The Official 2016 Belgian Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS with waffles and waffling***
Posted by gav
Dislike that they allow teams to stack penalties without incurring an extra penalty, it allows teams to game the system too much.
X (@ed24f1)
X (@ed24f1)
Crazy start I couldn't believe there wasn't an enormous crash on lap 1 and unfortunately for Magnussen there was one just a few laps later ...
X (@ed24f1)
X (@ed24f1)
Massive smash for Magussen.
I'd like to hear Vettel's La Source radio clip.
Also what the actual @#$%& are Williams doing with the stragety already?
I'd like to hear Vettel's La Source radio clip.
Also what the actual @#$%& are Williams doing with the stragety already?
Verstappen was also very lucky not to crash at Eau Rouge on Lap 1 with the broken wing - and if he had done so could have easily spun across the track in front of the field ...
X (@ed24f1)
X (@ed24f1)
gav Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sickening accident for Magnussen.
>
> As Morbid said it sounds like no broken bones, but
> I bet he'll be stiff in the morning. Hopefully
> he'll be fit for Monza - I suppose it's good that
> it's not too demanding a track physically, but it
> will give that ankle a good workout on the brake
> pedal.
According to his Twitter profile, he will be ready for Monza. He has reportedly been in high spirit after the crash. I thought that one would mess up his head for a while, but I guess he is handling it better than I thought he would. But time will tell. If he starts being cautious for the rest of the season, we know why. The cut probably came from slamming the ankle into the brake pedal on impact. I think he was very lucky that he glanced a barrier at the angle he did, before the full impact.
I have been watching the replay a couple of times, and he isn't even that hard on the curb. He took full advantage of track limits, but I saw Palmer take the curb harder on a previous lap. I dunno, I guess it is the messed up balance of the car, due to the two week conversion job of fitting the Renault engine and gearbox into that Lotus '15. I know for a fact, that the car is twitchy and prone to serve up surprises for the drivers, just as we saw with Palmer in Hungary.
> It was a shame, as he, like Palmer, was having a
> decent weekend and both were going great guns
> after the chaotic start.
>
The pit stops after the crash really hurt Palmer, and then the overheating tyres just killed his pace.
Speaking of which I was surprised that Palmer overheated his tyres, and the pit had to tell him, and that they needed to instruct him to lift and coast. Just before the race, Magnussen told in an interview, that taking care of the tyres would be the most important thing for Renault in this race, so I don't understand why Palmer wasn't prepared for that. Renault must have known if Magnussen knew.
>
> As for the rest of the race, I was disappointed in
> Hamilton. Clearly he stayed out and got lucky
> with safety car and then the red flag, so he was
> 5th with an equal footing to Rosberg, but he
> really wasn't on it today. I know he'd set the
> car up for overtaking rather than pure pace, but I
> thought he'd have a bit more about him, and that
> he'd certainly catch and pass Ricciardo by the
> end, but he was just a little underwhelming for
> me, reminding me of the Hamilton at the start of
> the season.
Perhaps he was just in consolidation mode, trying to get as many points as possible, with the least amount of risk and wear on the engine? TBH I think he was more than pleased with 3rd today.
> It was amateur hour with Ferrari and Verstappen.
> While turn 1 just sort of happened - there wasn't
> really enough room for Verstappen to take a dive
> and Vettel obviously didn't realise he was there -
> some of Verstappen's antics on the track were very
> marginal. I think he should have just about got
> away with pushing the drivers off at Les Combes,
> as he genuinely attempted to make the corner, but
> I have to say I think certain other drivers would
> have been given a penalty for either of those
> incidents.
We know for a fact, that certain drivers would have been given a penalty for that, because they already got them in previous races.
> But the block on Raikkonen on Kemmel
> was completely out of order, and while Red Bull
> defended him, I with I could be a fly on the wall
> in the next drivers briefing, as I think Charlie
> will make a big example out of him.
