USGP, and the Michelin tyre controversy!

[chris]

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns15060.html
------------------------------------------
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/17692/
------------------------------------------

I say NO chicane. Why should the circuit be changed just to accomodate a stuff-up by Michelin. This is a joke. Michelin, and the teams running those tyres should have to produce a package that is safe to race on the track as it is.

If they can't, then the cars in question should be excluded on safety grounds, simple as that.

--------------------------------------------

1 10 Juan Pablo Montoya McLaren-Mercedes 1:12.027
2 38 Ricardo Zonta Toyota 1:12.085
3 5 Fernando Alonso Renault 1:12.666
4 8 Nick Heidfeld Williams-BMW 1:12.804
5 3 Jenson Button BAR-Honda 1:12.865
6 35 Pedro de la Rosa McLaren-Mercedes 1:12.913
7 4 Takuma Sato BAR-Honda 1:13.013
8 6 Giancarlo Fisichella Renault 1:13.024
9 7 Mark Webber Williams-BMW 1:13.082
10 1 Michael Schumacher Ferrari 1:13.242
11 2 Rubens Barrichello Ferrari 1:13.245
12 17 Ralf Schumacher Toyota 1:13.461
13 16 Jarno Trulli Toyota 1:13.683
14 14 David Coulthard Red Bull Racing 1:13.740
15 37 Scott Speed Red Bull Racing 1:13.846
16 15 Christian Klien Red Bull Racing 1:14.444
17 12 Felipe Massa Sauber-Petronas 1:14.637
18 11 Jacques Villeneuve Sauber-Petronas 1:14.696
19 19 Narain Karthikeyan Jordan-Toyota 1:14.803
20 18 Tiago Monteiro Jordan-Toyota 1:14.978
21 39 Robert Doornbos Jordan-Toyota 1:15.791
22 20 Patrick Friesacher Minardi-Cosworth 1:16.343
23 21 Christijan Albers Minardi-Cosworth 1:16.357
24 9 Kimi Räikkönen McLaren-Mercedes

Practice 2:

Pos No Driver Team Laps Time/Retired Grid Points
1 10 Juan Pablo Montoya McLaren-Mercedes 1:11.118
2 9 Kimi Räikkönen McLaren-Mercedes 1:11.228
3 2 Rubens Barrichello Ferrari 1:11.746
4 1 Michael Schumacher Ferrari 1:11.758
5 8 Nick Heidfeld Williams-BMW 1:11.825
6 14 David Coulthard Red Bull Racing 1:12.076
7 35 Pedro de la Rosa McLaren-Mercedes 1:12.119
8 37 Scott Speed Red Bull Racing 1:12.143
9 5 Fernando Alonso Renault 1:12.265
10 16 Jarno Trulli Toyota 1:12.344
11 6 Giancarlo Fisichella Renault 1:12.384
12 12 Felipe Massa Sauber-Petronas 1:12.464
13 7 Mark Webber Williams-BMW 1:12.578
14 15 Christian Klien Red Bull Racing 1:12.664
15 3 Jenson Button BAR-Honda 1:12.803
16 4 Takuma Sato BAR-Honda 1:13.037
17 11 Jacques Villeneuve Sauber-Petronas 1:13.079
18 39 Robert Doornbos Jordan-Toyota 1:13.361
19 38 Ricardo Zonta Toyota 1:13.567
20 20 Patrick Friesacher Minardi-Cosworth 1:13.783
21 21 Christijan Albers Minardi-Cosworth 1:13.963
22 19 Narain Karthikeyan Jordan-Toyota 1:14.008
23 18 Tiago Monteiro Jordan-Toyota 1:14.336
24 17 Ralf Schumacher Toyota (Accident)

Qualifying:
1 16 Jarno Trulli Toyota 1:10.625
2 9 Kimi Räikkönen McLaren-Mercedes 1:10.694
3 3 Jenson Button BAR-Honda 1:11.277
4 6 Giancarlo Fisichella Renault 1:11.290
5 1 Michael Schumacher Ferrari 1:11.369
6 5 Fernando Alonso Renault 1:11.380
7 2 Rubens Barrichello Ferrari 1:11.431
8 4 Takuma Sato BAR-Honda 1:11.497
9 7 Mark Webber Williams-BMW 1:11.527
10 12 Felipe Massa Sauber-Petronas 1:11.555
11 10 Juan Pablo Montoya McLaren-Mercedes 1:11.681
12 11 Jacques Villeneuve Sauber-Petronas 1:11.691
13 17 Ricardo Zonta Toyota 1:11.754
14 15 Christian Klien Red Bull Racing 1:12.132
15 8 Nick Heidfeld Williams-BMW 1:12.430
16 14 David Coulthard Red Bull Racing 1:12.682
17 18 Tiago Monteiro Jordan-Toyota 1:13.462
18 21 Christijan Albers Minardi-Cosworth 1:13.632
19 19 Narain Karthikeyan Jordan-Toyota 1:13.776
20 20 Patrick Friesacher Minardi-Cosworth 1:14.494

[FeZ]

what a soap opera :D

Why do all Michelin teams now have a problem just because crashkid Ralf crashed ?

Anyway no matter what is going to happen I am looking forward to many accidents/retirements/penalties.

