Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I signed as well.

I think the decision needs to be reversed.

What i dont understand is that having told RD the pass was fine, CW set the precendent where Mac could just keep going with the comfort of knowing there wouldnt be any repercussions. RD said himself that if the pass was deemed unsatisfactory, then they would have asked LH to let KR through again.

Mac were told the pass was legit and as far as they were concerned that was the end of the story...

And now this...

  • Replies 3.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Ok. Youve got my attention, now.

I saw your post and how qualified you are to comment and thats all fine.

I have a great life here in Tokyo - thanks for your concern. My job affords me plenty of time to do other things i love doing and i still get paid really well...that includes watching F1 footage frame by frame if i feel like it.

Again, if the FIA had NOT investigated this incident, would you be up in arms as passionately as is the case now?

All these peeps saying he wasnt past him...blah blah blah...

You know what? The race stewards REPORT to CW and he makes the final call - he isnt called the RACE DIRECTOR for nothing, you know.

CW told Mac and RD on 2 occassions that is was OK - right after the incident.

What more do you want?

Make sure you get your facts straight before calling on your wealth of experience.

If CW told me, you or the neighbours dog that the pass was OK i would bloody well leave it at that.

CW will come into play heavily in the next couple of weeks you can rest assured and on the strength of his testimony, Mac should be cleared and reinstated.

Simple.

Looks like you're the one that needs to get your facts straight, as pointed out by Duncan. Gee, don't you look sillier now :P

If Whiting was able to tell Mac so soon after the incident that it was all ok, then I seriously doubt he had time to carry out the same in depth investigation as the race stewards.

I have a CAMS Level 2 licence. I must say filling out the form wasnt too bad, but licking that stamp and envelope, then finding a post box... Phew, talk about hard work. :)

:rofl::huh:

I also have my CAMS L2S licence, so am MORE THAN QUALIFIED to comment on all things motorsport.

As for the petition, so what? So those 50,000 arm chair racers are suddenly qualified to judge the incident all of a sudden are they?

Also telling Garage that he isn't in a position to question your authority due to his post count.... :(

Looks like its time for everyone in the F1 thread to bow down to dezz, the undisputed leader!

Sorry I can't let that go. its actually the opposite, the race director and their officials (flaggies, scruitineers etc) report incidents to the stewards for investigation.

There is a deliberate and clear seperation between the stewards and the rest of the officals to maintain their independance.

NO, really? I mean? How do you know that? :P Dont bother using facts Duncan...the obvious answer will be "well the rules are wrong :rofl:"

Even Dennis admitted he asked the wrong person...but i have given up. Its a tough decision...but fark me McLaren have done themselves no favours at all. If ppl want to continue to paint Lewis/McLaren as the completely innocent victims then so be it. It was a tough call but there is substance and merit to the penalty.

Perhaps McLaren are repeatingly being bitten by these sorts of things because they fail to admit their part in each affair. I mean without acceptance of a small portion of the blame they go on in their infallible ways...only for history to repeat (in a slightly different way) I dont think that is 100% but a part of it probably rings true. I am sure McLaren are looked at harder by the FIA then other teams. Thats more reason to be doing it right. But they need to look at what role they have played then ensure try not to put themselves in a similar situation.

I have found if i have stuffed up at work i tell the head of the wrong department because i know he probably doesnt give a damn or know better...he will tell me its ok and i am in the clear. I would never tell my boss about the stuff up in case i hear something i dont want to hear...a grilling :huh:

How bout looking at the issue in question instead of going off in tangents?

Let me say it yet again. Charlie Whiting told Ron Dennis that the pass was legitimate and it was okay.

It has already been said by Wolve that CW passes the dispute to the stewards if he deems there has been a problem. CW said there was no problem so it should not have gone to the stewards, correct?

Now, if CW had told RD that all was okay and LH continued on his mewwy way, how is it then Dezz, that LH was stripped of his win?

You can do basic math, right?

*edit*

Either RD made that up or something has happened between that radio transmission to CW and CW talking to the stewards.

I cant make out clearly whats going on behind the scenes here...

I prefer this one: http://www.petitiononline.com/belg08/petition.html

it only has one signature, but check out who it is... :P

will nobody sign this poor blokes petition? c'mon. have a heart.

wtf?

5. Beer Baron SAU I agree with kimi, I was taking a sh1t when it happend. but the FIA should not interfere. The stewards decision is final. They are the law. Judge, jury and executioner.

You are taking the piss, right?

From what Duncan's said, CW AND the other officials can report stuff to the stewards. So CW didn't think much of it, but others obviously did, and reported it. The stewards then make the decision.

I don't really see how Troy's example is a tangent, it is an analogy that most people would be able to relate to. RD what CW had to say, but he isn't the one that has the final word. That's my take on it anyway.

From what Duncan's said, CW AND the other officials can report stuff to the stewards. So CW didn't think much of it, but others obviously did, and reported it. The stewards then make the decision.

I don't really see how Troy's example is a tangent, it is an analogy that most people would be able to relate to. RD what CW had to say, but he isn't the one that has the final word. That's my take on it anyway.

I was referring to Dezz but the thing is CW is the race director!

I am sure without doubt it wouldnt have been handballed without his final approval.

Its a weird one.

wtf?

5. Beer Baron SAU I agree with kimi, I was taking a sh1t when it happend. but the FIA should not interfere. The stewards decision is final. They are the law. Judge, jury and executioner.

You are taking the piss, right?

no it's true, I'm serious, I really was taking a cr4p when it happend. :P so yes, not taking the piss, taking a cr4p. glad to be able to clear that one up...