Technically, Verstappen did not do anything illegal on the Kemmel straight. He just waited until Kimi was extremely close before he made his move, thus deflating his charge, because Kimi had to decelerate to avoid smashing into Verstappen. Not illegal, but very far from courteous behavior and really risky too. I don't think that kid has any notion that doing so can maim or kill him (or someone else) if he does it to the wrong driver. We have seen things like this before, such as DC at Spa vs MS, where he later, after being brake tested by FA at Nürburgring admitted that he actually did know MS was there, and he knew what he was doing.
> I felt sorry for Kimi today. He drove a decent
> race with a car that was clearly damaged, but he
> just got on with it. And he was the only driver
> of the 3 with no blame in turn 1.
Kimi had no blame in that at all. Oddly, the incident was a bit similar to the one with Kvyat in China. I highly doubt Verstappen will be back at Torro Rosso for Monza though!
It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sickening accident for Magnussen.
>
> As Morbid said it sounds like no broken bones, but
> I bet he'll be stiff in the morning. Hopefully
> he'll be fit for Monza - I suppose it's good that
> it's not too demanding a track physically, but it
> will give that ankle a good workout on the brake
> pedal.
According to his Twitter profile, he will be ready for Monza. He has reportedly been in high spirit after the crash. I thought that one would mess up his head for a while, but I guess he is handling it better than I thought he would. But time will tell. If he starts being cautious for the rest of the season, we know why. The cut probably came from slamming the ankle into the brake pedal on impact. I think he was very lucky that he glanced a barrier at the angle he did, before the full impact.
I have been watching the replay a couple of times, and he isn't even that hard on the curb. He took full advantage of track limits, but I saw Palmer take the curb harder on a previous lap. I dunno, I guess it is the messed up balance of the car, due to the two week conversion job of fitting the Renault engine and gearbox into that Lotus '15. I know for a fact, that the car is twitchy and prone to serve up surprises for the drivers, just as we saw with Palmer in Hungary.
> It was a shame, as he, like Palmer, was having a
> decent weekend and both were going great guns
> after the chaotic start.
>
The pit stops after the crash really hurt Palmer, and then the overheating tyres just killed his pace.
Speaking of which I was surprised that Palmer overheated his tyres, and the pit had to tell him, and that they needed to instruct him to lift and coast. Just before the race, Magnussen told in an interview, that taking care of the tyres would be the most important thing for Renault in this race, so I don't understand why Palmer wasn't prepared for that. Renault must have known if Magnussen knew.
>
> As for the rest of the race, I was disappointed in
> Hamilton. Clearly he stayed out and got lucky
> with safety car and then the red flag, so he was
> 5th with an equal footing to Rosberg, but he
> really wasn't on it today. I know he'd set the
> car up for overtaking rather than pure pace, but I
> thought he'd have a bit more about him, and that
> he'd certainly catch and pass Ricciardo by the
> end, but he was just a little underwhelming for
> me, reminding me of the Hamilton at the start of
> the season.
Perhaps he was just in consolidation mode, trying to get as many points as possible, with the least amount of risk and wear on the engine? TBH I think he was more than pleased with 3rd today.
> It was amateur hour with Ferrari and Verstappen.
> While turn 1 just sort of happened - there wasn't
> really enough room for Verstappen to take a dive
> and Vettel obviously didn't realise he was there -
> some of Verstappen's antics on the track were very
> marginal. I think he should have just about got
> away with pushing the drivers off at Les Combes,
> as he genuinely attempted to make the corner, but
> I have to say I think certain other drivers would
> have been given a penalty for either of those
> incidents.
We know for a fact, that certain drivers would have been given a penalty for that, because they already got them in previous races.
> But the block on Raikkonen on Kemmel
> was completely out of order, and while Red Bull
> defended him, I with I could be a fly on the wall
> in the next drivers briefing, as I think Charlie
> will make a big example out of him.
