[WEC] The ACO's Safety Car 'Overhaul'

[Simmi]

Woaaah this is big news - https://www.endurance-info.com/auto/...talement-revue

Complete safety car overhaul at LM24 with pass-arounds, class drop-backs and safety car groups merging!

Pick the bones out of that!

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Simmi

Woaaah this is big news - https://www.endurance-info.com/auto/...talement-revue

Complete safety car overhaul at LM24 with pass-arounds, class drop-backs and safety car groups merging!

Pick the bones out of that!

I always felt that the Le Mans safety cars worked quite well. So why the need to overhaul them?

[rx555]

Seems closer to what IMSA does. It makes SC periods much longer than they need to be IMO. The cause of the SC is usually long cleared up but they continued around for many laps to get everyone sorted at Daytona.

[Adam43]

Big news indeed - probably one for its own thread. We can split off later.

[Mike E]

Wretched. We can only hope there aren't too many safety cars. It's going to take forever to organise all that, which is presumably why it doesn't apply in the last hour.

[GT6]

As the world get more safety concerned i think there are likely to be even more safety car periods, it is unfortunate but i feel th i the way things are going

[Simmi]

Recently

2019: 8
2020: 4
2021: 4
2022: 1

Feels like they are for any accident over a certain threshold and barrier repairs. Also for when they're too wuss to start a race in the wet - but that's a moot point in this situation so I removed that one from 2021.

[Mike E]

They have recently tried to use slow zones more so hopefully that continues.

On the other hand, there is already a NASCAR in the race so why not go the whole hog and just run it as a stage race. Seems like the natural conclusion.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Big news indeed - probably one for its own thread. We can split off later.

Done. It's likely to generate a few posts.....

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by CTD

I always felt that the Le Mans safety cars worked quite well. So why the need to overhaul them?

There were always cases of teams that gained/lost the better part of a lap, but it was not predetermined, as it depended on the timing of the safety car and the location of the class leader.

With the proposed procedure, the merging should ensure that no car loses out, but it means a couple to a few cars will gain time back. Being cynical, teams are less likely to complain about others gaining an advantage than they are about being disadvantaged themselves.

[Simmi]

If I'm trying to look for the positives. It should mean that an early safety car doesn't bust apart the class battles, some of which in GT-Pro never came back together.

Later in the race, while it won't give freebie laps back (never go 'Full IMSA'), it will for sure give massive chunks back to cars on the tail end of the lead lap. By extension it could help recovering cars unlap themselves. I don't love this aspect.

I think like others have said, artificial re-bunching on such a long track doesn't feel right, let alone all the other manipulation for 'the show'.

What is random is where the class leaders are will be so important I think. For example if the P2 leader is lapping close battling 4th and 5th place cars in the class. If it laps the 5th place car, SC comes out. 4th / 1st / 5th are together on the road. The 4th place car does a pass around, rejoins at the back, then gets filtered into the P2 dropback line. Ending up almost a lap ahead of trapped 5th place.

Have I got that right or am I missing something?

When pitting under SC, would teams also have to anticipate what the class leader will do, given that's essentially a moving point at which you essentially cut the pack.

[AstonGeoff]

Way tooooo complicated!

I hope they see the error of their ways once they try it on test day!

If it was all about where cars make up time I'm sure there are easier ways of ensuring cars drop back in to the right place but heyho we'll get used to it I guess. But will the teams get it right for the wave by?

[Simmi]

The fact you get a two-lap Stop-Go penalty if you pass around when you shouldn't shows what an advantage it is deemed.

Also pray for the tired AM drivers in the night if their radio stops working. You've got to know when to pass around and when to drop back.

Just a pure guess but I'd imagine they'd try to do P2 drop back on the first straight. GTE one on the second.

[Coach Ep]

"yellows breed yellows" will play its part in making things very painful.

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by Simmi

What is random is where the class leaders are will be so important I think. For example if the P2 leader is lapping close battling 4th and 5th place cars in the class. If it laps the 5th place car, SC comes out. 4th / 1st / 5th are together on the road. The 4th place car does a pass around, rejoins at the back, then gets filtered into the P2 dropback line. Ending up almost a lap ahead of trapped 5th place.

Have I got that right or am I missing something?

Sounds about right. Or wrong.

To your other point about three SC packs potentially splitting up an on track battle, it can also create an on track battle by wiping out the lead of a car that was some way ahead of a rival that ends up in the same pack.

As usual with these things, the more they insist it's about fairness etc, the more they manipulate the race, and so the more artificial it becomes.

[J Jay]

Originally Posted by Mike E

Sounds about right. Or wrong.

To your other point about three SC packs potentially splitting up an on track battle, it can also create an on track battle by wiping out the lead of a car that was some way ahead of a rival that ends up in the same pack.

As usual with these things, the more they insist it's about fairness etc, the more they manipulate the race, and so the more artificial it becomes.

As I said above, at best this is an acceptable consequence of making sure nobody directly loses out. At worst, it's the stated aim, in service of increasing the wheel-to-wheel action on track.

[Simmi]

Originally Posted by J Jay

As I said above, at best this is an acceptable consequence of making sure nobody directly loses out. At worst, it's the stated aim, in service of increasing the wheel-to-wheel action on track.

It HAS to have been the aim I think. Like I said in the other thread, it's with a view to trying to 'tweak' the product for TV. The ACO talked about trying to increase entertainment value without sacrificing the core product.

People will have different views about how much this damages the core product. For me it certainly damages the more purist nature of Le Mans. Hyperpole did the same thing but many people will say it's an improvement. Time will tell I guess.

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Simmi

Hyperpole did the same thing but many people will say it's an improvement.

Can you name both of them?

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Can you name both of them?

Pierre and ......

[E.B]

Im struggling to find benefits the present 3 car SC and slow zone system dont provide. I understand that systm..... the new concept just smacks of over complication and potential confusion, particularly to those spectating or in my case watching at home, sleep deprived, and from behind a bacon sandwich and glass of wine..

A voice in my head keeps saying "If it aint broke dont fix it".

[tux]

How likely is a SC though? They use the Slow Zones for pretty much everything and the new run off at Porsche Curves seems to have cut down on accidents.

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by tux

How likely is a SC though? They use the Slow Zones for pretty much everything and the new run off at Porsche Curves seems to have cut down on accidents.

Exactly. They are used sparingly so why go through all this upheaval?

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by E.B

A voice in my head keeps saying "If it ain't broke don't fix it".

It's a phrase I find myself using far too often these days. I think the ACO could adopt it as their catchphrase for this year's Mans.

Either that or I'm just getting old.....

[Mike E]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

Either that or I'm just getting old.....

Could be both?

[Simmi]

My hope is that we don't see a SC called when it could be a slow zone, now that the SC is essentially an 'entertainment mechanism'. I believe deep down that's why this rule has been changed. To close gaps and ensure better action on restarts.

And I mean that in the same way that you watch IMSA and there's that notion that 'a caution would make this interesting'. Obviously IMSA are tied into their process whatever the incident, but there's often a choice in ACO rules racing.

It might sound a bit tinfoil hat but we've literally seen it in other forms of motorsport.

BTW I believe the average number of safety cars since 2019 and the introduction of FCY is 4. If my annuals are correct (can't find this info on Alkamel?)