[Rules] The FIA - what's occurring there?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

That works as well. Someone who knows the details as to when/why they issue drive through vs. serving penalty during pitstop can speak up. I think a drive through is a more harsh penalty as it creates the problem of a slow in/out lap vs. serving the penalty during a pit stop. Would we just not allow any time penalty to be served during a pitstop? All time penalties are stop and go or added at the end of race if there is no time to serve during the race?

Richard

The driver has to slow down when coming into the pits and when leaving anyway. The severity, if there is such a thing, happens because the driver then has to do this twice, first when serving the penalty and then again when making the tyre stop.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

The driver has to slow down when coming into the pits and when leaving anyway. The severity, if there is such a thing, happens because the driver then has to do this twice, first when serving the penalty and then again when making the tyre stop.

Yes, we are saying the same thing. My point is that stop and go is MEANT to be a more sever penalty than serving a time penalty during pit stop. So if there is a series of escalating penalties, there must be reasoning as to why sometimes it is just a time penalty and sometimes it escalates to a stop and go. As to examples of when stop and go are used... I can't say. So do we roll up ALL time penalties into stop and go?

Richard

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Yes, we are saying the same thing. My point is that stop and go is MEANT to be a more sever penalty than serving a time penalty during pit stop. So if there is a series of escalating penalties, there must be reasoning as to why sometimes it is just a time penalty and sometimes it escalates to a stop and go. As to examples of when stop and go are used... I can't say. So do we roll up ALL time penalties into stop and go?

Richard

It is effectively a stop go penalty, just that they take the penalty when they come for the tyre stop, hence no work on the car for 5 seconds. If the stop go were served separately there wouldn't be an issue.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It is effectively a stop go penalty, just that they take the penalty when they come for the tyre stop, hence no work on the car for 5 seconds. If the stop go were served separately there wouldn't be an issue.

I think we are talking past each other on this. Or maybe I am explaining myself poorly.

Richard

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I think we are talking past each other on this. Or maybe I am explaining myself poorly.

Richard

All I'm saying is the time penalty shouldn't be combined with the tyre stop, it should be completely separate.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

All I'm saying is the time penalty shouldn't be combined with the tyre stop, it should be completely separate.

Got it.

My point is that in the end... doing it that way (which would work) means that your are imposing a LARGER penalty than you are today if it is served during a tire stop. Which might be OK. I just wanted to point out that it is larger and that there is increasing tiers of penalties with I guess a black flag at the top. And if we roll up ALL time penalties to to be served during a stop and go, then it is increasing the penalty for some infractions. Again, that might be OK, or it might not.

I don't think I am saying anything different than you, just calling out knock on effects or implications of making that change.

Richard

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Got it.

My point is that in the end... doing it that way (which would work) means that your are imposing a LARGER penalty than you are today if it is served during a tire stop. Which might be OK. I just wanted to point out that it is larger and that there is increasing tiers of penalties with I guess a black flag at the top. And if we roll up ALL time penalties to to be served during a stop and go, then it is increasing the penalty for some infractions. Again, that might be OK, or it might not.

I don't think I am saying anything different than you, just calling out knock on effects or implications of making that change.

Richard

I understand what your saying. Just that if the time penalty was separate, the whole business of whether the jack touching the car constitutes work on the car would never have arisen in the first place. It always seems to me that when a situation like this comes up, F1 makes it overly complicated.

I personally don't like all these penalties in F1 and how they are administered. Alonso's left front was just outside the grid box but did he gain an advantage? I don't think so. Then there was the amount of time it took for the FIA to inform Alonso of the second penalty. I find the whole thing detracts from the sport.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Alonso's left front was just outside the grid box but did he gain an advantage? I don't think so. Then there was the amount of time it took for the FIA to inform Alonso of the second penalty. I find the whole thing detracts from the sport.

have to say, that when it was announced that they were investigating and given the start he actually did get, i was inclined to think that Alonso, even if was just fractionally, found a way to get a little bit traction and ideal launch direction which allowed him a perfect start.

cynical on my part or massive belief in the craftiness of that old man...but i dont feel like he is lined up incorrectly by accident or mistake?

they way he calmly accepted the penalty was like he knew right?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

have to say, that when it was announced that they were investigating and given the start he actually did get, i was inclined to think that Alonso, even if was just fractionally, found a way to get a little bit traction and ideal launch direction which allowed him a perfect start.

cynical on my part or massive belief in the craftiness of that old man...but i dont feel like he is lined up incorrectly by accident or mistake?

they way he calmly accepted the penalty was like he knew right?

This is only the third time F1 has raced at the Jeddah Corniche Circuit, so maybe Alonso has just got a really good bead on the track, or maybe he has been practicing where best to place the car at the start of the race, with the simulator?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It always seems to me that when a situation like this comes up, F1 makes it overly complicated.

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Alonso's left front was just outside the grid box but did he gain an advantage? I don't think so.