Technically, Verstappen did not do anything illegal on the Kemmel straight. He just waited until Kimi was extremely close before he made his move, thus deflating his charge, because Kimi had to decelerate to avoid smashing into Verstappen. Not illegal, but very far from courteous behavior and really risky too. I don't think that kid has any notion that doing so can maim or kill him (or someone else) if he does it to the wrong driver. We have seen things like this before, such as DC at Spa vs MS, where he later, after being brake tested by FA at Nürburgring admitted that he actually did know MS was there, and he knew what he was doing.
> I felt sorry for Kimi today. He drove a decent
> race with a car that was clearly damaged, but he
> just got on with it. And he was the only driver
> of the 3 with no blame in turn 1.
Kimi had no blame in that at all. Oddly, the incident was a bit similar to the one with Kvyat in China. I highly doubt Verstappen will be back at Torro Rosso for Monza though!
It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.
I thought Magnussen's spin was weird too. When the slow-mo from the outside came I expected to see a punctured tyre, but it looked fine and I couldn't even see any marks, so I doubt it was that. There was plenty of compression on the suspension, but the left-front looked normal, so I guess that's just how a 2016 car looks when it comes over the top of Raidillon.
I guess it's just luck with the way it landed and the angle the car was at the time. It's an odd place for a car to crash (I can only recall the Webber/Sato accident there, though obviously that was completely different), but clearly with a full tank of fuel Eau Rouge is still the daunting challenge it's been for a few decades. Raikkonen ran wide there later, but luckily for him it looked like understeer rather than the tank-slapper that caught Magnussen out.
gav Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> I thought Magnussen's spin was weird too. When
> the slow-mo from the outside came I expected to
> see a punctured tyre, but it looked fine and I
> couldn't even see any marks, so I doubt it was
> that. There was plenty of compression on the
> suspension, but the left-front looked normal, so I
> guess that's just how a 2016 car looks when it
> comes over the top of Raidillon.
>
> I guess it's just luck with the way it landed and
> the angle the car was at the time. It's an odd
> place for a car to crash (I can only recall the
> Webber/Sato accident there, though obviously that
> was completely different), but clearly with a full
> tank of fuel Eau Rouge is still the daunting
> challenge it's been for a few decades. Raikkonen
> ran wide there later, but luckily for him it
> looked like understeer rather than the
> tank-slapper that caught Magnussen out.
I think so too. That is just the way the 2016 cars look in a situation like that. I have found nothing that indicates a failure on the car. But I do know that Magnussen said before the race, that the Renault could juuust make Eau Rouge/Raidillion at full throttle, so there wasn't a huge margin for error in the first place. At first I thought it must have been the plank hitting the highest point of the curb, but that definately did not happen. Perhaps it was more a case of the right side of the suspension being at full compression when he turned left?
robracer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Verstappen definitely breached this regulation by
> cutting across Räikkönen on the straight. He
> will kill somebody one day if he keeps driving
> like this.
That all depends on what you consider "abnormal change of direction". We have seen worse with no punishment. If it had been IndyCar, chances are there would have been a penalty, but the interpretation of "blocking" is not uniform across the series, and I don't remember anyone being punished for what Verstappen did on Kemmel straight before, and it has happened before (Rosberg/Hamilton @ Barcelona comes to mind). The thing is Verstappen has made it into a system, to wait in the middle of the track, and then move at the last moment. That, it being done systematically, we have not seen before, but single incidents, yes we have. And the previous rule, which you did not quote, does allow for it.
It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2016 07:44AM by Morbid.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> I thought Magnussen's spin was weird too. When
> the slow-mo from the outside came I expected to
> see a punctured tyre, but it looked fine and I
> couldn't even see any marks, so I doubt it was
> that. There was plenty of compression on the
> suspension, but the left-front looked normal, so I
> guess that's just how a 2016 car looks when it
> comes over the top of Raidillon.
>
> I guess it's just luck with the way it landed and
> the angle the car was at the time. It's an odd
> place for a car to crash (I can only recall the
> Webber/Sato accident there, though obviously that
> was completely different), but clearly with a full
> tank of fuel Eau Rouge is still the daunting
> challenge it's been for a few decades. Raikkonen
> ran wide there later, but luckily for him it
> looked like understeer rather than the
> tank-slapper that caught Magnussen out.
