SPOILER - Malaysa GP

1. If a jump start is determined electronically, why is there always such discussion? It should be known before the cars even get to the first turn...case closed. 2. If it came down to Wurz holding a spot that McLaren needed for the Constructor's championship, would he really be expected to give it up? I'm not always a fan of team politics... :( Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +49.67 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

"EldredP" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > 1. If a jump start is determined electronically, why is there always such > discussion? It should be known before the cars even get to the first > turn...case closed. I don't know for sure, but I imagine that the marshals would double check the video tape to be sure it wasn't a technical fault in the transponder. Even so, it seems they do wait quite a while before making their ruling.

[email hidden] says... > > 1. If a jump start is determined electronically, why is there always such > discussion? It should be known before the cars even get to the first > turn...case closed. > Because too many times the "jury" has decided not to punish a driver if he stopped his car before the lights went out. When all five lights were on, Hakkinen saw Schumacher's car twitch a bit (dunno why it would do this, since the 1st gear is engaged much earlier), reacted to this, realized it was a mistake, and stopped his car. Then the lights went out and both MH and MS did pretty much their normal starts. In 1999 Belgian GP Hakkinen got away with it (similar situation, MH on pole, DC second), probably because he blew the start. There would be no latitude for interpretations if they just penalized every driver whose car moves on the grid when one or more red lights are on. > 2. If it came down to Wurz holding a spot that McLaren needed for the > Constructor's championship, would he really be expected to give it up? > I'm not always a fan of team politics... :( > Wurz was still under Benetton contract, not McLaren - even if he tried on the McOveralls during the weekend because of the official announcement and a short promo shoot. Anyways, Unca Flavio would've surely laid vendetta on Wurz, had he willfully helped McLaren on the track. --- Antti Markus Peteri a n t t i @ p e t e r i . n e t

Antti Markus Peteri wrote: > > ... Schumacher's car twitch a bit (dunno why it would do > this, since the 1st gear is engaged much earlier) I thought Matchett's explanation (that during a long light delay the carbon clutch expanded enough to start moving the car) made sense, but I don't understand why, in a discipline as technicaly sophisticated as F1, the teams haven't figured a way to hold the car still. There can be no more critical clutch applications and starting-line reaction times than in drag racing, and those guys figured out how to do it a long time ago -- even during the protracted staging battles one often sees in Pro Stock. Considering the draconian nature of the penalty involved, it would seem that making this "creep" problem go away would be a huge priority for the F1 engineers. Just one of the many mysteries of F1, I guess...

Barton Brown wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> > Antti Markus Peteri wrote: > > > > ... Schumacher's car twitch a bit (dunno why it would do > > this, since the 1st gear is engaged much earlier) > > I thought Matchett's explanation (that during a long light delay the > carbon clutch expanded enough to start moving the car) made sense, but I > don't understand why, in a discipline as technicaly sophisticated as F1, > the teams haven't figured a way to hold the car still.

snip Ask Gerhard Berger and Jean Alesi, Benetton used such a device for a couple of races one season, I've forgotten which one, where you simply applied pressure to the brakes and pushed a button on the steering wheel and the car wouldn't move......and it didn't, not at all as a matter of fact :-), in one race, both of them were stuck on the grid when the field took off because the device didn't release the brakes, hilarious..... Beers and cheers (uncle) Goy "Team Mirage" http://www.teammirage.com/ "The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/ * Spam is for losers who can't get business any other way * "Spamkiller" http://www.spamkiller.com

> > I thought Matchett's explanation (that during a long light delay the > carbon clutch expanded enough to start moving the car) made sense No disrespect to you but this is a GREAT deal of bollocks... Carbon clutch disks are very much the same as carbon brake discs (different size and thickness but same compound and building process). Did you ever heard of carbon brakes being "too hot and thus expanding", the main reason for using carbon brakes and clutches is the fact that carbon takes great temperatures (up to 900�) very easily, with steel brakes you start to have problems at about 700�, that is to say no problems with the discs but with the materail from the brake pad starting to "crumble", with carbon discs you can go almost to 1000� without any problems. If a carbon clutch disk (which is not cooled by air because the gearbox is closed) goes to 1000� after the formation lap at what temperature is it after 50 laps ? 5000� ? I think the car is moving because the driver is "playing" with the clutch, and that's all. More about brakes, brakes discs in competition use if you want, just ask for it

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Antti Markus Peteri) writes:

Quoted text (17 lines)

>[email hidden] says... >> >> 1. If a jump start is determined electronically, why is there always such >> discussion? It should be known before the cars even get to the first >> turn...case closed. >> > >Because too many times the "jury" has decided not to punish a driver if >he stopped his car before the lights went out. When all five lights were >on, Hakkinen saw Schumacher's car twitch a bit (dunno why it would do >this, since the 1st gear is engaged much earlier), reacted to this, >realized it was a mistake, and stopped his car. Then the lights went out >and both MH and MS did pretty much their normal starts. In 1999 Belgian >GP Hakkinen got away with it (similar situation, MH on pole, DC second), >probably because he blew the start. There would be no latitude for >interpretations if they just penalized every driver whose car moves on >the grid when one or more red lights are on.