As people have pointed out, in some situations car position in and around the box can create real advantages (particularly if looking for optimal traction on launch)

So you want simplicity (and I do as well). What is more simple than saying... you are either in or outside of the box. You get a penalty if you are outside of it. Complex is trying to examine and prove that there was an advantage (or not) gained by being out of the box and then applying a penalty or not.

Richard

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

This is only the third time F1 has raced at the Jeddah Corniche Circuit, so maybe Alonso has just got a really good bead on the track, or maybe he has been practicing where best to place the car at the start of the race, with the simulator?

Sorry to be imprecise in this but your comment reminds me of something I read (I think) last year which was explaining how 'complete and analytical' Alonso is and it cited somewhere where he'd noticed that during practice etc he'd noticed where rubber was naturally being laid on the starting grid, so positioned his car accordingly to take advantage of this. Maybe the crafty old so - and - so did do it on purpose?

[TrapezeArtist]

I'll start by saying something nice about the FIA (or stewards); at least this time they said they got it wrong and did something about it. It's a shame they didn't do the same in 2021 when Masi's monumental c__k-up cost Hamilton a record-breaking eighth world title.

Now to the things that need to change:
The painted markings on the grid appear to be just the width of the front axle of an F1 car, giving drivers no leeway whatsoever on positioning the car. Given the dreadful visibility from the driver's position, it's only a surprise that cars are not "out of position" more often. Simple solution: make the box wider.

Leaving teams to administer their own penalties in the pitman is fraught with problems and smacks of the FIA throwing the problem over the fence and leaving it to the team to pick it up. The simplest solution is to use drive-throughs as the main penalty. Easily administered and little scope for imaginative interpretation. The only problem is that is roughly equivalent to a time loss of 15-18 seconds, so a more severe penalty than the 5 second one.

If it's felt a 5 second-type penalty needs to be available, the stop/go box at one end of the pitman (as suggested by Greem above) would be appropriate. In addition to the traffic lights and timer, it would need something to prevent the equivalent of an "unsafe release". Just add a Line A well before the box and a Line B just after. Then build a bit of logic into the traffic lights saying that if a car has passed Line A the green light cannot come on until it has passed Line B.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

As people have pointed out, in some situations car position in and around the box can create real advantages (particularly if looking for optimal traction on launch)

So you want simplicity (and I do as well). What is more simple than saying... you are either in or outside of the box. You get a penalty if you are outside of it. Complex is trying to examine and prove that there was an advantage (or not) gained by being out of the box and then applying a penalty or not.

Richard

My point about simplicity was to do with whether the jack touching the car was regarded as working on the car, or not, all of which could easily have been avoided if the penalty was served separately.

Indeed, if you are inside the box, you are inside the box but it's still another rule that can incur a penalty, amongst the plethora of penalties already in F1. I remember seeing the starting grids of some of the GPs when I first started following F1, most of the drivers would have incurred penalties if those races were held now.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

Indeed, if you are inside the box, you are inside the box but it's still another rule that can incur a penalty, amongst the plethora of penalties already in F1. I remember seeing the starting grids of some of the GPs when I first started following F1, most of the drivers would have incurred penalties if those races were held now.

Agree. But without the rule it opens the door for abuse.

As to lax stuff in the past. I tend to think the sport is more mature now. One way to take that is that it should be a less freewheeling style than was normal in prior eras. Which is true! But I am really trying to say that I think teams are more aggressive on finding ways to exploit openings in the sporting regulations today than in the past. Lastly, right or wrong, as rules have tightened up over the years, there is more of a "rules is rules" mentality. Which frankly I tend to agree with.

Richard

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

All I'm saying is the time penalty shouldn't be combined with the tyre stop, it should be completely separate.

In that case if it is just a time penalty, then it should be added to the time at the end of the race,
Any time penalty that also includes a stop and go is an additional penalty to the time penalty and if not just a drive through does create a possibility of additional incidents if the there is an accident or incident in the pit lane or on the way in or out.

The simplest way to incorporate a time penalty is simply to add it on to the recorded time for the race.

This wasn't done in the past because it meant the running order didnt reflect the actual race order, but I actually think in F1 viewers can be informed in a variety of ways and the simplest way is the fairest and most efficient as long as the team is informed.
I would separate time penalties from drive throughs which should only be used for pit lane incidents.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

All I'm saying is the time penalty shouldn't be combined with the tyre stop, it should be completely separate.

That would be a different penalty then though.

For reference, the penalties are (in increasing severity):

• 5 second penalty - either taken at the next stop, or added to the race time at the chequered flag (putting the driver 5 seconds back of their on-track position)
  
• 10 second penalty (as per 5 second penalty, but longer)
  
• Drive-through penalty - dependent on circuit, can cost 20-25 seconds impact on on-track position.
  
• 10 second stop-and-go - in addition to the drive-through, an additional 10 seconds stationary in the pit lane is to be observed. Dependent on circuit, can cost 30-35 seconds impact on on-track position.
  

The 5 and 10 second penalties must be served the next time the driver enters their pit box. They are designed to be only 5 and 10 seconds.
The drive-through and stop-and-go penalties must not be used at the same time as a pit stop.

I think the clearest indication of how punishing each penalty is intended to be is if the driver is not able to serve the penalty due to the race having less than 3 laps left.

5 sec = 5 sec added to race time.
10 sec = 10 sec added to race time.
drive-through = 20 sec added to race time.
stop-and-go = 30 sec added to race time.

A time penalty not combined with a tyre stop would be a stop-and-go penalty.

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Greem

The simple solution to "not working on the car" is to stop the teams self-policing their penalties, and bring back the stop/go box that's used in club racing. Simple, uncomplicated, nobody near the car except the person doing the timing. It could even be automated - red light, car stops, timer starts, timer expires, green light.

So simple that it obviously has no place in F1.

(Some of this is mentioned above)

The solution they have is to try and equalize the effect of five seconds in the race and five seconds applied after. Ideally it is in the race for the ascetics of finishing in the right place. Whatever the impact is 5 seconds both ways. (Ignoring track position).

They’ve moved away from drive throughs and stop gos (without normal stop) due to the variation by circuit. It’s practically nothing at Silverstone. A lot more at Monza.

If it is stop, start, then the impact is different to 5s and might vary (a little) by positioning of the box. I think that is quite neat to do it as they do.

Another advantage is that it helps to be at your own box if the car stalls.

[Go Harder.]

How about serving time penalties AFTER the car has been serviced, all tools and hands removed and dropped to the ground?

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by Go Harder.

How about serving time penalties AFTER the car has been serviced, all tools and hands removed and dropped to the ground?

I think that is better. There is a small advantage from doing it before. The mechanics can get perfectly in place ready to change the wheels if before. Which must make the actual servicing part slightly quicker.

Ultimately just sort out / apply properly the touch or work on bit. (I confess to not actually seeing what they did or didn’t do).

[wolfhound]

I see the FIA have launched a tyre tender for 2025, 26 & 27 with an option to go further. What chance of a change of tyre supplier?


https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/fi...2025/10446651/

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

That would be a different penalty then though.

For reference, the penalties are (in increasing severity):

• 5 second penalty - either taken at the next stop, or added to the race time at the chequered flag (putting the driver 5 seconds back of their on-track position)
• 10 second penalty (as per 5 second penalty, but longer)
• Drive-through penalty - dependent on circuit, can cost 20-25 seconds impact on on-track position.
• 10 second stop-and-go - in addition to the drive-through, an additional 10 seconds stationary in the pit lane is to be observed. Dependent on circuit, can cost 30-35 seconds impact on on-track position.

The 5 and 10 second penalties must be served the next time the driver enters their pit box. They are designed to be only 5 and 10 seconds.
The drive-through and stop-and-go penalties must not be used at the same time as a pit stop.

I think the clearest indication of how punishing each penalty is intended to be is if the driver is not able to serve the penalty due to the race having less than 3 laps left.

5 sec = 5 sec added to race time.
10 sec = 10 sec added to race time.
drive-through = 20 sec added to race time.
stop-and-go = 30 sec added to race time.

A time penalty not combined with a tyre stop would be a stop-and-go penalty.

I've read the FIA 2023 Formula One Sporting Regulations. regarding time penalties I just think the time penalties should be separate, then the whole business of Alonso initially getting a second penalty and the ensuing fiasco would never have happened.

[bathurst77]

If they are going to apply time penalties they have to do it during the race so the driver can try to make up the time by driving faster.
If they want to apply it after the race has finished, it should be applied in the next race.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by bathurst77

If they are going to apply time penalties they have to do it during the race so the driver can try to make up the time by driving faster.
If they want to apply it after the race has finished, it should be applied in the next race.

Maybe, but a penalty should be a penalty. We don’t need the nonsense like Silverstone 21 where one driver knocks another out of the way and still wins, whoever it is.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Maybe, but a penalty should be a penalty. We don’t need the nonsense like Silverstone 21 where one driver knocks another out of the way and still wins, whoever it is.

Disagree. A penalty is a penalty. If the driver is able to make up the time offset by the penalty, then that's fine. Otherwise we're going to get into a situation where you'll have to give massive penalties to Max Verstappen (previously Lewis) for him having the audacity of being good.

Alonso should've been penalised during the race. Not randomly told an hour later that he's being penalised for something nobody bothered mentioning.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Disagree. A penalty is a penalty. If the driver is able to make up the time offset by the penalty, then that's fine. Otherwise we're going to get into a situation where you'll have to give massive penalties to Max Verstappen (previously Lewis) for him having the audacity of being good.

Alonso should've been penalised during the race. Not randomly told an hour later that he's being penalised for something nobody bothered mentioning.

Exactly, why should a driver not be able to win just because he got a penalty?