[Race] 2017 FORMULA 1 PETRONAS MALAYSIA GRAND PRIX

[ScotsBrutesFan]

It clarifies that Stroll didn't turn out into Vettel, however his turn angle on the wheel indicates that whilst he did in fact turn into the corner, he was intending to drift wide away from the apex, although as explained not as much as the camera on Grosjean's car first suggested.

My conclusion remains much as I had it before. Vettel should have given more room, and Stroll should have been more aware of where other cars were as he drifted out.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a new measure that on taking the checkered flag, cars must slow from racing speed and return to pits under VSC conditions of maintained slow speed and no overtaking..

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

It clarifies that Stroll didn't turn out into Vettel, however his turn angle on the wheel indicates that whilst he did in fact turn into the corner, he was intending to drift wide away from the apex, although as explained not as much as the camera on Grosjean's car first suggested.

My conclusion remains much as I had it before. Vettel should have given more room, and Stroll should have been more aware of where other cars were as he drifted out.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a new measure that on taking the checkered flag, cars must slow from racing speed and return to pits under VSC conditions of maintained slow speed and no overtaking..

Agree. Especially as this may trigger some "clarification" as to what drivers should be doing once they have taken the checkered flag.

Richard

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

It clarifies that Stroll didn't turn out into Vettel, however his turn angle on the wheel indicates that whilst he did in fact turn into the corner, he was intending to drift wide away from the apex, although as explained not as much as the camera on Grosjean's car first suggested.

My conclusion remains much as I had it before. Vettel should have given more room, and Stroll should have been more aware of where other cars were as he drifted out.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to find a new measure that on taking the checkered flag, cars must slow from racing speed and return to pits under VSC conditions of maintained slow speed and no overtaking..

That's an excellent summary of the situation.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by Lancsbreaker

Does this clip change anyone's mind about the Stroll / Vettel incident?

No. As before, I believed it was 95% Vettel's fault. Almost looked deliberate. The speed difference!??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWMgk8UnqWE


There's a WILD story going around in the Japanese paddock.

Ferrari had short filled Vettel for the race (which was confirmed by Ferrari during the race). In his efforts to get to the front, and being pushed by the team to do so (Ferrari had told SV numerous times to "attack", "keep pushing"), SV had used up a lot of fuel. When Ferrari realised they might be in trouble, they asked SV to back off completely (there's was radio on this). But too late, SV's fuel gauge showed he had less than one litre left.
Then bang! Car is now too badly damaged to go to post race scrutineering. Then SV takes steering wheel with him (which is not allowed) to make sure fuel gauge cannot be read, and that the car will now have to come directly to the garage.

Crazy story indeed!! Too risky to pull of without possible further ramifications. But apparently a team (or two) have had a little word in the ear of the FiA about it. No investigation at this stage, and I highly doubt there will ever be one. Water under the bridge as far as the FiA is concerned. Nothing they can do about it now anyway!

Maybe the rules will be changed for the future where when a car that has crossed the finish line, but is then damaged beyond a drivable condition (how often does that happen??), it has to be returned to parc ferme first just as all the other driveable cars must do? If not, no points will be awarded.

[S griffin]

So they obviously risked gearbox damage to save some fuel for the post race checks? What a load of pony

[Aysedasi]

It certainly sounds as far-fetched a conspiracy theory as I've heard for a long time......

[Akrapovic]

By paddock, I assume that's the name for a Facebook group, as that's a bit too crazy for anyone to seriously suggest.

My understanding is that a car will still be taken through scrutineering in whatever state possible. Fine you cannot check ride heights, but you can check fuel, engine and gearbox seals, oil levels, etc.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

It certainly sounds as far-fetched a conspiracy theory as I've heard for a long time......

It's nearly as far fetched as suggesting, Raikonnen was actually driving Vettel's car, which is why it was 'retired' before the race started.

[F1Guy]

Vettel's gearbox was in fact damaged after the shunt in Malaysia. But the complicated FiA rules meant that he's gearbox was pulled apart, repaired and put back in the car, but did not incur a penalty.

The rules are so complicated that many teams have (surprisingly) not understood them fully, and taken gearbox penalties when they "could have" or "possibly" have avoided them. Is it a case of teams not understanding the rules fully (I'd be very surprised if so), or Ferrari understand the rules better (I'd be very surprised if so) than the other teams??

A very brief explanation of the situation with Kravitz and Whiting on SkyF1 below.

https://youtu.be/mXbrXCoEDis?t=13m20s

TK: "Did you take a fuel sample from Seb's car?"
CH: "I can't say."

Hmmm...

Long may it continue indeed!

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Vettel's gearbox was in fact damaged after the shunt in Malaysia. But the complicated FiA rules meant that he's gearbox was pulled apart, repaired and put back in the car, but did not incur a penalty.

The rules are so complicated that many teams have (surprisingly) not understood them fully, and taken gearbox penalties when they "could have" or "possibly" have avoided them. Is it a case of teams not understanding the rules fully (I'd be very surprised if so), or Ferrari understand the rules better (I'd be very surprised if so) than the other teams??

A very brief explanation of the situation with Kravitz and Whiting on SkyF1 below.

https://youtu.be/mXbrXCoEDis?t=13m20s

TK: "Did you take a fuel sample from Seb's car?"
CH: "I can't say."

Hmmm...

Long may it continue indeed!

http://www.thedrive.com/accelerator/14911/sebastian-vettels-gearbox-undamaged-in-post-race-malaysia-crash

'Ferrari announced that his car's gearbox was undamaged'

[F1Guy]

The gearbox casing was damaged, cracked with pieces missing even. As was confirmed by Ferrari on the Italian coverage live on air in Japan(and also SkyF1's Ted Kravitz in that video link above @3:35sec).

But the complicated FiA rules only take into consideration the gearbox cassette. As was explained by Charlie in that video link I posted. It's a very technical situation that maybe Ferrari has an advantage with the design of their so called "gearbox".

Where as maybe with some of the other teams gearbox designs, if they find only the gearbox casing is cracked, the entire gearbox unit has to be changed as it is linked with items or some other reason??

Or.., maybe, just maybe the FiA were (desperately) doing their best to keep the championship alive?? It's not like they have not done it before now is it? They have form twisting the rules when it suits their own objectives.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Or.., maybe, just maybe the FiA were (desperately) doing their best to keep the championship alive?? It's not like they have not done it before now is it? They have form twisting the rules when it suits their own objectives.

In that video they also talk about some people having very wild imaginations.