So make it inclusive - if the car moves while the red lights are on, you get a penalty, period. That includes vehicle malfunction and/or driver error. That way, you don't have to *worry* about interpretations. I guarantee, if it was stated(and enforced *as* stated), you wouldn't have any problems. I just don't like the 'arbitrary' enforcement - I don't care WHICH driver gets it.... Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +49.67 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <HK_I5.785$[email hidden]>, "Txl" <[email hidden]> writes:

Quoted text (7 lines)

> >Did you ever heard of carbon brakes being "too hot and thus expanding", the >main reason for using carbon brakes and clutches is the fact that carbon >takes great temperatures (up to 900�) very easily, with steel brakes you >start to have problems at about 700�, that is to say no problems with the >discs but with the materail from the brake pad starting to "crumble", with >carbon discs you can go almost to 1000� without any problems.

I have heard of them not working at all until they have been warmed up. If there is that much difference, then you have to design it to work at a certain temperature. Brakes can be warmed up and will stay fairly warm, a clutch is only used four times in two hours, so must be designed to work when relatively cool. >If a carbon clutch disk (which is not cooled by air because the gearbox is >closed) goes to 1000� after the formation lap at what temperature is it >after 50 laps ? 5000� ? It doesn't go up in temperature due to the formation lap, it goes up because of the time sitting still on the grid when it is slipping. Once underway, it will be at engine temperature, probably 300 degrees or so. Don McCorkle

"Woodie 83" <[email hidden]> a �crit dans le message news: [email hidden]... > In article <HK_I5.785$[email hidden]>, > "Txl" <[email hidden]> writes: > > > I have heard of them not working at all until they have been warmed up.If > there is that much difference, then you have to design it to work at acertain > temperature. Brakes can be warmed up and will stay fairly warm, a clutchis > only used four times in two hours, so must be designed to work whenrelatively > cool. >That's what I say, the point was that ferrari said the clutch disk expanded because of temperature....after 1 lap ? BOLLOCKS..... The car moved because shumi's foot shrinked because of air conditioning in his racing boot

In article <%WAJ5.2446$[email hidden]>, "Txl" <[email hidden]> writes: >> >That's what I say, the point was that ferrari said the clutch disk expanded >because of temperature....after 1 lap ? BOLLOCKS..... > As I said, it has nothing to do with how far or how long the car has been driven. The heat is created by the clutch slipping while sitting still. Once it is released and the car is under way, you could drive until the wheels fall off and it will never get above engine temperature. Also, it wasn't Ferrari who said this, it was a TV commentator who used to be a mechanic for Benneton. He was trying to explain one possible reason why the McLaren had jumped the start. Don McCorkle

On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 17:40:55 GMT, "Txl" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (15 lines)

>> >> I thought Matchett's explanation (that during a long light delay the >> carbon clutch expanded enough to start moving the car) made sense > >No disrespect to you but this is a GREAT deal of bollocks... > >Carbon clutch disks are very much the same as carbon brake discs (different >size and thickness but same compound and building process). > >Did you ever heard of carbon brakes being "too hot and thus expanding", the >main reason for using carbon brakes and clutches is the fact that carbon >takes great temperatures (up to 900�) very easily, with steel brakes you >start to have problems at about 700�, that is to say no problems with the >discs but with the materail from the brake pad starting to "crumble", with >carbon discs you can go almost to 1000� without any problems.

Actually, from what I hear carbon fiber brakes are pretty finicky, and requires special techniques to be driven on the limit. When a regular brake tend to fade during braking(due to higher temperature), the carbon-fiber "sieze up" more, if applying the same brake pressure during the braking. Or so I've heard... If that's because of expanding or anything, I don't know... >If a carbon clutch disk (which is not cooled by air because the gearbox is >closed) goes to 1000� after the formation lap at what temperature is it >after 50 laps ? 5000� ? I'd gather the clutch is perfectly fine and cool when clammed shut. >I think the car is moving because the driver is "playing" with the clutch, >and that's all. Maybe... Though I've heard(I hear alot don't I? :) that the clutches of F1's and CART's are very much on/off, and most just have buttons on the steering wheel for it. >More about brakes, brakes discs in competition use if you want, just ask for >it Ok. /Magnus GPLRank hcp: -22.09