[chris]

Looks like Michelin has a tyre problem, that they, or their teams may have caused. So now they expect special treatment. :rolleyes:

Maybe build a chicane that is mandatory for Michelin teams to drive through, while Bridgestone teams are not required to use the chicane. :D

Now I like lots of action in a GP, but I don't want to see another Imola 1994 where Roland Ratzenberger was killed one day, and Ayrton Senna the next. :'(

[chris]

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN REPRESENTATIVES OF MICHELIN IN INDIANAPOLIS AND THE FIA FORMULA ONE RACE DIRECTOR
19.06.2005


Letter from Representatives of Michelin to Charlie Whiting, the FIA Formula One Race Director:

Saturday June 18 2005
Indianapolis

Charlie Whiting, FIA Race Director and Safety delegate

Dear Mr Whiting

Having analysed and fully evaluated the tyre failures that have occurred over the Indianapolis Grand Prix practice sessions we have been unable to identify a root cause.

The current rules and timescale do not permit the use of an alternative tyre solution and the race must be performed with the qualifying tyres.

Michelin has in the sole interest of safety informed its partner teams that we do not have total assurance that all tyres that qualified the cars can be used unless the vehicle speed in turn 13 can be reduced.

Michelin very much regrets this situation, but has taken this decision after careful consideration and in the best interests of safety at the event.

We trust that the FIA can understand our position and we remain at your disposal if you want any further information.

Pierre Dupasquier
Michelin Motorsport Director

Nick Shorrock
Director of Michelin F1 activities

Cc:
Bernie Ecclestone
Michelin teams
Ron Dennis (West McLaren-Mercedes)
Flavio Briatore (Mild Seven Renault F1)
Frank Williams (BMW WilliamsF1 Team)
Peter Sauber (Sauber Petronas)
Christian Horner (Red Bull Racing)
Nick Fry (B-A-R Honda)
John Howett (Panasonic Toyota Racing)



Letter from Charlie Whiting, the FIA Formula One Race Director, in reply to above letter from Representatives of Michelin:

19 June, 2005

Dear Mr Dupasquier,
Dear Mr Shorrock,

We have received your letter of 18 June.

We are very surprised that this difficulty has arisen. As you know, each team is allowed to bring two different types of tyre to an event so as to ensure that a back-up (usually of lower performance) is available should problems occur. It is hard to understand why you have not supplied your teams with such a tyre given your years of experience at Indianapolis.

That the teams you supply are not in possession of such a tyre will also be a matter for the FIA to consider in due course under Article 151c of the International Sporting Code.

No doubt you will inform your teams what is the maximum safe speed for their cars in Turn 13. We will remind them of the need to follow your advice for safety reasons. We will also ask them to ensure their cars do not obstruct other competitors.

Some of the teams have raised with us the possibility of running a tyre which was not used in qualifying. We have told them this would be a breach of the rules to be considered by the stewards. We believe the penalty would not be exclusion but would have to be heavy enough to ensure that no team was tempted to use qualifying tyres in the future.

Another possibility would be for the relevant teams repeatedly to change the affected tyre during the race (we understand you have told your teams the left rear is safe for a maximum of ten laps at full speed). If the technical delegate and the stewards were satisfied that each change was made because the tyre would otherwise fail (thus for genuine safety reasons) and that the relevant team were not gaining an advantage, there would be no penalty. If this meant using tyres additional to a teams’ allocation, the stewards would consider all the circumstances in deciding what penalty, if any, to apply.

Finally, it has been suggested that a chicane should be laid out in Turn 13. I am sure you will appreciate that this is out of the question. To change the course in order to help some of the teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tyres.

Yours sincerely,

Charlie Whiting
FIA Formula One Race Director

cc: Bernie Ecclestone
Ron Dennis (West McLaren-Mercedes)
Flavio Briatore (Mild Seven Renault F1)
Frank Williams (BMW WilliamsF1 Team)
Peter Sauber (Sauber Petronas)
Christian Horner (Red Bull Racing)
Nick Fry (B-A-R Honda)
John Howett (Panasonic Toyota Racing)
Jean Todt (Scuderia Ferrari)
Colin Kolles (Jordan Grand Prix)
Paul Stoddart (Minardi F1 Team)

Formula One Press Corps

So the issue of the chicane is resolved, and the issue of the problematic tyres is resolved. I'm particularly pleased with the fair approach of Mr Whiting:

To change the course in order to help some of the teams with a performance problem caused by their failure to bring suitable equipment to the race would be a breach of the rules and grossly unfair to those teams which have come to Indianapolis with the correct tyres.

Controversy no more. :) We will see how the race goes.

[FeZ]

lol 45 minutes until race start and it is total chaos as nobody knows what is going to happen ;)

[Sepecat]

watching Raceday now on Star Sports.... This race i want to see, i had a chance to go into the city with a mate, but I want to see some crashes... ;)

[Sepecat]

Its being reported that Ferrari is the only team on the track…. and Race starts in 15mins....

[Sepecat]

Ok Looks like other teams are coming out... So YES We'll have a race...

[FeZ]

LMAO

McLaren just announced that they will retire after the formation lap.
Could be that after some laps only the Bridgestone cars will run, this could mean podium finish for Minardi or Jordan ^_^

LMAO

what a great soap opera :Peace:

[Frank N. O.]

The danish commentators said 7 teams agreed and officially said they would not race without the safety chicane. And seriously, can't say I blame them with those tires and the press-release from Michelin.

