HRT also did no testing prior to the 1st round of 2010 & were still building the cars through Friday with Bruno Senna only getting a few laps in towards the end of FP2. Karun Chandhok's car wasn't ready until qualifying & he did his 1st laps in the car during Q1 & did a really respectable job given those circumstances.

2011 was similar in that they were still building the cars through the Friday of the 1st race weekend. 2012 however was better as while they didn't take part in any of the testing, They did have the cars ready for a shakedown at Barcelona a few days after the final test had ended & did make it to Melbourne with 2 cars that were ready to run in FP1.

And the fact they got through to Q2 on the basis of their outside 107% time. Normally anyone falling foul of it would be starting last.

Some people called it "The Riccardo Rosset" rule. Which was a bit cruel. Probably more about the Forti-Fords that I remember Damon Hill describing as "they're called Forti as that's how many times you pass them".

ESPN had a piece on abolishing the 107% rule and instead allowing the stewards to exclude anyone they judged to be dangerously slow. Which would make more sense than having a rule that everybody knows is broken virtually all the time.

The 107% rule thing was interesting because although it made sense to ignore it due to the weird happenings in Q1, they did apply it to the cars eliminated in Q1.

If they'd just waived the 107% rule entirely I don't think anyone would really have brought it up, but to partially enforce it made no sense, especially as it didn't even affect the order of the cars they did apply it to.

How do you mean "they did apply it"? No they didn't. If they did apply it, the cars wouldn't have been allowed to start the race!

As kriZbii says, they applied the 107% rule to those eliminated in Q1 and went by their FP3 times to decide the order. Amusingly in this instance it meant they still lined up in the same order they would have qualified.

Well in that case, why this massive hoo-ha over it?

Because it affected more than just those that were eliminated in Q1, and would have had drivers like Ricciardo lining up at the back. The rule doesn't really anticipate drivers outside 107% progressing out of Q1 and continuing with qualifying.

The common exception with the 107% rule throughout the years has been that if a competitor has set laps comfortably within the 107% standard during the weekend then they tend to waive enforcing it should a driver fall foul during qualifying. France '99 also saw a wet qualy session where Damon Hill actually failed to meet the 107% limit, but was allowed to race.
The rule was never to intended to reduce grid numbers per se, but to raise the standard of some sloppy backmarker teams (Forti etc) who regularly were 8+ seconds off the pace.

If they have a rule, in writing, regardless of how moronic it is, it should be enforced, not waived or only for a certain few!
F1 is a laughing stock at the moment, especially with the stupidity of forcing McLaren driver Button into a drive-through for advising him on how to fix a critical brake issue, you know, those things that stop you ploughing into a barrier and off to meet St Peter at the pearly gates!!!
If the 107% rule is there, use it properly, or, scrap it! It really is that simple!

As for the radio rules, in their current state, thanks to that Napoleon fool, f1 is becoming less the pinnacle of motor sport and more the joke of the sport!

Yeah they were quite harsh on Jenson over the radio messages:
https://www.instagram.com/p/BIVraWNA4dX/

Nice

If it was such a 'critical' issue, why did merely not shifting fix the problem to an extent that he was able to continue on for almost the entire race distance afterwards? I think Button was exaggerating the extent of his problems tbh... If the Brake pedal was truly hitting the floor useless, as he stated, then it's odd that he managed to keep going (and keep on braking) round those few corners even before he was told how to fix it...

Lets look at what was said:

BUT: "Pedal's going to the floor, pedal's going to the floor, what's the problem?
ENG: "OK Jenson, we're looking".

ENG: "Jenson, do not shift, do not shift, We've lost hydraulic pressure, OK-"
BUT: "-So Game Over?

ENG: "Uh Jenson, Stay out, stay out".
BUT: "Oh fantastic, race of hell this is gonna be!"

BUT: "So the brake pedal going to the floor isn't classed as a safety issue?"

If it's such a critical safety issue and the brake pedal truly was non-functional, I'm surprised he:
A) not only managed to keep the car on track & braking into the corners while the engineers looked at how to solve this 'critical' problem.

B) Was than able to simply fix said "non functional" brake pedal by not shifting, to an extent that the problem appeared resolved for the next 50+ laps he then continued to run under, until he was stopped by an oil leak...

I have no words for this post.....

If the brake pedal problem was such a safety problem then Jenson as the person sitting in the car should have ignored the team & parked the car up.

And certainly should *not* have entered the pits with no brakes!

(motor racing safety 101)

...because "merely not shifting" didn't fix the problem! Changing a setting on the steering wheel fixed the problem.


He did not state that the brakes were "useless", he stated that the pedal was going to the floor. He still had some braking, but obviously had to slow down & lose places to compensate for the reduced braking.


The brake pedal was not "non-functional".


The problem was not fixed by not shifting.

In that case, if the problem can be fixed by altering a setting on the steering wheel, and the effects were not a total loss of braking function but merely reduced performance, then it was not a critical safety issue as button is implying, ergo he could have continued on (albeit at a slower pace to compensate) without fixing the problem.

You also need to bear in mind that there is an awful lot of stopping force (drag) on these cars without even touching the brakes. No brakes would make it hard to stop, but if they were working even just a bit I'm sure you can compensate to a large degree with the aerodynamic stopping force.

For me, *any* issue with the brakes is potentially a safety issue though. In fact I don't ever recall anybody ever complaining about pit to car messages about the car mechanics, only about the driver and their approach to individual sectors/corners.

Are you actually for real here?!!!!!

I took it to be a safety issue because it was an problem with the hydraulic system which could have caused the brakes to fail.

Could be completely wrong, I was rather worse for wear on Sunday after being at a wedding the day before.

Just had a very interesting and long Yougov survey all about F1 advertising on track and on Sky.
There was video of some DHL adverts to comment on, that I'm not sure Id seen or probably didn't remember.
Always the way, upfront it asked me to name F1 advertisers on track and on tv, and I did not choose DHL.
Also questions about Sky F1 and C4 F1 broadcasting itself and even a few about the BBC.
Was a high paid pointer too, so they were keen to get the data

The problem with DHL is that their colours (red & Yellow) are so similar to Pirelli, it's easy to get the two confused in your memory tbh.

Team Radio is back properly, then.

Probably the right move on balance, but a bit surprising that they didn't keep things as they were till the end of the season, review everything properly, and then relax some aspect of the rule whilst keeping others. Why do that when you can kneejerk back to the other extreme for the very next race

I assume they had to open it up completely, because allowing more communication had enough scope for coded messages related to whatever was banned.

I thought this following bit was already the case, but good news anyway from a broadcast point of view:

Special offer on sweary Vettel radio blasts?