I think the reason the IRL cars become airborne projectiles if the nose gets pitched up from debris (as in Hornish's flight this year in practice ) is that they are getting almost all downforce from the undertray. Once the nose pitches up and all air is disturbed through the diffuser , there isnt much downforce from the wings and the thing becomes a kite /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
F1 Madness
- Thread starter DC
- Start date
Good points. IRL may make more downforce from under body aero and not necessarily wings. Should result in more tire load though. Maybe Firestone has been giving Bridgestone pointers /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
Gary here is a picture of Gil Deferran at Fontana before Penske went to the IRL. His car set a record at 241mph in qaulifying. Notice how small the front wing is ! I think if you took a saw and hacked off some of the IRL cars wings they would go actually faster. Oh one other thing about Gil's car that year they were running the Hanford device on the back of the rear wing (verticle flat plate on aft edge of wing) I think it was 5 inches high, although I know they later increased it to 7 inches I believe at Michigan. The year before at Michigan the telemetry from Tracy's car showed 252mph in the draft going into turn three ! So they wanted to slow them down. By the way I was working tech at the Texas debacle for CART when they had to cancel the race due to excessive G-forces causing the drivers to "grey -out" and almost black out. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
Attachments
It will be interesting to see how the IRL cars change for the road courses. Now they need a compromise low speed vs. high speed, etc. I am not going to the race tonight, but it would be nice to see someone take a few pics at Richmond as it is a bit slower, 0.75 mile track.
An F1 car basically has a flat bottom, with the exception of a skid plate. I believe this is 10mm thick and 50mm wide, although that is pulling from a weak memory. This was instituted to lessen the aero forces. At the end of a race the plank still has to be a certain minimum thickness. Years ago, when Schumacher was with Bennetton (I know I spelled that wrong), he was disqualified after I believe winning Spa for a too-thin skid plank.
Pat
Supporter
After reading all this I arc back to Gary's original point, it is inconceivable to me that Michelin could not build a suitable tire for this event and to alter the rules in favor of one or more ill prepared competitors seems absurd. This is not the first time F1 has been in Indianapolis, Bridgestone figured it out and the turn has been there (in some form) since 1909. It may be argued that the research time by Michelin for a unique track was insufficient and that is at root cause here. The time invested in that effort was a management decision. That said, their “oh well, our tire was unsafe so no race, we really don’t know why this is happening but rest assured we’ll be fine before we race in France” is of little consolation to those that paid out of pocket to travel and attend. Apparently for some that’s fine (such as the earlier post that preferred the US keep baseball and lose F1.)
The fact that six cars ran is better than the alternative suggestion that Joe Paycheck see nothing to somehow give Max, Bernie or Tony their comeuppance. That is just nonsense.
What I haven’t heard is the end-to end of all this. The FIA needs to come down hard not only on Michelin and I think the teams who field the poor equipment. It is a troubling precedent set if biggest tire company in the world can not prepare, rules will be changed and all will be forgiven. If so the nature of this being a sport versus WWF theatrics comes to question.
The fact that six cars ran is better than the alternative suggestion that Joe Paycheck see nothing to somehow give Max, Bernie or Tony their comeuppance. That is just nonsense.
What I haven’t heard is the end-to end of all this. The FIA needs to come down hard not only on Michelin and I think the teams who field the poor equipment. It is a troubling precedent set if biggest tire company in the world can not prepare, rules will be changed and all will be forgiven. If so the nature of this being a sport versus WWF theatrics comes to question.
David Morton
Lifetime Supporter
Some of the letters being sent around:
In the interests of complete transparency we have decided to publish the attached exchange of correspondence between the representatives of Michelin in Indianapolis and the FIA Formula One Race Director.
Indianapolis, June 19, 2005
Michelin Letter:
Saturday June 18 2005
Indianapolis
Charlie Whiting, FIA Race Director and Safety delegate
Dear Mr Whiting
Having analysed and fully evaluated the tyre failures that have occurred over the Indianapolis Grand Prix practice sessions we have been unable to identify a root cause.
The current rules and timescale do not permit the use of an alternative tyre solution and the race must be performed with the qualifying tyres.