Holy Shit!!! They are backing them in the garages!!! All Michelin teams!!

Frank

[Sepecat]

Straight into the pits mate... ^_^


Bloody Hell! My English language audio feed changed to some crap…

[FeZ]

LOL the farce has started &(

This is just a joke, poor American viewers that dont know what happened ^_^

[Frank N. O.]

Ah there we have that typical american "thumbs down" and buuhing.

Although the question is, who are they buuhing for? The ones driving alone on the track or the ones that won't drive out of sheer safety?

And several Michelin drivers are now getting out and packing it in seems.

Why are they still driving? This race is practically invalid.

Frank

[FeZ]

Now the coolest thing would be 2 engine faults for Ferrari :D

[Frank N. O.]

Lol Frank.

Hmm, the yanks are throwing bottles and stuff right on the track, nice behaviour.

Frank

[Sepecat]

Black Flag this... lmao

[FeZ]

Danger: Beer on Track :D

[Sepecat]

Fez and Frank come to to chat.. many in there...

[FeZ]

m'kay

[Frank N. O.]

Xchat is payware now and the freeware version is not to be found and even though I don't have a router then the chat applet says spoofed ID whatever that means, any idea?

LOL I just heard that Tom Kristensen won Le Mans on guess-what-brand of tires :rolleyes:

Frank

[Sepecat]

http://www.racerplanet.com/chat/

[Frank N. O.]

Wait please, connection in progress ... sterling.va.us.undernet.org
*** Looking up your hostname
*** Checking Ident
*** Found your hostname
*** Spoofed IP.
*** You are disconnected

That's my problem. According to my reciept then I don't have a router so what could that be?

Frank

[Sepecat]

hmm thats funny, i got in with no prob... got any firewall?

[Frank N. O.]

ZoneAlarm but turning it off didn't help.

Frank

[Sepecat]

u should try mirc or reboot

[[XR]M12]

oslo.no.eu.undernet.org - try this server..works for me

[Wazza]

Yay, what a fantastic race. 35 laps remaining

Could be someones first podium. What a time to do it. :mad:

I also wonder if Matt is still there.
I'm sure he's getting some fun photos of everyone booing, and throwing stuff on the track making it more dangerous than the tyre problem itself!

[Sepecat]

http://flimflam.homelinux.org/chat/

[Frank N. O.]

This is weird. I now found a freeware X-Chat 2 and it again said Spoofed ID, disconnecting. What does that mean? I already granted it access in the firewall.

Frank

[Sepecat]

frank get mirc...

[Wazza]

I can't get into it either.

Don't mind

"Race" will be over in 32min.

And I have work in an hour.

[Frank N. O.]

Hey Warren, I found a freeware version of X-Chat 2 that worked, after it retried to connect after it too, like the RP chat applet, said Spoofed ID, but it works now.

I can't believe the race is still being run, but those stands sure look empty.

Frank

[[XR]M12]

Spoofed ID/IP means that a specifix IP range is know for spaming - thats nothing related to you personally or to any kind of your PCs hardware
its just friggin undernet, no more, no less

[[RS]Alt]

Perhaps Michelin should REFUND all of the spectators entrance fees - perhaps this will make them happy?

You all know that I live in Indianapolis, don't you? I hadn't heard about this until this evening.

They DID have a race of 6 cars, didn't they?

Perhaps Michelin should refund the expenses of the teams and their support personnel. While we're at it, Michelin should pay Tony George and the IMS all damages to the property AND to the City of Indianapolis for the "Bad Publicity!"

[chris]

Michelin should be ASHAMED of themselves!

FIA should have excluded them from the race on safety issue, before the race started.

[Wazza]

Well in thousands and thousands of km of testing, and great performance, Michelin have had great praise until now, as Bridgestone have struggled to get the heat into their tyres. And now this sad thing happens, and it's all Michelin's fault?

Yes, sure, unfortunate.

But what if Bridgestone never knew about how abrasive the new track was.

Here is a quote from a forum member, of a photographers forum I visit.


It was a mess all around. It wasn't that Michelin intentionally did this. They brought a set of tires which worked perfectly fine last year, and found out Saturday that due to resurfacing of the track and slightly new tire design because of the regulations the tire was not going to last more then 10 race laps.

An alternate design of the tire was sent to Indianapolis from France overnight and was tested. Unfortunately, this alternate tire would last longer, but would not last long enough. There was no time to redesign a tire structure, manufacture it, and have it shipped from France to the USA overnight and therefore a request was send to Mosley and Co (FIA) to attempt to mend the situation with a chicane that would be placed in the straight. This would slow the cars down and would reduce structural load on the joint of the belt and sidewall. The host(Indy), nine of ten teams, excluding Ferrari (as usual), agreed to this proposal. Max Mosley decided that there would be no compromise. The F1 drivers were told to park their cars by team officials, many drivers were very upset about this. If you don't know, the decision to drive isn't really up to the drivers. Due to obvious and very serious safety reasons, all Michelin runners were recommended by Michelin to not participate due to a faulty product. Minardi and Jordan/Midland F1 had also agreed not to run with the Michelin runners in their support. At the last minute, Jordan/Midland F1 decided to go against their earlier promise and compete in the race. Due to the position of Jordan and Minardi, Stoddart was forced to also go against his promise, there is no way they could let Jordan/Midland get away with that many point and Minardi with none.

