Grand Prix 2012 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix Practice, Qualifying & Race Discussion

At one stage of this season it looked like we could have had a Championship battle as close as 2010 if not closer, but after Sebastian Vettel's 4th victory in a row, it appears that he has a third title in three years in the bag. A determined second from Alonso limited the damage, but he has to finish ahead of Vettel at almost all the remaining races to take his own third championship, and at this moment in time, that appears very difficult with the pace of the Red Bull.

Despite the hype, India once again delivered an underwhelming race with Vettel taking his second win at the track and at a canter as he was rarely troubled throughout the race, only late troubles with the 'tea-tray' threatened to derail his victory but this was but a minor bump on the road and from looking a distant contender after an alternator failure at Monza but since then he's taken 100 points from 100 available to completely change the face of the Championship, it feels like 2011 all over again.

It shows how quickly F1 can change that until lap 23 in Singapore, it seemed like McLaren would take their 4th win in 4 races and that Hamilton would close the gap to Alonso and increase his chances of a second world title. But a gearbox failure and suspension problems (and astroturf) in Japan and Korea evaporated any chances he has and he looks forward to a fresh start at Mercedes next year. From having the quickest car at that point, it seems that McLaren were unable to stop the Red Bull onslaught that has pretty much wrapped the championship up in one sharp autumn burst, the only thing that can stop it is if Red Bull's reliability problems rear it's head again and I feel that this is Alonso's best chance of overhauling Vettel's ever increasing lead.

But Abu Dhabi is a track where Red Bull have been strong at, Vettel won in 2009 and 2010, and qualified on pole in 2011 but a first lap puncture prevented him from probably making that three wins in a row, however he might not have won in 2009 where Hamilton had to retire from the lead with brake problems. McLaren themselves have been strong here in the past with both Hamilton and Button on the podium for them in 2010 and 2011 (Button has been third every single year at the track as he finished there in 2009 for Brawn). But their championship hopes, both in the WDC and the WCC are over after a poor last 4 races which took them out of contention.

However, if 2012 has shown us anything, it's that nothing is certain. After Germany it seemed that nothing was going to stop Alonso from taking a third world championship and for various reasons, his formidable lead has been wiped out. The updates Ferrari made for recent races has ensured that he can fight for the podium, but he'll need extra if he is to take the title, whether Ferrari can do that or not remains to be seen, but after the mistakes of 2010 where they lost the title, they will not want to see another title slip through their grasp, another failure will not look good on Domenecali, and it is very probable that Luca de Montezemelo would see it as a failure if Alonso doesn't win the championship this year.

Abu Dhabi circuit write up - http://cliptheapex.com/pages/yas-marina-circuit/

 

[Kewee]

Brogan......Another question you may be able to help with. The penalty Vettel has received is solely related to the inability to provide a fuel sample. As they're unable to be penalized further in this GP, (you can't start further back than the rear of the grid), if they changed ratios, which is also a breach of the regulations, would a further penalty be carried over to the next GP. I know it's a tricky one Paul but I can't find an answer anywhere. Hope you can help.

 

[Mephistopheles]

I assume the stewards accepted force majeure on the grounds that the engine could be damaged due to fuel pick up, but surely the reason the fuel could not be picked up was because of lack of fuel, so why was force majeure accepted? It doesn't make sense, unless there is something else wrong with the car, which would make sense of the fact they want to take the car out of parc fermé conditions to rectify the problem and therefore start from the pit lane...

 

[mnmracer]

Brogan But what is the penalty for changing the gears? Exactly, a grid-penalty.
Kewee I believe the only penalties that can carry over to the next race are 'dangerous driving penalties' i.e. Grosjean and Schumacher.

 

[Brogan]

From reading the reg's Kewee they're simply not allowed to change the ratios - presumably if they did they would be disqualified?
I'm not sure on that though, it would be interesting to try and get some clarification.

mnmracer, grid penalties for changing gearboxes are a separate issue - the ratios inside any replacement gearboxes ,should be identical. See the point above though.

