Usage of the Safety Car (and its effect on 2015 Re-starts)

Are you in favor of re-introducing re-starts into GP racing?

  • Total voters


Much has been made of the plan to re-introduce (that's how it was done for decades) re-starts into Grand Prix racing. The announcement has incited enormous backlash that I believe is misplaced and overblown. And I think there is a serious possibility that this rule may make Charlie a bit more hesitant to release the Safety Car in some situations where it hasn't truly been necessary in the recent past.

Anyway, thanks to ZakspeedYakspeed 's Safety Car data I had a look at how many races would have featured Re-starts according to the proposed 2015 Regulations. In the first decade (94-03) of the SC, an average of 2 races a year would have been re-started. In the second decade (04-13) this number jumps to an average of 5.

1994 - 1
1995 - 1
1996 - 1
1997 - 1
1998 - 3
1999 - 4
2000 - 2
2001 - 3
2002 - 2
2003 - 3
2004 - 4
2005 - 4
2006 - 5
2007 - 3
2008 - 6
2009 - 4
2010 - 9
2011 - 6
2012 - 6
2013 - 5

Now obviously if we regularly had 9 races affected by SC/Restarts then that would become tedious, and would detract from the sport, but if you only had 4-5, I do not think that is an untenable situation and would actually be welcomed at the traditional SC tracks like Monaco and Singapore.

i can understand the drivers' reticence to get on board with this plan as it certainly makes their job harder, but I think everyone can agree they're adequately compensated to undertake this task.
Screen Shot 2014-07-03 at 16.12.46.png

By 2105 F1 will be more like Tron light cycles. Any crashes will put you out the game and you will 'pixelate' removing the need for a restart.
If memory serves, the introduction of the SC was about keeping races in progress safely and to avoid the restart debacles of the past. As we know, other series, e.g. NASCAR, Indycar and Le Man's 24hr, etc. use rolling starts to avoid standing start mayhem from the off.

The main issue I have with the safety car restart idea is the propensity for aborted starts and accidents. It's bad enough for drivers, and the pit crews that helped them, to build their gaps and positions on track only to lose it behind the SC. Then, to add insult to injury they will be expected to do it all over again. I can see some cost implications as well since F1 car clutches are notoriously fragile and will need beefing up. That may be easier said than done considering how tight the "packaging" of the power unit is in the current F1 chassis. I'm wondering if that has been fully factored in just to avoid clutch trouble in the few SC affected races.

It seems to me that this is another case of finding a problem to fix that isn't really a problem. The only change worth making, IMHO, is to get the lapped cars to drop to the back of the field to get rid of the nonsense of losing laps waiting for them to un-lap themselves and catch up with the field.

Edit: Re: Odds on Bernie presiding over F1 in 2015. Answer: Thin. :D
Last edited:
Thing is they were a lot more reluctant to interrupt a race when they there was any kind of track obstruction when they were doing standing re-starts as a norm..
There were also a number of different rules at the time. I seem to remember there was a rule that dictated that when a a car stopped on the tracks for over three laps without removing the stationery car was then considered to have become part of the track itself, and it was up to drivers to avoid crashing into it, which iin retrospect and with today's safety standards in mind seems.. well, a bit mad really.

The 1986 Detroit GP was a good example of that, with Piquet's car left on the track for the race's remainder after his incident.

I believe the mandatory safety-car in the modern era was introduced because they thought adding up half-race times from before and after the red flag was getting too confusing for spectators, so that's something that's also very different to what we're faced with now, where races are simply being stopped and re-started again.
Last edited:
If I'm honest if there is an incident on the first lap then I'm in favour of a restart. Probably within the first five laps but as Fenderman has pointed out the safety car was introduced in order to not disrupt the flow of the race, not completely rub out someones advantage and, much forgotten, to keep within time constraints. Is the 4 hour rule still going to apply? Taking into account that each restart procedure from the moment its called, to reassembling the grid, to the parafe lap and then lights out will take at least 20 mins we could be adding serious time on the race.

Also whats the rule on doing work on the car? If someone has been part of an accident but is still driving round without a nose cone can they take their place on the grid in the position they were in and have their nose cone fixed?