Michelin has in the sole interest of safety informed its partner teams that we do not have total assurance that all tyres that qualified the cars can be used unless the vehicle speed in turn 13 can be reduced.
Michelin very much regrets this situation, but has taken this decision after careful consideration and in the best interests of safety at the event.
We trust that the FIA can understand our position and we remain at your disposal if you want any further information.
Pierre Dupasquier
Michelin Motorsport Director
Nick Shorrock
Director of Michelin F1 activities
cc : Bernie Ecclestone
Michelin teams
Ron Dennis (West McLaren-Mercedes)
Flavio Briatore (Mild Seven Renault F1)
Frank Williams (BMW WilliamsF1 Team)
Peter Sauber (Sauber Petronas)
Christian Horner (Red Bull Racing)
Nick Fry (B-A-R Honda)
John Howett (Panasonic Toyota Racing)
FIA Letter:
19 June, 2005
Dear Mr Dupasquier,
Dear Mr Shorrock,
We have received your letter of 18 June.
We are very surprised that this difficulty has arisen. As you know, each team is allowed to bring two different types of tyre to an event so as to ensure that a back-up (usually of lower performance) is available should problems occur. It is hard to understand why you have not supplied your teams with such a tyre given your years of experience at Indianapolis.
That the teams you supply are not in possession of such a tyre will also be a matter for the FIA to consider in due course under Article 151c of the International Sporting Code.
No doubt you will inform your teams what is the maximum safe speed for their cars in Turn 13. We will remind them of the need to follow your advice for safety reasons. We will also ask them to ensure their cars do not obstruct other competitors.
Some of the teams have raised with us the possibility of running a tyre which was not used in qualifying. We have told them this would be a breach of the rules to be considered by the stewards. We believe the penalty would not be exclusion but would have to be heavy enough to ensure that no team was tempted to use qualifying tyres in the future.
Another possibility would be for the relevant teams repeatedly to change the affected tyre during the race (we understand you have told your teams the left rear is safe for a maximum of ten laps at full speed). If the technical delegate and the stewards were satisfied that each change was made because the tyre would otherwise fail (thus for genuine safety reasons) and that the relevant team were not gaining an advantage, there would be no penalty. If this meant using tyres additional to a teams' allocation, the stewards would consider all the circumstances in deciding what penalty, if any, to apply.
Finally, it has been suggested that a chicane should be laid out in Turn 13. I am sure you will appreciate that this is out of the question. To change the course in order to help some of the teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tyres.
Yours sincerely,
Charlie Whiting
FIA Formula One Race Director
cc: Bernie Ecclestone
Ron Dennis (West McLaren-Mercedes)
Flavio Briatore (Mild Seven Renault F1)
Frank Williams (BMW WilliamsF1 Team)
Peter Sauber (Sauber Petronas)
Christian Horner (Red Bull Racing)
Nick Fry (B-A-R Honda)
John Howett (Panasonic Toyota Racing)
Jean Todt (Scuderia Ferrari)
Colin Kolles (Jordan Grand Prix)
Paul Stoddart (Minardi F1 Team)
Formula One Press Corps
DM
In the interests of complete transparency we have decided to publish the attached exchange of correspondence between the representatives of Michelin in Indianapolis and the FIA Formula One Race Director.
Indianapolis, June 19, 2005
Michelin Letter:
Saturday June 18 2005
Indianapolis
Charlie Whiting, FIA Race Director and Safety delegate
Dear Mr Whiting
Having analysed and fully evaluated the tyre failures that have occurred over the Indianapolis Grand Prix practice sessions we have been unable to identify a root cause.
The current rules and timescale do not permit the use of an alternative tyre solution and the race must be performed with the qualifying tyres.
Michelin has in the sole interest of safety informed its partner teams that we do not have total assurance that all tyres that qualified the cars can be used unless the vehicle speed in turn 13 can be reduced.
Michelin very much regrets this situation, but has taken this decision after careful consideration and in the best interests of safety at the event.
We trust that the FIA can understand our position and we remain at your disposal if you want any further information.