This is not the first time there has been a tire issue at Indy after the resurfacing, both Nascar and IRL were forced to make drastic changes to their tires after experiencing damage and unusual wear of the tires. Firestone was able to convey this information to sister Bridgestone where a new tire was developed for this track specifically. Unfortunately, Michelin was kept out of the circle of information.

But of course, let's have it the other way around. If there were 3 teams, with problems, would the other 7 teams accept a track change such as adding a chicane?

[chris]

Of course they wouldn't. And the fans (predominantly of Michelin running teams) would scream murder if the changes were made.

From Charlie Whiting:

"As explained in our earlier letter, your teams have a choice of running more slowly in Turn 12/13, running a tyre not used in qualifying (which would attract a penalty) or repeatedly changing a tyre (subject to valid safety reasons). It is for them to decide. We have nothing to add."

This years tyre it should be known is nothing like last years one. But it shouldn't be too difficult to build a tyre that should have enough of a safety margin that it will not fail. It might not work as well, but it'll be safe.

Bridgestone has been suffering lack-lustre tyre performance all year, and yet they have not requested special treatment.

[Justin Martin]

Bridgestone has been suffering lack-lustre tyre performance all year, and yet they have not requested special treatment.
They both have designed faulty tires, but the difference is that while the Bridgestone is apparentely a crappy tire, it does not have any safety issues.

The Michelin has a fault too, but its fault only appears on one track, and the fault is a major safety issue, and the fault likely couldn't have been detected without testing at that track. Given that the fault was discovered at the last minute and was going to knock out most of the field, I don't think it's unreasonable to request special treatment.

If Michelin had simply designed a tire that wouldn't perform well at Indy, I would agree it's silly to ask for special treatment. Same if they had known about this issue months ago. But with it being a unforeseen safety issue that prevented the majority of the cars from being able to race safely...

Having said that, it's a loose-loose situation. Adding a chicane does create concerns, and simply running slow through that turn would have been dangerous; the Bridgestone cars would have been passing the Michelin cars with a large speed differential.

IMHO, there really ought to be more testing at Indy. It's vastly different than the other F1 tracks, and it seems like there are often issues that come up, particulary with tires...

[D_Man]

Yes Michelin should be ashamed because they do not have access to Bridgestone's exclusive tyre development data from the IRL series and the tyres they produce are superior on road circuits. The easy answer is to ditch the ridiculous US race at Indy.

Interesting that Ferrari was the only team to object to the chicane and the FIA caved in to their favourite team.

If that is what Ferrari has to do to win a race it is a disgrace. They would put other driver's lives at risk to ram home their advantage in a race that should be held on a road circuit anyway.

My humble 2 cents.

[chris]

Ferrari did not object. They simply said that it was for the FIA to decide.

They were never, ever going to get a chicane. Not in anyones wildest dreams, not even with Ferrari support. The FIA very firmly rejected the unsafe chicane idea right away, as you may have read in the FIA's letter to Michelin shown earlier in this message. They did NOT cave in to Ferrari whatsoever. Any suggestion to the contrary is utter nonsense.

A chicane would have been grossly unfair to Jordan and Minardi in particular, and it would have put drivers lives at risk.

The most fair and safest option was to simply run Michelin teams at reduced speed through the fast corner. That was suggested by Charlie Whiting:

"As explained in our earlier letter, your teams have a choice of running more slowly in Turn 12/13, running a tyre not used in qualifying (which would attract a penalty) or repeatedly changing a tyre (subject to valid safety reasons). It is for them to decide. We have nothing to add."

Running more slowly in that corner should not create any dramatic safety concerns once it is explained to everyone that this is indeed what will happen. Everyone will expect it and will be aware of it.

It happens normally in the course of racing. Look at other circuits where multi-class racing exists and fast cars are approaching slower ones with large speed differences. This is no different to that.

Michelin also had the opportunity to go racing and sell tyres at a profit in other racing series, nothing prevented that from happening. And surely nothing prevented testing being done at Indianapolis. Other teams have tested overseas previously in the last month or so.

With the knowledge that the track had been resurfaced, you would have thought teams might organised to have done their thousands of kilometres of testing of recent times over at Indianapolis.

The problem is that Michelin has, as in the past pushed the limits with tyre design. And sometimes they got in trouble as a result.

[Wazza]

Good points by all.

As far as Ferrari objecting, that was plain what I read, about their director. It was only Schumacher and Barrichello keeping a neutral head, and saying it's not up to them.

Well, the race is over, and next one is under 14 days away, hopefully we can have some real racing. Let's hope this doesn't penalise Michelin, and make them sound like the fools, who have bad tyres, and try and beg for a chicane, when the 2008 rules come into place. (One tyre manufacturer)

[Nappe1]

the whole situation from my point of view:
1.) Michelin screwed up. When they noticed the problem, the took instant action with all possible ways they could solve the problem. (making new tire, manufacturing it for 7 teams and flying it from france to Indianapolis within 3 days ain't cheap.)

2.) FIA took "No slip from the rules, no matter what it costs" -line. as from the rules point of view, this was the correct action, but it most likely caused that F1 -series won't be seen at Indianapolis during next few years, if at all in the states. So, they did screw up as well.

As other notes:
- Ferrari didn't have anything to do with FIA's decisions this time, because they didn't attend at all the meeting considering chicane installation. They left it up to FIA to decide. (this is one of the decisions that can be argued if FIA did the correct decision here.)

- Bridgestone knew about new pavement and also had a lot of data collected via Firestone testing with Nascars. For Michelin, the changes were much suprise, But IMO, they did everything to fix the problem. Driving with the faulty tires and coming to pits after every 10 laps would not have changed anything. (perhaps it would have caused more serious safety issues on the pits, because so much of traffic.)

Also, way how the teams reacted single minded to Michelin's proposals, it looks like that connections between majority of teams and FIA are getting worse every day. Was this enough to break the neck and make basics for WCGP? Time will tell. Still, if Michelin is punished too hard for this, FIA will get attack of angry teams using M's tires and trusting Michelin's expertice.


as to end note:
To me it looks like that the snowball is ready swinning on the top of log. It only needs a small push to start rumble down to hill. When that happens, we'll see a death struggle of F1 and a born of something new...

[[XR]Pale]

The easy answer is to ditch the ridiculous US race at Indy.


I feel that comment was very unappropriate. We have just as much right to enjoy F1 in our country as anyone else. We should not be made to suffer because the "powers that be" can't see themselves clear to bend the rules a bit or find a reasonable way to make it work. I have alot more to say on this but I'm a bit too ticked off right now.

[D_Man]

My comment was related to the venue - not the country - sorry if it came across that way. The idea of an F1 race on a banked circuit which requires a very specialised vehicle design due to suspension load factors is wrong as far as I can see. The cars can never perform as well as cars that are built specifically to race on those types of circuits. F1 cars are built to race on road-type circuits. I would like to see the US GP go back to Watkins Glen :)

[Nappe1]

The idea of an F1 race on a banked circuit which requires a very specialised vehicle design due to suspension load factors is wrong as far as I can see. The cars can never perform as well as cars that are built specifically to race on those types of circuits. F1 cars are built to race on road-type circuits. I would like to see the US GP go back to Watkins Glen :)

but even the whole oval has been used in F1 GP... fromn 1950 to 1960 Indianapolis 500 race was a part of Formula 1 Championship calendar. ;)

but you are right. There's good places for F1 in the U.S. like Watkins Glen and Sears Point for example. F1 cars have been too long away from oval tracks and they have been nowadays built for different kind of tracks.

(there has been previously other similar tracks like Indy F1 track is now. Fuji Raceway had similar design when it was used for Japan GP during mid-70's and (IIRC) Fernand track in france used few times during 60's as French GP had half oval and 7 km road course.)

[chris]

Or why not go back to the old ways and have 2 US GP's. One of them was on a frightfully fast street circuit. :eek:

[FeZ]

I wonder if this is the end of Formula1 in the US.

The interest in F1 is pretty low anyway, and after that "race" it will be even lower.
Bernie was planning a new GP in Las Vegas, but I think he can forget about this now.

[Nappe1]

I wonder if this is the end of Formula1 in the US.

The interest in F1 is pretty low anyway, and after that "race" it will be even lower.
Bernie was planning a new GP in Las Vegas, but I think he can forget about this now.

After the press release stating that all 7 teams will be taken to FIA World Court (in 29th of June) about destroying the GP, I am starting to wonder if this really is a begining of the end as whole to the F1? Of Course the result of the court makes a big difference, but for example if BAR is prooven to be guilty regulation violation, they will be gone for 6 months from. (and this is caused by their previous problem with the car having second tank, which put them under magnifying glass for next 12 months from Monaco GP.)

I don't know who has made decision taking action against all michelin teams, but the press release is from Max Mosley. (is the FIA so ignorant about threat of GPWC that they think they can still play gods?)

[chris]

How are the GPWC going to start? What, with that bunch of arguementative and disagreeing teams? GPWC will have the same problems.

Stoddart and Minardi would be eaten alive by that ruthless bunch.

[Nappe1]

How are the GPWC going to start? What, with that bunch of arguementative and disagreeing teams? GPWC will have the same problems.

Stoddart and Minardi would be eaten alive by that ruthless bunch.

With whom those 7 disagree? remember that I am not counting Jordan and Minardi in this group. Right now I can't remember those having any bigger problems against each other. BAR had it's violation, but they didn't complain about decision.

if I would be you, I would be more conserned the fact that if Car makers (Daimler-Benz, BMW, Toyota and Renault) leave F1 (whenever they leave without founding GPWC or because founding it), there's going to be problem having enough cars in the grid. (I doubt that Ferrari alone is enough to fill the grand stands. Majority still comes to races see clean and very tight fights about points, not to see while one team drives 2 laps ahead others to victory race after race.)

[chris]

They'll find something to dispute about. You watch. When one of them gets a big advantage over the rest, you'll see the disputes start. And the media will complain naturally.

It always happens.

[Wazza]

This is just ridiculous. Let's now penalise the teams for not racing for safety issues. Sure, the rules which know one uses, or really knows about, such as Article 131 about 4 hours notice to race start, and if they can't race, to let the stewards know.

So it's a no win situation. They race, they would have been pulled into pits for racing an unsafe car. The recommendation by FIA was to drive slow through that section. 30km/h slower? or 200km/h slower? No one really knows.

So now BAR could be out with another infringement, and the other teams could get a whopping fine and/or, penalties, or future loss of championship points. Almost looks like Ferrari are going to be given the championship again, in one of their most lacklustre performances in recent times.

I say bring on the GPWC, F1 is doomed.
GPWC could end up the same way, but at least to start with, at least they won't be governed by FIA as they are now.

[D_Man]

Ferrari could field all 20 cars for Max's pleasure and they would always win - just kidding :D

Honestly, if the FIA wants to kill off F1 altogether they are going the right way about it. The FIA wants to let the teams know who is boss, but at what cost?

BMW and Mercedes don't need F1 but F1 needs them.

[[XR]M12]

imo - those rules concerning the tyres & the motors are complete sh!t, see what we`ve come to
- the engines are not built for more then 1 race (that rule change came with a short notice, when all engines were finished)
- the tyres were built to slow down the cars & to bring more overtaking to a race, as we know it didnt help much

A fresh start from scratch might be needed - F1 is busted all over.
Looking at other race classes (GP2, GTWC, etc) the best solution seems to be the same tyres for everyone - dunno if the same material (chassis, engine) would help, since then everything depends on the driver.

[lewi]

In regards to the disciplining of people, FIA are going the wrong way about this. The Michelin-shod teams are not the ones at fault here, it's Michelin. Michelin supplies both tyres to the teams - Michelin are responsible for the CONSTRUCTION of the tyres, which is the primary reason for the tyre failures.

Because of the new surface on the Oval part of the circuit, tyre wear was different than previous years - so Michelin were already behind the 8-Ball because Bridgestone already had information about the new surface because the IRL cars run Firestone (sister company) tyres.

In regards to the actual race, I think it's a bit sad that grown adults couldn't come to a comprimise to put on a show for the fans. The FIA AND the teams have some thinking to do.

Rather pathetic

Rant off =) Lewi

[chris]

Max Mosley had a interview recently about this saga, and he made some very reasonable points. I should post it here..

By the way, that so called Firestone tyre "test" was all of 2 laps, and then it was abandoned completely.

[lewi]

Max Mosley had a interview recently about this saga, and he made some very reasonable points. I should post it here..

By the way, that so called Firestone tyre "test" was all of 2 laps, and then it was abandoned completely.

The IRL cars run Firstone Firehawk tyres. Firestone is closely related to Bridgestone. Keep in mind that the Indy 500 oval surface was re-surfaced (it was slightly more abraisive). The Indy500 was just recently run and it's pretty certain to say that Bridgestone would have had more knowledge and data on the new surface than Michelin. But still, that doesn't excuse Michelin to any extent!!


Here's the interview from www.f1.com
]The US Grand Prix - questions to Max Mosley

Max Mosley, President of Formula One racing’s governing body, the FIA, answers questions on the events of last weekend’s United States Grand Prix at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
Q: What about the American fans who travelled long distances and spent a lot of money to see a race with only 6 cars?
Max Mosley: My personal view, and it is only my personal view, is that Michelin should offer to compensate the fans on a fair basis and ask the Indianapolis Motor Speedway to coordinate this. Then Tony George and Bernie Ecclestone should jointly announce that the US Grand Prix will take place at Indianapolis in 2006 and that anyone who had a ticket this year would be entitled to the same ticket free-of-charge next year. But I emphasise, that’s just my personal view.

Q: Should you not have just forgotten about the rules and put on a show for the fans?
MM: You cannot do that if you wish to remain a sport. Formula One is a sport which entertains. It is not entertainment disguised as sport. But even more importantly Formula One is a dangerous activity and it would be most unwise to make fundamental changes to a circuit without following tried and tested procedures. What happened was bad, but it can be put right. This is not true of a fatality.

Q: Why did you refuse the request of some of the teams to install a chicane?
MM: The decision was taken (quite rightly in my view) by the FIA officials on the spot and notified to the teams on the Saturday evening. I did not learn about it until Sunday morning European time. They refused the chicane because it would have been unfair, against the rules and potentially dangerous.

Q: Why unfair?
MM: Because modern Formula One cars are specially prepared for each circuit. To change radically a circuit like Indianapolis, which has very particular characteristics, would be a big disadvantage to the teams which had brought correct equipment to the event.

Q: Is this why Ferrari objected?
MM: No, Ferrari had nothing whatever to do with the decision. They were never consulted. Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi, as the Bridgestone teams, were not involved.

Q: Why would a chicane have been unfair, it would have been the same for everyone?
MM: No. The best analogy I can give is a downhill ski race. Suppose half the competitors at a downhill race arrive with short slalom skis instead of long downhill skis and tell the organiser to change the course because it would be dangerous to attempt the downhill with their short skis. They would be told to ski down more slowly. To make the competitors with the correct skis run a completely different course to suit those with the wrong skis would be contrary to basic sporting fairness.

Q: Never mind about skiing, what about Formula One?
MM: OK, but it’s the same from a purely motor racing point of view. Suppose some time in the future we have five teams with engines from major car companies and seven independent teams with engines from a commercial engine builder (as in the past). Imagine the seven independent teams all have an oil surge problem in Turn 13 due to a basic design fault in their engines. They would simply be told to drop their revs or slow down. There would be no question of a chicane.

Q: All right, but why against the rules, surely you can change a circuit for safety reasons?
MM: There was no safety issue with the circuit. The problem was some teams had brought the wrong tyres. It would be like making all the athletes in a 100m sprint run barefoot because some had forgotten their shoes.

