I'd like to echo your thanks and to add a link to the manufacturer's webpage for Confor®Cushioning and Impact Absorbing Safety Foam, plus another to their pdf data sheet.Originally Posted by reecie
There are four varieties (colours) and two different grades of this foam. F1 mandate two of the varieties, but it widely used. See the pdf for: Typical applications:
It is available in various grades which provide different performance properties, such as speed of rebound and stiffness, to meet specific design parameters. It provides solutions for many industries and applications, these include:
- Motorsport – it is widely used for headrest and cockpit protection
- Gliders/Light Aircraft – seat cushions for gliders, sailplanes and light aircraft
- Child and baby car seats – padding keeps children safe when they travel
- Aerospace – bulk protection and cruise seats
- Packaging – used for protecting high value electronic devices. Protect components by virtually eliminating the destructive shock energy, absorbing it internally and not returning any of the force to the impacting body
- Sports equipment – padding to help prevent injuries; such as helmets, body protection and footwear
- Medical – Hospital bedding, wheelchair cushions, examination and operating table pads take advantage of CONFOR Foams self-adjusting behaviour – clinically proven to prevent the development or advancement of decubitus ulcers in high risk patients
Motorsportweek.com now suggesting that Jean Todt is unhappy with Vettel's actions and believes the penalty was inappropriate.
It it is reported that further action is under consideration and a decision should be made prior to the Austrian GP.
We will see, given that it's Ferrari I'm not holding my breath!
Maybe he'll get points on his license? Not too clued up about they work. Is it 12 points and then you start getting grid penalties?
He's already received three points for the offence. Apparently he's up to eleven now but two to come off before Silverstone.
Stewards have already given three points for this transgression bringing Vettel's total up to nine. Should he reach twelve points within a year a one race ban is imposed, I believe.
Is should think so too, particularly as he is a UN Special Envoy for Road Safety.
Sniff Petrol take on things...
http://sniffpetrol.com/2017/06/27/ye.../#.WVOggevyv0M
I read on FB (I think it was),someone suggesting that when Vettel came up alongside Hamilton to barge him his car went slightly ahead of Hamiltons so he should be penalised for overtaking behind the safety car too
Some chat that the FIA are considering further action. Pit lane start for the next race would be nice.
FIA are to hold a meeting on July 3rd to discuss whether any further action is merited.
Decision on due prior to Austrian GP on July 9th.
Whilst I firmly believe a race ban is clearly warranted I won't be surprised if Vettel gets off with a slap on the wrist.
Hefty fine?
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I do hope so. This sort of action needs to punished in a way it deter others. 10 seconds and 3 points on their licence is a joke - an unfunny one.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
The only similar situation in a race I can recall, is Schumacher on Villeneuve. Although I always wondered if the punishment was severe because it was effectively meaningless. Title had gone.
Firstly, and with the benefit of various post-race reports, some of which are supported by access to the telemetry of the cars involved, I'm happy to admit that I got it wrong, and Hamilton did not brake-test Vettel. I believe that Hamilton was backing up the pack, as he was entitled to do, the last section at Baku is very fast between the corner at which the incident occurred and the first Safety Car line and he needed to put some distance between himself and Vettel to prevent Vettel using the slipstream and launching an overtaking manoeuvre into Turn 1.
For Vettel's part, he had a tired engine which had already completed four races (and won two of them), so he needed to take whatever opportunity arose, and didn't want Hamilton to get away from him. He wrongly thought that Hamilton was going to pull away at the exit of the corner, and DRS isn't available for the first two laps after a Safety Car period, so he would have to stick close. He out-thought himself, and the resulting shower of carbon fibre shards meant that his front wing had been badly damaged which would necessitate an unscheduled visit to the pits and cost any chance of victory.