Can the teams change tyres on the grid? Could someone look in with a one stopper in the lead, restart happens, tyres changed on the grid and they are starting from pole?

Also imagine this - there are 4 laps to go and an accident happens. Do they call a restart? Would their be safety issues because they'd be reluctant to do so? imagine if Lewis Hamilton is leading the race by 50 seconds, a restart is called with 2 laps to go and Vettel nips past him off the second on the grid spot and takes the win. Fair?

I think F1 would be stupid to get rid of the safety car all together. Especially as its universally used by nearly every form of motorsport.
Well, I'd be for it.

I don't think it would take 20 minutes to do a standing re-start, as they are capable of doing one off the end of a formation lap.

The Safety Car does not reward people who have worked hard for the lead, necessarily. Nelsinho Piquet was jumped into the lead of the 2008 German GP by pure dumb luck and a Safety Car. Maybe Crashgate wouldn't have been such a shoo-in for Briatore if Alonso had the opportunity to stuff it up.

I would be in favour of simply dropping a red flag though. An alternative to the time situation is feasible to work out.

My big problem is with what we have now. 22 cars take 3 laps to form a queue. They then lap slowly. The danger is clear. There is an interminable wait while Max Chilton catches up to the back of the pack, and before we know it, a fifth of racing distance has gone. That shit has to change, because it ruins races. I have no interest in aggregation.

Personally my view to the idea that the car couldn't restart unaided sitting alone on the grid would be to tell the teams to ****ing build one that can, then.
Sort of, kind of agree with some of what you said there TBY but if we're going to have a standing re-start after an incident that warrants a safety car, then why do we need the frickin' safety car? Drop a Red Flag with a white question mark in it and have the blokes line up on the grid in race order. F1 can save some fuel with the SC parked up whilst Berndt Maylander and his co-driver can relax with their feet up and drink a bit more coffee.:D
teabagyokel have you ever seen a re-start where they haven't done the 'race starts in 10' warning?

Unless they are suggesting the cars would keep going round and then all line up on the grid which seems a little silly. Also that means they'd still have to let lapped runners through and wait for them to actually catch the pack up so the front runners weren't sitting waitng on the grid for an age.
I may have missed it, but is the "second race" just a sprint race with the qualifying order determined by the "first race"? Or do the results in the "first race" (number of laps completed) still count?
I'm with Fenderman. What's the point of the SC if you're gonnan do a restart? The laps behind the SC just make the racing distance shorter then. Might as well red flag it then.
But I think a rolling start should be better. The SC already takes away the lead of a driver, now there's also the risk of a start.
It was always said that you can't win a race at the start, but can lose it. But if there's a restart with just 10 or less laps to go, you actually can win the race at te restart.
Imo it's a bit like a marathon, where at the end you bunch up the field to let them run the last lap in the stadium and the winner takes all.
Has the lapped runners rule been discussed? They'd have to have then shuffle round if they are doing it like that and then the whole situation will be even worse than we have now.

Also good luck on getting every driver into the right grid spot when they are realky 100% sure where they are suppose to be lining up.
And where do they take the grid line-up from? The order when the SC comes out or the order from the lap before the accident?
Am I right thinking if a race is red-flagged and started again tyres etc can be changed (did it happen in Monaco a couple fo years back??), so would those rules apply?
They have said it wouldn't be enforced within 2 or 3 laps of the start and 5 laps of the end & it's at the discretion of the race director...the FIA just loves grey areas doesn't it?!!
i can understand the drivers' reticence to get on board with this plan as it certainly makes their job harder, but I think everyone can agree they're adequately compensated to undertake this task.

I think the reticence may also have to do with safety. Crashes often occur during starts, and so it increases the probability of injury as well as DNFs.
The FIA actually had little or nothing to do with this plan. It was proposed by one team (still nameless) and ratified by the others.

As for the safety concerns, dangerous incidents can happen anytime, anyplace in auto racing. These are the top drivers in the world and I believe they can be trusted to make a handful of extra starts every year.

I will admit there are some valid concerns and they'll have to be ironed out on the fly if indeed these regulations are enacted.
Top Bottom