I would be willing to say that what most likely happened with the conversatons between RD and CW where that RD got on the email and asked about redressing, CW (or his 2ic) replied saying that if a proper attempt was made, then it would be OK. As LH was then able to be right on the tail of KR up to La Source and then passed him into the corner (as well as "propping" on the apex, going by the engine note to try and stop KR from diving under him) then CW decided that not enough effort was made in the redress (the driver doing the redress must not make any gain, and should really be in a worse position regarding the other car than before the cause of the redress situation) and because of this, the referral to the stewards was made.

FWIW, my credentials for talking about this are as follows.

CAMS B2 (Steward)

CAMS C2 (Event command) - Mainly Clerk OF Course / Race director role

CAMS F2 (Flag Marshal)

The level 2 (now replaced with Silver as a license grade) means that I can act as a senior official at national event, or as a 2ic at international events. I also had a National circuit license.

Thats all well and good but i cant see it happened that way...

Not according to MW anyway...

Whitmarsh also repeated the claim of Ron Dennis, made immediately after the race, that Hamilton's move past Raikkonen was deemed legal and fair by race director Charlie Whiting.

"From the pit wall, we then asked Race Control to confirm that they were comfortable that Lewis had allowed Kimi to repass, and they confirmed twice that they believed that the position had been given back in a manner that was 'okay'," Whitmarsh explained.

"If Race Control had instead expressed any concern regarding Lewis's actions at that time, we would have instructed Lewis to allow Kimi to repass for a second time."

One as yet-unanswered peculiarity in the brief press release issued by the stewards in which they announced their decision to punish Hamilton was the claim that they acted upon a 'report received by the race director' - namely, Whiting.

Whiting himself has yet to comment on the matter but could prove to be a key witness if McLaren's appeal is heard - something that remains in doubt despite the team's registering their notice of appeal.

So, i love the guy to death, but please oh please can DC have one good weekend before he marches off to different pastures? Qualifying 6th to Webbers 7th woudl be great. And a top 5 finish to Webbers 5th or 6th will be enough for me. The curtains are about to close for the guy, surely he is massivaly motivated to get a good result. Hell even if he does a stupid low fuel qualifyign effort just to stuff around with the leaders then go really long middle stint. I dont care, come on DC, its killing me watch you race the Hondas and Force Indias

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah everyone always seems to refer to them as S13 wheels however they came on R32 Skyline, A31 Cefiro, C33 Laurel etc., and also came polished diamond cut or painted depending on the model. Congrats on your GTS purchase! I'd personally leave it NA.
    • In this thing about this 100% renewal energy stuff I hear no one really talking about anything other than power and fuel really Power and fuel, whilst being a huge part of how we use the billion year old Dinosaur juices, are only 2, of the probably thousands of things that we need to use it for in the chemicals industries for making nearly everything we use nowadays I'm all for a clean planet, but if we want to continue to have all the day to day appliances and stuff that we rely on everyday we will still need fossil fuels Whilst I do love science, and how it can bring innovation, there's really a limit to how far it can go in relation to "going green" As for EV's, unless your charging of your own solar panels, it isn't helping the environment when you consider the the batteries, the mining processes required,  the manufacturing process required, and how long a batteries (read: the vehicle) lasts long term If I was supreme dictator of the world, I would ban the use of sugar for fizzy drinks and food additives and use that for ethanol manufacturing, petrol engines would be happier, and people would be alot healthier  Disclaimer: Whiskey manufacturing would still be required, so says the supreme dictator of the world Same same for all the vegetable oils that get pumped into all our food, use that for bio diesel Disclaimer: the supreme dictator would still require olive oil to dip his bread in This would take some of heat off the use of the use of fossil fuels which are required for everything we use, unless you want to go back to pre 1800 for heat and power, or the early 1900's for plastics and every thing else that has come from cracking ethylene  Would I be a fair and just dictator, nope, and I would probably be assassinated within my first few months, but would my cunning plan work, maybe, for a while, maybe not Meh, in the end in an over opinionated mildly educated arsehole typing out my vomit on my mobile phone, which wouldn't be possible without fossil fuels And if your into conspiracies, we only need the fossil fuels to last until a meteor hits, or thermonuclear annihilation, that would definitely fix our need for fossil fuels for manufacturing and power issues for quite some time  Meh, time for this boomer to cook his lunch on his electric stove and then maybe go for a drive in my petrol car, for fun    
    • It really helps that light duty vehicles have absolutely appalling average efficiency due to poor average load. Like 25% average brake thermal efficiency when peak is somewhere around 38% these days. So even a 60% BTE stationary natural gas plant + transmission and charging losses still doing much better with an EV than conventional ICE. And that's before we get into renewables or "low carbon nonrenewable" nuclear which makes it a no-brainer, basically. In commercial aircraft or heavy duty diesel pulling some ridiculous amount of weight across a continent the numbers are much more difficult to make work. I honestly think in 5-10 years we will still be seeing something like the Achates opposed piston diesels in most semi trucks running on a blend of renewable/biodiesel. Applications where the energy density of diesel is just too critical to compromise. CARB is running trials of those engines right now to evaluate in real world drayage ops, probably because they're noticing that the numbers just don't work for electrification unless our plan is to make glorified electric trains with high voltage wires running along every major highway and only a token amount of battery to make it 30 miles or something like that after detaching. Transport emissions is not insignificant especially in the US, but yes there's a lot of industrial processes that also need to be decarbonized. I agree the scale of the problem is pretty insane but EDF managed to generate ~360 TWh from their nuclear reactors last year and this is with decades of underinvestment after the initial big push in the 70s and 80s. I don't think the frame of reference should be solar-limited. France is not exactly a big country either. Maybe it doesn't work everywhere, but it doesn't have to either. We just can't live off of fracking forever and expect things to be ok.
    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
×
×
  • Create New...