agree on one tactic: Either no punishment, or we
will have a "technical failure" (or something more subtile) every race,
the FIA will have to withdraw. There are too many teams involved that
the FIA can make any harsh punishment.

By FIA I mean that hole gang who is making big $$$ with the lowest risk
of all.


Nick
--
Motormodelle / Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
todays SPAMfeed: 

Nick Müller wrote:
In my oppinion, the only one who will have to suffer from this fiasco
(in the long run) is the FIA itself.
_If_ the teams meet and agree on one tactic: Either no punishment, or we
will have a "technical failure" (or something more subtile) every race,
the FIA will have to withdraw. There are too many teams involved that
the FIA can make any harsh punishment.

Well, it's a little more complicated than that.
FIA is the rule-making body for F1 and other international motorsports.
Their job is implementing and enforcing rules that have been agreed on
by the series in question. FOCA works with FIA to establrish and revise
rules, then FIA is tasked with ongoing enforcement. In this particular
casem they are doing just exactly what they are supposed to do. They
gave the Michelein teams 3 or 4 possible alternatives within the rules,
but they chose "none of the above".
So the teams were involved in the rules-making, agreed to run by
them with FIA enforcing those same rules, then they blatantly violated
same in the most embarrassing way possible.
the big screwup here is Michelin, for not bringing a safe alternate
tire as they are required to. they did bring some in at the 11th hour -
past the legal time - and made them available. The teams should have run
the illegal tires, completed the race and given the fans a show, then
taken the DQs post-race. Post-race impound could say "Whoa - look -
wrong tires! Tsk tsk! No points for YOU."
Alternately, one of FIA's alternatives was "Drive slower". That
sounds ludicrous today, but there was a time when one had to drive slow
to conserve the car, or you would not finish. In the 1950's a set of
brakes would not last the whole race, so drivers could not run 10/10ths
the entire distance like they do today. At the turn in question, a
2-second lift at T13 entry might have dropped the loading into safe
limits. The Bridgstone'd Ferrari's would've still won, but I bet the
fastest teams would still beat the (Bridgestone) backmarkers even so.
Worst case would have been the outcome we wound up with, except with a
somewhat interesting to race instead of the farce we had.

But the F1 show was already on the virge of organizational failure. Most
of the F1 teams had met to discuss starting a new series and leaving the
current setup behind, much like happened a cfew decades back. Most are
tired of Bernie's high-handedness, but even more they resent the very
fat broadcasting income that he controls absolutely.

Rex B wrote:

Well, it's a little more complicated than that.

It is even more complicated, because there are several standpoints, each
being OK (from one perspective :-).

- The spectators want what they paid for. A show! It was really a shame
what they got, and I was astonished, that they didn't get more angry.
- On the other hand, why should the teams wear their precious engines,
without having a chance to win. They keep the extra revs for the next
race.
- The FIA not allowing Michelin to test tires on the (terribly) modified
track (You said, that Bridgestone had the necessary information).
- On the other hand, if some teams want a chicane (SP?) why should the
FIA give in? Next time, some team wants another exception that helps
them, again next time, a team wants to allow only one gear, because
their gearbox has broken, etc.
- How can this happen, that the track is so bad? They cut grooves to get
grip on the slippery surface! Who's responsible for allowing a race
there?
- Michelin not supplying OK tires in the right time (but anyhow, it
would have helped only for the show)
- The FIA suggesting to drive slower. This was an _exceptional_
circumstance out of control of Michelin and the teamsw. They do have
data of the tracks, but not of Indi _after_ that modification. The
stupid rules made it impossible to react.
- The (read: all) teams not standing together and finding a solution.
Well, you couldn't blame Ferrari (or any other team) for not joining.
everyone wants to take his advantage, that's racing!


But the F1 show was already on the virge of organizational failure.

That was a proof. And that's why I think the winners will be the teams.
It's getting time for (not all too serious):
- a new organisation
- a BMW-team without a Williams carriage^Wchassis
- Schumi to win again


Nick

--
Motormodelle / Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
todays SPAMfeed: 

Nick Müller wrote:
- The FIA not allowing Michelin to test tires on the (terribly) modified
track (You said, that Bridgestone had the necessary information).

