FIA The FIA Clarifies Defensive Driving Guidelines

Viscount

Pole Sitter
Contributor
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101147

From the Autosport article:

Whiting said that "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."

To further clarify the situation he later added: "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'."

So you don't always have to leave a cars width, at least until a part of their car is alongside yours, then you do.
 

Dizzi

Podium Finisher
Now 6cm of front wing inside a rear wheel is significant, which is what we'll get when the overtaker assumes the defender will move.
It seems unworkable to me. With the poor wing mirrors on these cars to judge whether a car is less than the width of an average hand away from your back tyre when travelling at xmph is ludicrous. I couldn't judge that in my road car, my parking sensors probably wouldn't pick that up.
Why am I ever surprised when the FIA come out with such ridiculous rules, to me a significant portion is front wing alongside front wheel so the other driver has half a chance of knowing you're there.
 

KekeTheKing

Banned
Supporter
These endless clarifications do nothing but confuse matters even further.

And Brogan the front wheel quote came directly from Perez in his interview with the BBC during the race. Charlie Whiting is treading in dangerous waters right now. He can't even keep the drivers on the same page.
 

ZakspeedYakspeed

NeverUnderestimateThePredictabilityOfStupidity
Valued Member
As alluded to by Brogan above, this will result in a lot of penalties when you have a donkey dan drivers rep... and probably not too many when someone who has half a brain is the drivers rep... the result could well be inconsistency... which is just what we don't need right now during this years tight WDC race...

With all the footage and several different camera angles, why can't common sense simply win out... :crazy:
 

Viscount

Pole Sitter
Contributor
I don't think there'll be many now penalties because of it. There weren't any at Silverstone.

The clarification only refers to the straight before a corner so I think it will be fairly easy for the stewards to evaluate. All they have to do is look at the camera angles & steering traces to see if Driver A turned his wheel before Driver B's front wing was alongside him.

It's pretty much for situations like Rosberg vs Hamilton & Alonso in Bahrain where Rosberg didn't get a penalty as they weren't alongside as he turned, or Senna vs Kobayashi in Valencia where Senna did get a penalty as part of Kobayashi car was alongside him as he moved to the wall.
 

KekeTheKing

Banned
Supporter
It's pretty much for situations like Rosberg vs Hamilton & Alonso in Bahrain where Rosberg didn't get a penalty

I don't see how Rosberg could possibly avoid sanction if the same maneuver was performed after this "clarification". And the same goes for countless maneuvers over the past couple seasons.

This should be interesting.
 

Viscount

Pole Sitter
Contributor
I don't see how Rosberg could possibly avoid sanction if the same maneuver was performed after this "clarification". And the same goes for countless maneuvers over the past couple seasons.

This should be interesting.
I don't think Rosberg's move would be judged any differently now by the stewards. As the clarification states, he can use the full width of the track with his first move. All that matters is no part of the car overtaking is alongside. With Alonso in Bahrain, no part of his car was ever alongside Rosberg, so if the stewards adhere to the rules and clarifications set, they couldn't give a penalty for the same move now.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2012/04/22/rosberg-hamilton-alonso-cleared-incidents/

 

Mezzer

A fine chap if ever there was one.
Contributor
Of course the next argument is going to be what portion of the rear wheel they have to be level with to not block, i.e. any part of it, the middle of the wheel, etc etc. If we can pick this kind of stuff apart so easily why can't the FIA get it right when they announce it.
 

ZakspeedYakspeed

NeverUnderestimateThePredictabilityOfStupidity
Valued Member
Mezzer... technically you would be 92% alongside when your front wheel breaches the rear wheel of the car being passed... which is about 91% more alongside and 14 times more logical than the current Whiting intepretation...:crazy:
 

Chad Stewarthill

Champion Elect
Contributor
mud2.jpg
 
Top Bottom