Mephistopheles apparently there is a problem with the fuel cell, confirmed by Renault. Horner insists there is enough fuel in the car for a sample, but it can't be obtained without removing bodywork, which is against the rules. So the force majeure relates to the fuel cell issue, not the lack of fuel.

Edit: Re the gearbox ratios, perhaps that's the purpose of the FIA seal - to stop any ratios being changed? In which case, Red Bull may be able to change them and a further grid drop for breaking the seal is irrelevant. I would check the reg's but I can't be bothered

 

[Kewee]

Brogan.....Thanks Paul. It's a tough one to find an answer to. I noticed on the BBC site Andrew Benson was tweeting that they may take advantage of their situation and give Vettel longer gearing. He obviously knows even less than we do.

 

[Kewee]

Brogan But what is the penalty for changing the gears? Exactly, a grid-penalty.
Kewee I believe the only penalties that can carry over to the next race are 'dangerous driving penalties' i.e. Grosjean and Schumacher.

Sorry thats not right. They frequently give five place grid drops at the next GP for technical infringements.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

My view on gear ratios is exactly what Brogan said in his last post, i.e. that there is no penalty as such for changing them because you can't do it, as I originally stated in post #171, even when changing the gearbox.

However, if a team effectively cheated by taking the opportunity to change them when they shouldn't, while they were carrying out other work, and that were to be discovered during post-race scrutineering, I would expect a quite heavy penalty to be applied for the next race.

 

[Greenlantern101]

I forgot to check for news on Vettel last night. What a nice start to the day I have had. All happy. Should make for a good race and it keeps the championship going untill Brazil. Hopefully Alonso can get decent points here to keep the fight alive. Got to say Hamilton is looking good for the win if he can keep Webber behind him at the first corner.

Some people asking about vettels release from the pit lane. The regs 38.2 state ... All such cars may then join the race once the whole field has passed the end of the pit lane for the first time after the start.

Which doesn't really clear it up. Does 'the pit lane' also include the pit exit road or just the area up to the traffic light.

 

[The Artist.....]

I've just checked the rules regarding changing gear ratios...
Sporting regulation 28.6a) and d) cover this situation.

Essentially, a change of gear ratios is allowed if you change the gearbox, but it will be accompanied by a 5 place grid penalty for the gearbox change and a further 5 place grid penalty for the gear ratio change, AND that will allow the driver to take a new gearbox at the next event.....

So from last on the grid, Vettel can have a 10 place grid penalty for changing the gearbox and ratios, leaving him last....

 

[F1ang-o]

You can bet that Red Bull will get the best possible advantage for their main man.....That's For Sure....

 

[The Artist.....]

Greenlantern101

Usually, this relates to the exit onto the track - this problem has caught drivers out at races like montreal before.... Basically, Vettel will necessarily be dead last when he exits the pits!

 

[Kewee]

I think Red Bull have just put their man at a huge disadvantage. I don't believe for one moment Red Bull have a problem with their fuel cell and I can't find anyone on this side of the world who thinks otherwise. I think they either have a more serious problem or they simply tried to be a little too clever and made the mistake of short fueling. If they try to push the regulations any further in this GP they could find themselves facing a far more severe penalty.

 

[The Artist.....]

Sorry thats not right. They frequently give five place grid drops at the next GP for technical infringements.

However, these only tend to be for incidents like engine changes or gearbox changes (which are taken between races)... I can't remember a case where a car has had an infringement of the technical regulations and then hasn't been disqualified straight away.... (or at least if there's been any punishment)....

 

[Hamberg]

Kewee, they satisfied the stewards on the first visit there was a genuine problem causing them to stop so whilst I think RBR can be sneaky bastards (aren't they all) I think this one is genuine.

They are investigating to see if the cell contains enough fuel. If it does and the reason for force majeure is the reason the FIA couldn't extract the fuel and there has been a genuine mechanical failure I think the DSQ is harsh.

That said if it is all genuine Vettel would have had to start from the pit lane regardless as they had to break parc ferme conditions to rip the car apart and find out whats gone wrong so either way Vettel would be starting last.

 

[Hamberg]

Interestingly enough that car looked pretty erratic by Red Bull standards, has young Seb proven with a decent quali performance that he can drive a less than perfect car?

 

[Kewee]

The most extraordinary thing about this championship is first McLaren and then Red Bull seem to be trying their hardest to loose it. The number of times either one of them has had Alonso over a barrel with the opportunity to shut him out of any chance of winning it, only to hand him a free pass a couple of GP's later is incredible. Alonso doesn't need a second invitation to pounce. All he needs to do this time is stay out of trouble and Vettel's advantage could be gone. If he can get past Maldonado and Riakkonen reasonably quickly he will put huge pressure on Webber, especially with the Ferrari's top speed advantage. I'm picking Alonso for 3rd at worst possibly 2nd and only a couple of points for Vettel if he finishes. I'm sticking my neck out I know, but this championship seems to me as though it's meant to be Alonso's.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

I've just checked the rules regarding changing gear ratios...
Sporting regulation 28.6a) and d) cover this situation.
Essentially, a change of gear ratios is allowed if you change the gearbox, but it will be accompanied by a 5 place grid penalty for the gearbox change and a further 5 place grid penalty for the gear ratio change...

The Artist..... Without wishing to labour this point, you're wrong. I quoted that regulation in full in post #171 and nowhere does it say that the ratios can be changed with a five place grid penalty. In fact it says the opposite, that any cogs being replaced must be of identical specification to those of the original box. And then only if there is evident physical damage to the parts in question.

 

[Kewee]

To elaborate on my comment regarding Red Bulls fuel cell. I'm not laughing but nearly all my friends are. These are people who have spent their lives building racing cars from the ground up including F1 cars in some cases. None have ever heard of fuel cell failure even at club level. I'm not saying it's not possible but I struggle to believe it could happen at this level.

 

[The Artist.....]

Chad Stewarthill

The regulation you make reference to is 28.6d)

28.6a) is slightly different- unfortunately I can't copy and paste it as I'm on a tablet, but go and have a look at it- it explicitly mentions that after a gearbox change "Any change to the gear ratios declared under d) below will incur a further 5 place penalty"

 

[gethinceri]

a) Each driver may use no more than one gearbox for five consecutive Events in which his team competes. Should a driver use a replacement gearbox he will drop five places on the starting grid at that Event and an additional five places each time a further gearbox is used.
Any replacement gearbox must be fitted with the same gear ratios that were declared under d) below and will only be required to complete the remainder of the Event in question. Any change to the gear ratios declared under d) below will incur a further five grid place penalty. In either case a new five race sequence may start at the following Event.
Unless the driver fails to finish the race (or is unable to start the race for reasons other than a penalty imposed by the stewards) the gearbox fitted to the car at the end of the Event must remain in it for the remainder of the five race sequence. Any driver who failed to finish the race at the first, second, third or fourth of the five Events for reasons which the technical delegate accepts as being beyond the control of the team or driver, may start the following Event with a different gearbox without a penalty being incurred.
A gearbox will be deemed to have been used once the car’s timing transponder has shown that it has left the pit lane.
d) At each Event seals may be broken once, under supervision and at any time prior to the second day of practice, for the sole purpose of changing gear ratios and dog rings (excluding final drives or reduction gears). Competitors must inform the FIA technical delegate which ratios they intend to fit no later than two hours after the end of P2. However, one additional change of ratios and dog rings will be permitted if a gearbox change is necessary on the first day of practice before the end of P2.
Gear ratios and dog rings (excluding final drives or reduction gears) may also be changed under supervision for others of identical specification at any time during an Event provided the FIA technical delegate is satisfied there is evident physical damage to the parts in question and that such changes are not being carried out on a systematic basis.