Bridgestone supplies Firestone race tires ti some IRL teams, used at
Indy. Michelin does not.

F1 has very strick testing rules for teams. They basically cannot test
except at the events. This is to lessen the advantage of the
well-heeled teams who can afford to test to perfect, cost no object.
So, the only option would have been for Michelin to sign up an IRL
team to provide tires so they can have the IMS information that results.

- How can this happen, that the track is so bad? They cut grooves to get
grip on the slippery surface! Who's responsible for allowing a race
there?

Nothing wrong with the track. The IRL guys did fine with it, as did the
Bridgestone-shod F1 guys.

- Michelin not supplying OK tires in the right time (but anyhow, it
would have helped only for the show)

They may have had suitable tires on hand by race start.

- The FIA suggesting to drive slower. This was an _exceptional_
circumstance out of control of Michelin and the teamsw. They do have
data of the tracks, but not of Indi _after_ that modification. The
stupid rules made it impossible to react.

THe FIA only suggested that as one of 5 (?) options, for the sake of
offering all possible alternatives. And it is a legitimate alternative.

Well, you couldn't blame Ferrari (or any other team) for not joining.
everyone wants to take his advantage, that's racing!

Ferrari (& Minardi & Jordan) came ready to race, the others did not,
thanks to their tire supplier.

Rex B wrote:


F1 has very strick testing rules for teams. They basically cannot test
except at the events.

Yes, I know that.

Nothing wrong with the track. The IRL guys did fine with it, as did the
Bridgestone-shod F1 guys.

Nothing wrong? The track was newly coated and too slippery. Then they
cut grooves in it. It will be recoated next year for onother 3 millions
or so. You call this "nothing wrong"? If the track would have been that
way since years, it would be OK.


They may have had suitable tires on hand by race start.

Without knowing about the track? They (Bridgestone and Michelin) collect
information like mad over the years. It is said that they even to have
samples of the coating. Bidgestone hat info about the new coating. You
might call that "unfair". You could also blame Michelin for not
delivering tires to IRL-teams.


THe FIA only suggested that as one of 5 (?) options, for the sake of
offering all possible alternatives. And it is a legitimate alternative.

As I said, from fIA's point of view, the options were OK. But there are
also other oppinions.


Ferrari (& Minardi & Jordan) came ready to race, the others did not,
thanks to their tire supplier.

Thanks to their chance to test (through the back door).

I neither want to blame Michelin/fIA/Biridgestone/Indi, nor am I their
advocate. I just look at the things from different perspectives and see
that everyone has got reason for their decission.

Maybe there is much more behind Michelin's "failure". Some intrigue?
Some way of kicking FIA? The start of retiering from F1?


Nick
--
Motormodelle / Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
todays SPAMfeed: 

Nothing wrong with the track. The IRL guys did fine with it, as did the
Bridgestone-shod F1 guys.


Nothing wrong? The track was newly coated and too slippery. Then they
cut grooves in it. It will be recoated next year for onother 3 millions
or so. You call this "nothing wrong"? If the track would have been that
way since years, it would be OK.

Worked fine for the Indy 500. The racers have to deal with the track
surface that they get.

They may have had suitable tires on hand by race start.


Without knowing about the track? They (Bridgestone and Michelin) collect
information like mad over the years. It is said that they even to have
samples of the coating. Bidgestone hat info about the new coating. You
might call that "unfair". You could also blame Michelin for not
delivering tires to IRL-teams.

Fact is, the teams - and their tire supplier - are required by the rules
to bring two, and only two, tire types to each event. The primary is the
latest/greatest, capable of winning. The 2nd is a backup, a known good
tire that will not be the fastest, but will work and finish the race.
Such a tire existed, by Michelins admission. The Michelin teams failed
to bring those tires to Indy.

Rex

Nick Müller wrote:

- a BMW-team without a Williams carriage^Wchassis

Nice! It has happened yesterday.


Nick
--
Motormodelle / Engine Models
http://www.motor-manufaktur.de
todays SPAMfeed: