I feel the tyres won't change till Alonso and vettel have blow outs. The teams are to self centred about gaining advantages and the FIA is to weak to do what's best for the sport. Its like having no front crumble zone and not doing anything because no ones had a head on collision
It's not just controlling the car, but also the debris. Alonso and Kimi had close calls. Also, it all depends where the tyre erupts as to if the driver can control it.
http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1...sh-GP-overshadowed-by-left-rear-tyre-failures Good little video with Davidson on there. He highlights Rosberg's tyre starting to delaminate just after Vettel retired, he's so lucky that safety car came out when it did. He also brings up the steel belt thing Forza mentioned.
Bellend. I wonder if he's that frivolous with safety concerns on his planes. please log in to view this image
Is there some veto against suggesting that the failures were a combination of the tyre construction AND the Silverstone kerbs AND drivers (like Massa) who habitually go beyond the edge of the racetrack? And that ALL THREE problems need to be addressed?
The tyres have to be able to cope with everything thrown at them. Someone on Autosport was saying they should be designed with an enormous safety tolerance, like the cables on a ten person lift being designed to carry 100. It's no good Pirelli saying the tyres can cope with the cornering loads etc, they have to be able to cope with kerbs and bumps and debris. Other tyre manufacturers (and Pirelli themselves in previous years) have designed tyres that can withstand the abuse thrown at them, there have been 20 tyre failures this season, it's not good enough. If they can't be run on kerbs or by aggressive drivers, they shouldn't be used in F1. Someone posted on another forum that blaming the track for the tyres failing is like blaming a source of heat for your chocolate fire guard melting.
So, by that argument, any puncture caused by contact between cars or debris is also the fault of the tyre?
I didn't say every puncture is the fault of the tyre. The tyres are too easily damaged. There's been 20 failures in 8 races. It's not like they're being caused by exceptional circumstances, the tyres can be destroyed by commonly occurring features of race tracks.
"The tyres have to be able to cope with everything thrown at them" All I am saying is that it is a combination of factors and that all the blame cannot be loaded onto one single element.
I expected this to happen tbh, after Spain I had a gut feeling this was going to be worse at Silverstone.
I am new to posting here, but I have been reading all the posts on formula 1 here for a long time.. I just want to ask a silly question.. If all the teams had agreed to do the tyre test when Pirelli asked them some time before do you think they would be having this problem now? I am thinking more and more that Mercedes did the right thing when they did the tyre test - all the other teams were asked according to Pirelli and only two teams took it up. The thing is would it make sense testing the tyres without a car that isn't current? Would the feedback and data be relevant? I am not sure. I think all the teams should have made an effort to assist Pirelli by agreeing to do the tyre test and I am sure there wouldnt have been any secret tests and certainly any tyregate. I am just saying... So all the teams that were so against Mercedes must be secretly thinking....Maybe Mercedes were right to do that test..maybe we should have helped too... What do you think?
Welcome to the forum! This is a thought that I had considered myself. I didn't manage to put it in my initial post but it speaks volumes that the teams are now clamouring for a tyre test which should by rights have happened weeks ago!
http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1...Pirelli-to-conduct-two-tyre-tests-immediately Ecclestone talking some ****.
As far as I know, Red Bull were the only team who turned it down, and they did that because the test was clearly illegal, not because they didn't want to help Pirelli. Any team would bite Pirelli's hand off to do an illegal three day test and get away with it. Also Mercedes didn't do the test out of the kindness of their hearts, they did it to gain an advantage, and they've gained a massive advantage in doing so.
I do wonder if in fixing one problem, that Pirelli have made another. The failures this weekend looked different to me to previous ones. In Spain, the centre of the type was ripping out, which looked to my very untrained eye like the belt failing. If it's true they changed the construction, that would make sense as it looked like a different kind of failure this weekend. To me, it seemed like the failures were starting in the sidewall, either due to cuts or excessive strain. From Andersons look at the kerbs, it definitely looked like there was an edge that could be causing damage. As to where we go from here, there isn't time to change the tyres before next weekend, so any concession to the tyres has to come through regulations. Saying cars must keep all 4 wheels on the black stuff is the simplest I can think of, although hard to enforce.
The obvious solution is to use last season's tyres, they've been tried and tested extensively and proven safe. If they develop a new tyre how can they be sure it's safe? They'll have to do extensive testing which in itself is going to cause all sorts of controversy, and if the new tyres fail in the test what do they do? Keep using the current ones while they come up with another solution? They have to change to the 2012 tyres from Hungary onwards, it would probably be impossible to manufacture enough for Germany at such short notice.
TomTom: that is a super bit of writing. Not only do you highlight several important factors, as well as hinting at the possible reasons behind them; it is also well thought out and very well presented. Unfortunately the rep system will not allow me to add the credit you deserve. I've not yet read the responses but this must rank amongst the best articles seen in this forum for a long time. Quality.
Good points here AG. Incidentally, Räikkönen was struck on the helmet by debris. My understanding is that this debris was not just rubber and kevlar, but included shards of carbon fibre. With regard to your comment about drivers, Crow; it's nice to see you hold them in such high regard. However, the outcome very much depends on the situation where the incident occurs, as well as how much time and space a driver has; i.e. proximity to objects, including other cars. For instance, before the car is brought under control, there will normally be at least some swerving. If another car is close, the possible outcome should be obvious. On top of this, as pointed out by AG (above), flying debris is a massively unpredictable danger. Ferrari always demand a bigger slice of cake; and I agree: too much cake can become sickening⦠I think your last sentence about Pirelli's remit is important, Crow; but surely you see that F1 can only "move on now, and stop slagging off Pirelliâ¦" by addressing the problem? Of course, addressing the problem very much does need it to be spoken about! Presumably this is also why you feel that taking part in TomTom's important discussion is a good thing. I've read other responses to this comment, which appear very reasonable. Would it be rude of me to suggest that you cannot be serious?! I also saw some disapproval of Health and Safety, suggesting you really mean what I've quoted here! Health and Safety is about prevention; dead people cannot be cured.
