|
Articles by Darren Galpin
| When is a tyre a dangerous tyre? - Sun 29th May 2005 |
|
When Räikkönen’s right front suspension let go as he started the final lap, the commentators were already drawing their conclusions. “He should have come in and changed it,” said ITV’s James Allen, pointing out that he would have had at least four points rather than none. Mark Blundell and Martin Brundle were both of the opinion that as a racer you had to risk it and go for it. All of this over a flat-spotted tyre. But this raises an interesting question given this years rules – what constitutes an unsafe tyre?
In the event that a tyre is unsafe, the driver is allowed to change it, but can only change the tyre for another used one. Thus in the event of a puncture, such as the one experienced by Felipe Massa during the race, the driver can come in and change the tyre. However, if the driver locks up his brakes and creates a flat spot on his tyre, it is considered to be tough luck – you have to put up with the result of your driving error and live with it. And this has been the case so far this year. However, when does a flat spot become dangerous?
In the case of Räikkönen, it was patently obvious from the in-car camera that he was in serious trouble. The right-front of the car was visibly vibrating up and down as the tyre rotated, and the flat spot was causing the tyre to wobble from side to side under braking. It was obvious that the degree of flat-spottedness was unusually severe, but was it dangerous?
The end of the chain of events showed that it was, as the suspension gave way under the unusual torsional loads generated. But imagine that he had pitted to change the tyre, what then?
If a tyre is changed, the FIA has the right to inspect it to see if it was really damaged, and in the case of Räikkönen, the tyre was relatively undamaged. Yes it had a flat spot, but even after the accident the tyre remained inflated. It wasn’t deflated, it wasn’t delaminating, and it didn’t have any sidewall injuries (at least, none were obvious or reported). Thus the tyre might have been declared to be safe, and in these circumstances Räikkönen could have been disqualified from the race. If these circumstances had occurred and I had been in Ferrari’s position, I would have been the first to protest the McLaren, as there would have been nothing to lose. If Ferrari won the protest, both cars gain a position, and if it lost, so what?
What is needed now is for the FIA to issue a clarification over what they consider to be an unsafe tyre. When is a flat spot considered to be more than just a flat spot? Until these things are clarified to the nth degree, another grey area exists in the rules to be exploited, and do we really need another BAR type saga over rules interpretation? Not really.
The race itself was a cracker from the start, with close racing throughout the field and no one team dominating the standings. Both of the Williams’ made notably better starts, although Webber somewhat over-cooked his braking into the first corner, collected Montoya, and sailed onwards into the gravel trap (he was the first of only three non-finishers, an astounding degree of reliability being shown throughout the field). Although the grid positions of the Williams pair seem to have been flattered by light fuel loads, they did show good race pace, which shows that although the Monaco result somewhat flattered the team, their step up in pace has not been a false dawn. Heidfeld made the most of it with another second position. Although there isn’t much to choose in pace between the Williams pair, it is striking how Heidfeld seems to keep out of trouble and finish. He may prove to be the bargain of the season for Williams.
Also notable this weekend was the continued lack of performance of the Ferrari, and yet again Barrichello out-qualifying, and to some degree out-racing Michael Schumacher. There can be fewer excuses this time. The race temperatures were not excessively hot (strike one tyre excuse), it was possible to overtake on this circuit, as demonstrated by Barrichello (strike one driver excuse), yet still they didn’t make a huge impression (except for one by Michael Schumacher’s chassis in a gravel trap as he took a ride through it). Their finishing positions owed more to the misfortunes of others than any particular pace. The pace of the car seems to be highly affected by the fuel load, but in a perverse inverse way. Most other cars get faster as the fuel load comes down, but the Ferrari’s somehow get slower. And if the team can’t get it right at the Nürburgring, a track which is quite average in speed and layout, then it doesn’t bode well for the rest of the season. The team is not used to this any more, and it will be interesting to see whether they come through it or self-destruct.
What Ferrari’s predicament will do is to entrench their position even more over testing. They are the one team holding out over limiting the number of test days that can be held, and given that they will have to test even more to try and eradicate their problems, the likelihood of them signing any agreement limiting this are slim to none. Expect more fireworks over the rest of the season. Also queue huge amounts of schadenfreude if Ferrari do put in all of this testing, and still can’t beat the rest of the teams who limited themselves to the 30 days they agreed on.
The European Grand Prix saw the return of BAR, and in shooting off their mouths about how fast they would be, they seem to have missed their target and hit their foot instead. Given that the race engines would have been sitting around for five weeks doing nothing, they were always going to have to take it gently in order not to break their engines. Race engines these days are built out of all sorts of weird and wonderful metal alloys, and it was quite possible that sitting around while holding fuel internally would cause a degree of oxidisation which could harm the engine. In the end both engines lasted the race distance, but how much did the team back off from full power to ensure that they finished? We will probably never know, but it was an inauspicious return with both cars finishing outside of the points.
A special mention has to go to the Red Bull team, and particularly David Coulthard. All to often Coulthard is a figure of fun, never quite achieving what his talent should do, yet since joining Red Bull the lifting of expectation seems to have rejuvenated his driving. Although he qualified outside of the top ten, a legacy of Ferrari chewing his rear at Monaco and the resulting early qualifying slot, he was up to fourth by the second corner, and finished in the same position, his race spoiled slightly by a pit-lane speeding violation caused by excessive zeal in trying to get out of the pits ahead of a Minardi. If it hadn’t been for that, he might have been on the podium. Coulthard has been quietly amassing points all season, and will probably finish unexpectedly high in the final championship standings, unforeseen events notwithstanding!
A final mention has to go to ITV, yet again. Their scheduled race coverage time was only just enough to fit in the race and the podium celebrations, and they cut away to some awful program before the official top 3 driver interviews. Come on ITV, didn’t you learn enough at Barcelona?
|
|
Other great sites
Search
|