Pierre Dupasquier
Michelin Motorsport Director
Nick Shorrock
Director of Michelin F1 activities
cc : Bernie Ecclestone
Michelin teams
Ron Dennis (West McLaren-Mercedes)
Flavio Briatore (Mild Seven Renault F1)
Frank Williams (BMW WilliamsF1 Team)
Peter Sauber (Sauber Petronas)
Christian Horner (Red Bull Racing)
Nick Fry (B-A-R Honda)
John Howett (Panasonic Toyota Racing)
FIA Letter:
19 June, 2005
Dear Mr Dupasquier,
Dear Mr Shorrock,
We have received your letter of 18 June.
We are very surprised that this difficulty has arisen. As you know, each team is allowed to bring two different types of tyre to an event so as to ensure that a back-up (usually of lower performance) is available should problems occur. It is hard to understand why you have not supplied your teams with such a tyre given your years of experience at Indianapolis.
That the teams you supply are not in possession of such a tyre will also be a matter for the FIA to consider in due course under Article 151c of the International Sporting Code.
No doubt you will inform your teams what is the maximum safe speed for their cars in Turn 13. We will remind them of the need to follow your advice for safety reasons. We will also ask them to ensure their cars do not obstruct other competitors.
Some of the teams have raised with us the possibility of running a tyre which was not used in qualifying. We have told them this would be a breach of the rules to be considered by the stewards. We believe the penalty would not be exclusion but would have to be heavy enough to ensure that no team was tempted to use qualifying tyres in the future.
Another possibility would be for the relevant teams repeatedly to change the affected tyre during the race (we understand you have told your teams the left rear is safe for a maximum of ten laps at full speed). If the technical delegate and the stewards were satisfied that each change was made because the tyre would otherwise fail (thus for genuine safety reasons) and that the relevant team were not gaining an advantage, there would be no penalty. If this meant using tyres additional to a teams' allocation, the stewards would consider all the circumstances in deciding what penalty, if any, to apply.
Finally, it has been suggested that a chicane should be laid out in Turn 13. I am sure you will appreciate that this is out of the question. To change the course in order to help some of the teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tyres.
Yours sincerely,
Charlie Whiting
FIA Formula One Race Director
cc: Bernie Ecclestone
Ron Dennis (West McLaren-Mercedes)
Flavio Briatore (Mild Seven Renault F1)
Frank Williams (BMW WilliamsF1 Team)
Peter Sauber (Sauber Petronas)
Christian Horner (Red Bull Racing)
Nick Fry (B-A-R Honda)
John Howett (Panasonic Toyota Racing)
Jean Todt (Scuderia Ferrari)
Colin Kolles (Jordan Grand Prix)
Paul Stoddart (Minardi F1 Team)
Formula One Press Corps
DM
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Ian Anderson
Lifetime Supporter
Some new press offerings from the FIA make good reading
See
http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/index_800.html
Ian
See
http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/index_800.html
Ian
David Morton
Lifetime Supporter
JOINT PRESS RELEASE FROM:
B.A.R Honda
BMW Williams
Renault F1 Team
Sauber Petronas
Team McLaren Mercedes
Toyota Motorsport GmbH
Paris, France, Wednesday 29th June 2005
The six Formula One Michelin teams identified above are very disappointed by the decision of the World Motor Sport Council to find them guilty of two of the five charges brought against them by the FIA in relation to the 2005 U.S. Grand Prix at Indianapolis.
1) In relation to the finding that they failed to ensure that they were in possession of suitable tyres, the Teams point out that they reasonably relied on Michelin, an approved FIA tyre supplier and a highly reputable manufacturer of tyres world-wide, to provide suitable tyres for that race. As Michelin have already acknowledged, they were responsible for the supply of unsuitable tyres for the Indianapolis circuit. The FIA's decision accepts that there were «strong mitigating circumstances» for the Teams. In truth, those circumstances provided a complete answer to the charge, given that the Teams cannot be held responsible for what occurred.
2) In relation to the finding that the Teams wrongfully refused to allow their cars to start the race having regard to their right to use the pit lane on each lap, the Teams respond as follows. The charges suggested only one means by which the Teams could safely have raced (the use of a speed restriction). On that charge, the Teams were found not guilty. The Teams cannot understand how they can be found guilty by reference to another proposed solution, which was not part of the charges brought against them, which was not suggested by the FIA at Indianapolis, which was considered unsafe and which, in any event, would not have achieved a satisfactory race for the fans.