I think so too. That is just the way the 2016 cars look in a situation like that. I have found nothing that indicates a failure on the car. But I do know that Magnussen said before the race, that the Renault could juuust make Eau Rouge/Raidillion at full throttle, so there wasn't a huge margin for error in the first place. At first I thought it must have been the plank hitting the highest point of the curb, but that definately did not happen. Perhaps it was more a case of the right side of the suspension being at full compression when he turned left?
robracer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Verstappen definitely breached this regulation by
> cutting across Räikkönen on the straight. He
> will kill somebody one day if he keeps driving
> like this.
That all depends on what you consider "abnormal change of direction". We have seen worse with no punishment. If it had been IndyCar, chances are there would have been a penalty, but the interpretation of "blocking" is not uniform across the series, and I don't remember anyone being punished for what Verstappen did on Kemmel straight before, and it has happened before (Rosberg/Hamilton @ Barcelona comes to mind). The thing is Verstappen has made it into a system, to wait in the middle of the track, and then move at the last moment. That, it being done systematically, we have not seen before, but single incidents, yes we have. And the previous rule, which you did not quote, does allow for it.
Quote
27.7 "Any driver defending his position on a straight, and before any braking area, may use the full width of the track during his first move, provided no significant portion of the car attempting to pass is alongside his. Whilst defending in this way the driver may not leave the track without justifiable reason. For the avoidance of doubt, if any part of the front wing of the car attempting to pass is alongside the rear wheel of the car in front this will be deemed to be a ‘significant portion’."
It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/2016 07:44AM by Morbid.
Regarding Magnussen's accident - I know it's obviously not the real thing, but it struck me how incredibly similar it was to many accidents we had on the simulator at Eau Rouge, usually by rookie drivers. I imagine mitadumapaga would have seen it, too. It's something about Eau Rouge that I never appreciated until using the sim myself - that 90% of it's difficulty is in keeping control though Raidillon. With balanced cars, it rarely happened, but when a car had comparatively poor rear grip, it was incredibly easy to do. I did it myself once, it was a spitting image of Magnussen's accident except I ended up going over the barriers and into the trees. A simple answer from that would be that maybe Renault tried to use too little rear wing on Magnussen's car yesterday, but as always it's never that simple. It does seem to make sense, though, as Renault aren't exactly known for having much grunt, so I could believe it if they did use less rear wing.
As for the rest of the race - I wasn't expecting a thriller, but for the first half I was on the edge of my seat. It's a shame about the red flag, because we could've been in for a very mixed-up result if the race hadn't have been stopped. Did anybody else notice the Force India engineers getting angry when the red flag was thrown? We can't have been the only ones thinking that Hulkenburg was on for a podium! Poor Nico, whenever he looks likely to get a podium it all goes down the shi-*ahem*, err, pan. He must be wondering what on earth he's got to do to finally get a good result.
Apart from Alonso, nobody really impressed me in the race. Raikkonen was solid, too, but that's what top drivers should be doing every day. Verstappen's assertiveness was disappointing, we don't need another Hamilton. Saying that - Hamilton was surprisingly docile yesterday, even the way he questioned the pit strategy seemed more calm than usual. If he can stay like this then I will find the races much less stressful, heh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know you want to. [judgegrudge.mybrute.com]
A simple answer from that would be that maybe Renault tried to use too little rear wing on Magnussen's car yesterday, but as always it's never that simple. It does seem to make sense, though, as Renault aren't exactly known for having much grunt, so I could believe it if they did use less rear wing.As for the rest of the race - I wasn't expecting a thriller, but for the first half I was on the edge of my seat. It's a shame about the red flag, because we could've been in for a very mixed-up result if the race hadn't have been stopped. Did anybody else notice the Force India engineers getting angry when the red flag was thrown? We can't have been the only ones thinking that Hulkenburg was on for a podium! Poor Nico, whenever he looks likely to get a podium it all goes down the shi-*ahem*, err, pan. He must be wondering what on earth he's got to do to finally get a good result.