I've stated before that Vettel is one of the more intelligent drivers in Formula 1, and reminds me of Michael Schumacher in his ability to think beyond merely driving the car. Unfortunately, he also shares Schuey's less endearing trait of being susceptible to the "red mist", and his subsequent move on Hamilton was ill-judged, petulant and downright stupid. The resulting penalty, which cost approximately 30 seconds, was the most stringent that the Stewards could apply, short of immediate disqualification, and the incident although stupid happened at low speed (I'm with Jacques Villeneuve on that one), and nobody was in any danger, but the FIA hierarchy's collective memory stretches back as far as Mexico near the end of last season, and they may see fit to subject Vettel to a greater penalty. We'll find out next week. Vettel's apparent inability to accept responsibility for his deliberate action hasn't done him any favours at all.
I hope that this unfortunate and altogether silly and regrettable incident doesn't detract from what has been an excellent scrap for this year's titles. I'm bored of Mercedes having things all their own way.
Respect is due for admitting your mistake in the light of further evidence.
Now, the question for me becomes what level of punishment will be dished out to Vettel, especially in light of his rant at Charlie Whiting in Mexico last year? My money's on a retrospective disqualification from Baku as a suitable punishment and having the least significant effect on the WDC. Having said that, it's not his first infringement and his lack of remorse or even acknowledgment might mean a harsher punishment than if he'd just come out and said 'oops, my bad'.
If such respect is due for admitting the mistake, shouldn't the LH fanboys apologise too considering they were not in possession of telemetry either and sided with their idol?
Asking for a friend.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Watching the race, it was evident fairly quickly from the commentary (who had access to the telemetry) that LH had done nothing wrong.
Seeing it through Vettel's onboard camera did make it look like LH slowed but without sound, it wasn't possible to tell Vettel accelerated.
I was reminded of being at a roundabout when you expect the car in front to go but doesn't. You know you're in the wrong but it doesn't stopped you being annoyed with the car in front!
Even the BBC radio commentary immediately called it as a break test... http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p056xbbw
They also said in that clip that they were accelerating out of turn 16 before then saying Hamilton had stopped. Hardly accurate reporting is it?
No!! Why?? Very simple, because irrespective of whether LH did or did not brake test him Vettel should not have behaved in the way he did. Two wrongs and all that.
However it became very clear (at least to to the C4 commentary team and before the race even completed) that in their opinion LH did not brake test Vettel.
Finally it seems that you (and a few others) were quick to assume that LH was guilty purely on the basis on the ranting of Vettel, He said LH brake tested him and you like a muppet believed him. Doh!
So when are you going to accept YOU were wrong as well?
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
To some degree perhaps (regarding the brake testing) as the visuals alone could quite understandably suggest Hamilton had braked. BUT
Telemetry really wasn't needed to see that following the 1st impact, Vettel had pulled alongside and then deliberately driven into the side of Hamilton's car.
Even if Hamilton had brake tested Vettel, his following actions were unacceptable.
It is these actions that were and are the subject of the Ire of the majority of those who commented IMHO. They certainly were for me.
Apologise for what? Hamilton being the innocent victim of Vettel's psychotic aggression? Even if Hamilton had brake tested Vettel it was no excuse for retaliation. Vettel should have simply told the team to get on to the stewards, not used his car as a weapon.
Vettel has nine points on his licence from four incidents of aggression towards other drivers:
2016 British GP: forced Massa off the track
2016 Malaysia GP: rammed Rosberg
2016 Mexican GP: over-aggressive defence against Ricciardo
2017 Azerbaijan GP: deliberately hit Hamilton
He clearly has an issue controlling himself & this pattern of behaviour needs to be stopped by the FIA. A multiple race ban is entirely appropriate in my view.
Interesting to see what Mr Todt does next week, guess he still remembers Jerez 97 when he was Ferrari team boss and what the punishment was then
Was surprised at Jackie Stewart slightly blaming LH although guess that was before he had the full facts, I quote what he said in 97
“I don’t believe that what Michael did in Spain was acceptable, nor that it should be tolerated. Even in the late ‘90s, there is room in motor racing for morals, for a sense of ethics. If we don’t have that, I don’t believe we have a sport anymore.”