The Teams therefore will be lodging an appeal against each of these findings.
The Teams explained to the World Motor Sport Council that, in the light of the clear and written advice from Michelin that it was unsafe to race at Indianapolis on the tyres supplied by that company, the Teams had no choice but to decline to race. Any other decision would have been irresponsible. Nineteen of the current Formula One drivers have expressed their agreement with the decision of the Teams.
The Teams much regret that the American public were unable to enjoy a race involving all ten Formula One teams, and would like to express their thanks to the many fans who have communicated their support for the stance taken by the Teams and by Michelin on grounds of safety.
The Teams are pleased that Michelin have agreed to compensate fans who attended the race.
The Teams very much look forward to the next Grand Prix on Sunday.
B.A.R Honda
BMW Williams
Renault F1 Team
Sauber Petronas
Team McLaren Mercedes
Toyota Motorsport GmbH
Paris, France, Wednesday 29th June 2005
The six Formula One Michelin teams identified above are very disappointed by the decision of the World Motor Sport Council to find them guilty of two of the five charges brought against them by the FIA in relation to the 2005 U.S. Grand Prix at Indianapolis.
1) In relation to the finding that they failed to ensure that they were in possession of suitable tyres, the Teams point out that they reasonably relied on Michelin, an approved FIA tyre supplier and a highly reputable manufacturer of tyres world-wide, to provide suitable tyres for that race. As Michelin have already acknowledged, they were responsible for the supply of unsuitable tyres for the Indianapolis circuit. The FIA's decision accepts that there were «strong mitigating circumstances» for the Teams. In truth, those circumstances provided a complete answer to the charge, given that the Teams cannot be held responsible for what occurred.
2) In relation to the finding that the Teams wrongfully refused to allow their cars to start the race having regard to their right to use the pit lane on each lap, the Teams respond as follows. The charges suggested only one means by which the Teams could safely have raced (the use of a speed restriction). On that charge, the Teams were found not guilty. The Teams cannot understand how they can be found guilty by reference to another proposed solution, which was not part of the charges brought against them, which was not suggested by the FIA at Indianapolis, which was considered unsafe and which, in any event, would not have achieved a satisfactory race for the fans.
The Teams therefore will be lodging an appeal against each of these findings.
The Teams explained to the World Motor Sport Council that, in the light of the clear and written advice from Michelin that it was unsafe to race at Indianapolis on the tyres supplied by that company, the Teams had no choice but to decline to race. Any other decision would have been irresponsible. Nineteen of the current Formula One drivers have expressed their agreement with the decision of the Teams.
The Teams much regret that the American public were unable to enjoy a race involving all ten Formula One teams, and would like to express their thanks to the many fans who have communicated their support for the stance taken by the Teams and by Michelin on grounds of safety.
The Teams are pleased that Michelin have agreed to compensate fans who attended the race.
The Teams very much look forward to the next Grand Prix on Sunday.
What planet is Max on??? On charge no.2 the teams were found guilty of not racing since they had the option to use the pit lane on each lap!! Apart from the pure farce of this option (is this not bringing the reputation of the 'sport' into far more disrepute /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif) would they not have then inevitably finished more than the required laps behind the winner to have a chance of scoring points?
I was glad to see the back of J-P Balestre (a self important clown) but Max's position seems to have gone to his head (must be in the genes - for those who aware who is father was!)
I was glad to see the back of J-P Balestre (a self important clown) but Max's position seems to have gone to his head (must be in the genes - for those who aware who is father was!)
Howard Jones
Supporter
I just just read all of this. Bring on the winton west stock cars. They ran the best road race in mexico this year I have seen in years.
Really how about a ILR roadrace at Indy. We can call it the Indy 250. Better yet how about a proto type sprint on the road course at Indy. Say 300 miles. No on second thought how does the 24 hours of Indy sound!
Really how about a ILR roadrace at Indy. We can call it the Indy 250. Better yet how about a proto type sprint on the road course at Indy. Say 300 miles. No on second thought how does the 24 hours of Indy sound!