Apart from Alonso, nobody really impressed me in the race. Raikkonen was solid, too, but that's what top drivers should be doing every day. Verstappen's assertiveness was disappointing, we don't need another Hamilton. Saying that - Hamilton was surprisingly docile yesterday, even the way he questioned the pit strategy seemed more calm than usual. If he can stay like this then I will find the races much less stressful, heh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know you want to. [judgegrudge.mybrute.com]
flat tyre Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I imagine mitadumapaga would have seen
> it, too. It's something about Eau Rouge that I
> never appreciated until using the sim myself -
> that 90% of it's difficulty is in keeping control
> though Raidillon. With balanced cars, it rarely
> happened, but when a car had comparatively poor
> rear grip, it was incredibly easy to do. I did it
> myself once, it was a spitting image of
> Magnussen's accident except I ended up going over
> the barriers and into the trees. A simple
> answer from that would be that maybe Renault tried
> to use too little rear wing on Magnussen's car
> yesterday, but as always it's never that simple.
> It does seem to make sense, though, as Renault
> aren't exactly known for having much grunt, so I
> could believe it if they did use less rear wing.
Spot on! Those were my thoughts as well. You are completely right that in the simulator (I play GP4) the less rear wing I put AND the bigger the gap between the level of front and rear wing, the more unbalanced my car becomes. For example if a have rear wing 11 and front wing 12 the car would be more or less balanced, because 11 and 12 are close. However, if I want to be quick on the straights and reduce the rear wing to 8, then the gap between rear wing=8 and front wing=12 becomes too big and it is extremely risky in high speed corners, let alone with change in direction AND in elevation, such as Eau Rouge.
I honestly believe that this is what Renault had gone for. They have little downforce and less power from the engine compared to any other car on the track. So what they did is to reduce the rear wing as much as possible to gain speed, while keeping as much front wing as possible to keep decent levels of downforce. Add to that the full tanks of fuel early in the race and there you go.
Of course it could have simply been that magnussen hit a bump or went on the throttle much earlier than needed
. But it is always nice to have educated people to discuss such things. You gotta love GPG.org 
-------------------------------------------------------
> I imagine mitadumapaga would have seen
> it, too. It's something about Eau Rouge that I
> never appreciated until using the sim myself -
> that 90% of it's difficulty is in keeping control
> though Raidillon. With balanced cars, it rarely
> happened, but when a car had comparatively poor
> rear grip, it was incredibly easy to do. I did it
> myself once, it was a spitting image of
> Magnussen's accident except I ended up going over
> the barriers and into the trees.
A simple> answer from that would be that maybe Renault tried
> to use too little rear wing on Magnussen's car
> yesterday, but as always it's never that simple.
> It does seem to make sense, though, as Renault
> aren't exactly known for having much grunt, so I
> could believe it if they did use less rear wing.
Spot on! Those were my thoughts as well. You are completely right that in the simulator (I play GP4) the less rear wing I put AND the bigger the gap between the level of front and rear wing, the more unbalanced my car becomes. For example if a have rear wing 11 and front wing 12 the car would be more or less balanced, because 11 and 12 are close. However, if I want to be quick on the straights and reduce the rear wing to 8, then the gap between rear wing=8 and front wing=12 becomes too big and it is extremely risky in high speed corners, let alone with change in direction AND in elevation, such as Eau Rouge.
I honestly believe that this is what Renault had gone for. They have little downforce and less power from the engine compared to any other car on the track. So what they did is to reduce the rear wing as much as possible to gain speed, while keeping as much front wing as possible to keep decent levels of downforce. Add to that the full tanks of fuel early in the race and there you go.
Of course it could have simply been that magnussen hit a bump or went on the throttle much earlier than needed
. But it is always nice to have educated people to discuss such things. You gotta love GPG.org 
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.