Last edited by TBKBABAB; 29th June 2017 at 15:11.
I think the issue in question wasn't the (non-existent) brake test it was Vettels reaction to it that drove most of the vitriol (certainly my view as a Hamilton fan(boy) was that he didn't do anything wrong but if telemetry showed he did then he should be punished also). Irrespective of the (non-existent) brake test the reaction to it was the main issue.
I'm sorry if you feel I needed to apologise to you. (How's that? ;o)
He does seem to have a poor record of late: F1 Penalty Points...(the dates in the lower table don't tally, especially as we have yet to reach 2018).
Please point me where in my posts I defended SV in the incident. Or blamed LH. Throughout the whole sad affair I suggested that the rules were applied. The stewards applied them during the race despite the howling of those who would lynch SV to make sure he got the WDC instead of losing it to another German. After the race another sanction was decided and I supported that as well. And should the FIA decide another that will sadden me only if it affects the WDC, not because I like or support SV (I really don't) but because we have one of the most interesting championships in a long time and I don't want outside decisions to spoil it. But even saddened I shall still support it because it's the right thing to do.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
If he's penalised, it's his fault. It's not an 'outside decision' affecting the championship. His actions, so the consequences are his to bear.
Dont know where you're assumption comes from that people are making their comments on the basis that they want SV to have a more severe penalty so he doesnt win the WDC.
This isnt about the result of this race or the WDC its purely that what he did is totally unacceptable and would be for whoever the driver was of either car.
It was completely unacceptable. But, if nothing else, it'll spice up the title race. All been a bit too friendly so far.
Up to this point, I don't think I've seen Vettel drive as well as he has this season. Always a feeling that the red Bull was more of a factor than his driving.
Don't forget that the stewards themselves neglected to DSQ Seb on the basis that they didn't want to unduly influence the title race. For me that sets a dangerous precedent in itself. Hence my opinion (others are available) that the punishment wasn't befitting the crime as external factors influenced the punishment and not the transgression in isolation.
IMHO the stewards decision making process should also be looked at in respect of unequal treatment depending on where you are in the title race.
Is that a fact or an opinion? (genuine question)
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
As far as I am concerned they should deal with these things at the race. If that needs a "Vettel rule" creating for deliberate ramming then so be it.
I know you're going to ask for the citation but I believe its fact (I believe in fairies too). There was a report that came from the Stewards that said something like "Car no.5 was nearly disqualified but the most stringent penalty of a 10 second stop-go was decided on so as not to unnecessarily influence the WDC".
I'll try and dig it out.
No need for the exact quote, as I said it was a genuine question.
I thought that the 10s stop and go was the most they could use, and that dsq was in Charlie's hands.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
I believe he should be and needs to be banned from a race. There are lots of fine lines in racing, aggressive overtakes and defending etc. But this was pretty clear, SV deliberately drove into an opponents car due to anger. Regardless of whether he was brake tested or not (and we now know he wasn't) this behaviour is completely unacceptable and a 10s drive through penalty insufficient punishment.
I like SV, he's one of the more 'interesting' guys in F1, but like Hamilton he can be a right tit if things aren't going his way.
I, too, understood that was one of the reasons given.I know you're going to ask for the citation but I believe its fact (I believe in fairies too
I'll try and dig it out.
If my maths is correct had Vettel been black flagged, as I firmly believe should have happened, both he and Hamilton would be level pegging. Thus the stewards reasoning re WDC does not hold water.
I think the 10 Second stop/go was always going to be the strongest the stewards were going to give during the race but that doesn't preclude
subsequent stronger penalties and that is probably the right way to handle it.
In between all of the Vettel-related over-excitement, the "other" F1 story this week is that Ron Dennis has had his personal fortune considerably enhanced and is no longer a McLaren shareholder. Or Director.
To the outsider, Ron appears to have been treated pretty shabbily by his former friends and fellow Directors, but I always had the impression that he must have been difficult to work with, both in the boardroom and in the Formula 1 paddock, and the other shareholders at McLaren certainly didn't hold back when they usurped him last November, and it seemed that his final separation from the organisation which probably owes its very existence to him was only a matter of time.