Q: How can you say a chicane would be “potentially dangerous” when most of the teams wanted it for safety reasons?
MM: A chicane would completely change the nature of the circuit. It would involve an extra session of very heavy braking on each lap, for which the cars had not been prepared. The circuit would also not have been inspected and homologated with all the simulations and calculations which modern procedures require. Suppose there had been a fatal accident – how could we have justified such a breach of our fundamental safety procedures to an American court?

Q: But it’s what the teams wanted.
MM: It’s what some of the teams wanted because they thought it might suit their tyres. They wanted it because they knew they could not run at full speed on the proper circuit. We cannot break our own rules just because some of the teams want us to.

Q: Why did the FIA stop the teams using a different tyre flown in specially from France?
MM: It is completely untrue that we stopped them. We told them they could use the tyre, but that the stewards would undoubtedly penalise them to ensure they gained no advantage from breaking the rules by using a high-performance short-life tyre just for qualifying. We also had to make sure this did not set a precedent. However the question became academic, because Michelin apparently withdrew the tyre after trying it on a test rig.

Q: Michelin were allowed to bring two types of tyre – why did they not have a back-up available?
MM: You would have to ask Michelin. Tyre companies usually bring an on-the-limit race tyre and a more conservative back-up which, although slower, is there to provide a safety net if there are problems.

Q: Is it true that you wrote to both tyre companies asking them to make sure their tyres were safe?
MM: Yes, we wrote on 1 June and both replied positively. The letter was prompted by incidents in various races in addition to rumours of problems in private testing.

Q: So, having refused to install a chicane, what did the FIA suggest the Michelin teams should do?
MM: We offered them three possibilities. First, to use the type of tyre they qualified on but with the option to change the troublesome left rear whenever necessary. Tyre changes are allowed under current rules provided they are for genuine safety reasons, which would clearly have been the case here. Secondly, to use a different tyre – but this became academic when Michelin withdrew it as already explained. Thirdly, to run at reduced speed through Turn 13, as Michelin had requested.

Q: How can you expect a racing driver to run at reduced speed through a corner?
MM: They do it all the time and that is exactly what Michelin requested. If they have a puncture they reduce their speed until they can change a wheel; if they have a brake problem they adjust their driving to overcome it. They also adjust their speed and driving technique to preserve tyres and brakes when their fuel load is heavy. Choosing the correct speed is a fundamental skill for a racing driver.

Q: But that would have been unfair, surely some would have gone through the corner faster than others?
MM: No, Michelin wanted their cars slowed in Turn 13. They could have given their teams a maximum speed. We offered to set up a speed trap and show a black and orange flag to any Michelin driver exceeding the speed limit. He would then have had to call in the pits – effectively a drive-through penalty.

Q: How would a driver know what speed he was doing?
MM: His team would tell him before the race the maximum revs he could run in a given gear in Turn 13. Some might even have been able to give their driver an automatic speed limiter like they use in the pit lane.

Q: But would this be real racing?
MM: It would make no difference to the race between the Michelin cars. Obviously the Bridgestone cars would have had an advantage, but this would have been as a direct result of having the correct tyres for the circuit on which everyone had previously agreed to race.

Q: Did the Michelin teams have any other way of running the race if the circuit itself was unchanged?
MM: Yes, they could have used the pit lane on each lap. The pit lane is part of the circuit. This would have avoided Turn 13 altogether. It is difficult to understand why none of them did this, because 7th and 8th places were certainly available, plus others if any of the six Bridgestone runners did not finish. There were points available which might change the outcome of the World Championship.

Q: But that would have looked very strange – could you call that a race?
MM: It would seem strange, but it would absolutely have been a race for the 14 cars concerned. And they would all have been at full speed for most of each lap. That would have been a show for the fans, certainly infinitely better than what happened.

Q: Did not Michelin tell them quite simply not to race at all?
MM: No. Michelin said speed must be reduced in Turn 13. They were apparently not worried about the rest of the circuit and certainly not about the pit lane, where a speed limit applies. If the instruction had been not to race at all, there would have been no point in asking for a chicane.

Q: Didn’t the Michelin teams offer to run for no points?
MM: I believe so, but why should the Bridgestone teams suddenly find they had gone all the way to America to run in a non-Championship race? It would be like saying there could be no medals in the Olympic rowing because some countries had brought the wrong boats.

Q: What about running the race with the chicane but with points only for the Bridgestone teams?
MM: This would start to enter the world of the circus, but even then the race would have been open to the same criticisms on grounds of fairness and safety as a Championship race run with a chicane. It would have been unfair on Bridgestone teams to finish behind Michelin teams on a circuit which had been specially adapted to suit the Michelin low-speed tyres to the detriment of Bridgestone’s high-speed tyres, and the circuit would no longer have met the rules.

Q: Have you ordered Michelin to produce details of all recent tyre failures as reported on a website?
MM: We cannot order Michelin to do anything. We have no contractual relationship with them. Their relationship is with the teams. However, we have an excellent understanding with both tyre companies and with many of the teams’ other suppliers. We find they always help us with technical information when we ask them.