Ron's shares have, apparently, been bought by Mansour Ojjeh who, like Dennis, previously owned 25% of McLaren and the other shareholder Mumtalakat, the Bahraini Royal Family's sovereign wealth fund. What this means for the future of both the Formula 1 team and the road car business remains to be seen, but Ron's presence and values probably loom large over the polished grey Bond-villain lair that is McLaren's HQ, and will do so for some time to come.
I'm not convinced that he's the sort of character to disappear into the shadows and retire from the public gaze. I wonder what he'll do next? Love him or loathe him, he was certainly a character.
It's a shame to see Ron ousted from the business he built for so many years.
He is a polarising character and, perhaps, did little to help the situation of late but I think he will be sorely missed by McLaren in the time to come.
No further action against Vettel:
https://www.pitpass.com/59484/Offici...ver-Baku-clash
No great surprise really. Guess he must have taken a big pack of chocolate hob-nobs (the good ones!) to the meeting :-)
Spotted earlier:
Posted with tongue firmly pressed to cheek!
The FIA bottled it then? Token effort at appearing to take this seriously while effectively saying you can use your car as a weapon with impunity as long as you feel you've been slighted just beforehand.
Poor show.
It wasn't with impunity, he got a 10 second stop go penelty.
Exactly and it was a non risk mishap.
The poor show is the Hamilton fans moaning about it.
Missing the point, by a country mile. Using your car in that manner, regardless of speed, is unacceptable.
Shows a dreadful bias to not acknowledge this, and to label anyone that does as a Hamilton fan.
For an organisation that claims to focus on road safety to sweep it under the carpet, strange at best. Good job the top guy doesn't have any previous affiliation with Ferrari........
Hopefully everyone can move on, and resume a great battle.
If you read the article, the FIA has acknowledged it as unacceptable and hasn't swept anything under the carpet.
Cheers..
Jase
To be expected from you frankly. Perhaps if you take your anti-Hamilton glasses off you'll see how you're missing the point entirely. Not really surprising however.
Vettel's last infraction was supposedly 'suspended' and that any further incidents would result in sanction.
The ten second stop/go was a result of which infraction? Causing a collision? Dangerous driving? Overtaking under the safety car? (If we want to follow this to it's logical conclusion). Or just lump them all together and give a token slap, only to be served when we call the other car in.
There'll be a lot of drivers looking at this (esp Dani Kvyat) wondering what constitutes fair in terms of penalties.
- - - Updated - - -
Like the last time they threatened to punish Vettel if he was naughty again?
Totally agree, this is a disgraceful decision and will only lead to further accusations of Ferrari International Assistance.
Last year Vettel was told that any further infractions would result in sanctions, clearly this was pure bluff.
As far as I am aware this is the first time Vettel has admitted his responsibility in order to mitigate this offence and, surprise surprise it fooled the FIA.
I wonder if Hamilton had done this whether the outcome would have been the same.
What precedent has been set here?
Last edited by JeremyO; 3rd July 2017 at 21:37.
Acknowledgement, without action, is sweeping it under the carpet (imo).
Moving on, and we now have two races on consecutive weekends, the first being Austria:
Scenic, fast, and a bit odd: only 10 corners, three of which are merely kinks, the circuit is owned by Red Bull and the fast sweeping nature of the circuit played into the home team's hands in the past, but the altitude changes have meant that their under-performing Renault power units have struggled in the hybrid era.
Tyre choices:
Pirelli have now dropped the Hard tyre for the remainder of the season, so the most durable tyre now available is the Medium, although this isn't an option for Austria.
Turns 1 and 3 always create issues in the early laps, and the Stewards usually enforce track limits strictly at Turn 9, especially during Qualifying. It's a power circuit, so Mercedes will have the upper hand, and Williams also tend to go well and could mix it with the Ferraris and Red Bulls in Qualifying.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