Q: Wouldn’t Formula One be better if one body were responsible for the commercial side as well as the sport?
MM: No, this is precisely what the competition law authorities in many parts of the world seek to avoid. It is not acceptable to them that the international governing body should have the right both to sanction and to promote. This would potentially enable it to further its own financial interests to the detriment of competitors and organisers. Apart from the legal aspect there would be an obvious and very undesirable conflict of interest if a body charged with administering a dangerous sport had to consider the financial consequences of a decision taken for safety reasons.. You can be responsible for the sport or for the money, but not both.

Q: Didn’t this entire problem arise because new regulations require one set of tyres to last for qualifying and the race?
MM: No. The tyre companies have no difficulty making tyres last. The difficult bit is making a fast tyre last. There is always a compromise between speed and reliability. There have been one or two cases this season of too much speed and not enough reliability. Indianapolis was the most recent and worst example.

Q: Finally, what’s going to happen on June 29 in Paris?
MM: We will listen carefully to what the teams have to say. There are two sides to every story and the seven teams must have a full opportunity to tell theirs. The atmosphere will be calm and polite. The World Motor Sport Council members come from all over the world and will undoubtedly take a decision that is fair and balanced.

[KyzrSoze]

Humorous commentary on this issue from the Sniff Petrol website. :)

OBITUARY: FORMULA 1 (1950 - 2005)

Sniff Petrol is saddened to report the tragic death of Formula 1 motor racing. Following a long decline, F1 finally passed away in America on Sunday 19 July. The sport was surrounded by fans and family. Although Formula 1 had been suffering from several maladies and needless complications for some time, the actual cause of death is yet to be confirmed. Many suggest it may have been hastened by being repeatedly abused and shat upon by a Prancing Horse, but it is believed that the once-loved sport's actual demise was brought on by a number of other factors including dangerously swollen egos, over exertion caused by money grabbing, and a bad reaction to certain kinds of rubber. Some close to F1 are already pointing the finger at those who were meant to care for the ailing sport, and in particular Dr Max Mosley. Critics allege that Mosley himself was in no fit state of health for the position, suffering as he was from several osteopathic ailments including a weak spine and severe inflexibility. "F1 needed a taste of its own medicine to wake it from a fat, lazy sleep," noted Maurice Ital of Every Other Sunday magazine. "Since Michelin were involved perhaps this could have been administered in true French style, as a suppository. Or, to put it another way, Max Mosley can shove the whole thing up his arse".

[MATT]

Yes, I was there... but my photo-taking was mostly limited to the previous days' action... For the race I was in the grandstands and had a large fence to shoot through... made things difficult.

But let's get a couple things straight. As in any Grand Prix, the crowd is NEVER just the local population. Particularly at the U.S. GP because the price of admission is the cheapest on the whole calendar. Plus I'd like to think that the history of the track alone is attractive. Let's not forget how impeccable the grounds and facilities are! Absolutely amazing.

At any one moment around the track I could hear several languages. Including German, Italian, Spanish and Portugese. As always, there were a number of rabid Columbian fans for Juan Pablo Montoya too. I find it hard to believe that the booing and throwing of objects onto the track was not just from the locals... Many people paid BIG money to fly themselves over here from the other side of the world on top of a still not very cheap price of admission to the track (although again, very cheap by F1 standards elsewhere). I would be quite angry if I were them. I just had to drive a few hours from my home in Michigan to get to Indianapolis... and that was with a fuel-efficient TDI Volkswagen ;) I wasn't hurting too bad. Plus, unlike most people, I didn't have to pay for lodging. I have a friend who lives within walking distance of the track. I bought he and his girlfriend dinner one night as a thank you, but that's still a hell of a lot cheaper than any other lodging in the area ;)

I felt bad for the track workers. Running around like chickens with their heads cut off to keep the track clean. I watched one piece of debris nearly hit a track worker. When the worker looked down and saw it sitting next to him, he turns around and looks to the crowd. After a moment he points to someone in the stands and starts walking towards him! EVERYONE in the area stands up to watch what's happening, then the track worker backs down as he likely couldn't see the perp anymore... plus with everyone standing up in unison practically it had to be a little intimidating.

Once the race was over, the track workers went through the holes in the fences and zip-stripped them shut so people would not get onto the track. Security was out in force, but no violence broke out (much to my surprise... I expected it to get a lot worse than it did. Half-expected a riot to break out).

Also surprising was the number of fans who stayed to the end. Sure, thousands streamed out of the track after the start, but I estimate that much more than half stayed for the majority of the race. And the few who stuck around afterwards stood up and applauded the track workers as they went around the course on the back of flatbed trucks. I did. They deserved the biggest cheer we could give them for putting up with the displeasure of the fans who boo'd and threw things.

Michelin, the day before the hearings at the Motorsport Counsel in Paris, had volunteered to refund everyone's tickets and also purchase about 20,000 tickets towards next year's race (which is still under contract, but no official word on if IMS will have them back. This is certainly a case which would make breaking the contract a very easy thing to do. I hope F1 does remain at Indy, though).

As for Bernie's efforts to secure GP's in Las Vegas as well as San Fransisco... Good luck! Prior to the GP, he was having difficulty doing it. The Cities in question found it ludicrous that they would have to pay Bernie for him to race on THEIR streets. F1 isn't so desperately wanted/needed in this country. More it's the other way around. F1 needs/wants the U.S. And they just shot themselves in the foot. If Bernie did have any chance prior to this year's USGP to get a race at Las Vegas or San Fran., it's gone now after this fiasco.