So When Will Pirelli Bring Better Tires ?

[Massa 0]

A concern for driver safety and an enjoyment of this era of F1 are not mutually exclusive.

To say that F1 2012-present as a whole has been great does not mean every moment has been. Even golden ages have flaws, and today's race, for me, was quite the flaw. How to address that, I do not know. I'm not an expert, but I suspect there's probably a way out there to have tires that allow for different cars and drivers with different strengths and weaknesses to sensibly employ different strategies in a race without compromising safety. Maybe, instead of outright softness, relative softness of the two compounds (i.e. bigger steps between them) would accomplish that (re-worded, make all four compounds stronger, but then pair Soft with Hard and Super-Soft with Medium instead of just one step on tracks where this isn't impossibly dumb).

Now, about tire competition, because people bring that up. There are potential disasters there:

1. Unregulated competition always has consequences, and we see that in our every day lives. Competition can be a safety issue. This happened in NASCAR in 1994; they had two suppliers. One supplier, Hoosier, pushed too hard and had to withdraw after a fatal accident. Would it get that far in F1? Maybe, maybe not. But the point is, competition can cause suppliers to push too hard and create a mess...

...so you say, hey, regulate it. But if you regulate it so much, why not just have one supplier? It's more efficient to have one if you are going to give an operating window to the suppliers in which they must stay.

2. Unregulated competition can lead to non-competition. You want more market share, but if you get all the market share, there's no competition anymore. Let's say Google, Bing, and Dogpile decided to supply tires. Eventually, the superiority of Google's tires will be realized, and all the teams will want to have them. Thus, we end up with as ole supplier...

...so you say, no, that won't happen. Fine. It usually doesn't; you're right. Instead, it just creates haves and have-nots, which is part of competition, and part of why we race. But is it more satisfying to say "Red Bull beat Marussia by a large margin because Red Bull's car was designed to do that and its drivers are the best" or "Red Bull beat Marussia because Red Bull has Google tires and Marussia got stuck with Dogpile ones?" I'd rather the haves and have-nots be created by their own doing because then their is control. If everything holding Marussia back is Marussia's doing, Marussia can, theoretically, make the changes to catch up. If you are stuck with a tire supplier, you can't really do anything about it.

3. Competition pursues the optimum. The optimum is pretty boring. The optimum is a tire that can do qualifying laps for the entire 190-mile race and never drop off. If you let them compete long enough, they'll get there. And when they do, all strategy will be removed from racing. For me, strategy is the biggest appeal of any sport. You'd lose a lot without strategy.

At the end of the day, I think there needs to be something to keep teams honest. This isn't the old era where competition means wild experimentation and monstrous cars. Competition in racing now just means everyone discovering the same exact things and converging on a very boring reality. Risks aren't rewarded anymore; they're punished. So you need to do something to create an environment where teams can do different things and be willing to take that chance. Having a sole supplier provide different compounds for a race has been an easy way to do that.

We are seeing consequences of it, of course. No one denies that. But it's not the system, having one supplier with a required two-compound race, that is broken. It is the execution of that system. We should perfect this system so that we can balance exciting racing without creating any more danger than we already have. We need not scrap it entirely. Maybe Pirelli can't be the supplier to achieve that, maybe they can. We'll see.

[Rainmaster 7]

Well said that man.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

Well done again Pirell for tire explosions all over Great Britain.

Just imagine if they had been filled with custard.....

[Quiet One 15]

Spot on Eric. I just didn't know Google made tires!

[radical-one 0]

For next week's race in Germany, the race official will say instead of let the races begin, "Let the Tire Explosions begin"

If this isn't Pirelli being SUB-PARR , I don't know what is.

Pirelli OUT , Michelelin IN !

'I almost red-flagged race' – Whiting

30 June 2013

Formula 1 race director Charlie Whiting has revealed that the British Grand Prix was close to being red-flagged, with four drivers suffering left-rear tyre failures.

Whiting, who deployed the Safety Car following the third tyre-related incident involving Jean-Éric Vergne, argued that alongside the danger to drivers, marshals were being put under increasing risk as they attempted to clear away the mass of debris.

"It was quite close to being red-flagged; it did occur to me to do that," said Whiting. "To clear up all the debris was putting marshals at risk, and it is not satisfactory. We haven't seen a failure like this before – and that is what has been addressed. So we need to analyse it very carefully to see if we are able to establish the cause."

Whiting said it is "too early to draw conclusions" as to the cause of the issues, but reckons tyres that did not fail could provide vital clues for sole tyre supplier Pirelli.

"It is too early to draw any conclusions," he said. "They have a lot of analysing to do. This includes the tyres that didn't fail, because maybe we will find something there that was on the verge of failing that will give us a better indicator of what happened."

Whiting added that although the failures will discussed at a meeting of the Sporting Working Group on Wednesday, a solution that suits all parties needs to be found in advance, with the German Grand Prix at the Nürburgring taking place on the weekend.

[radical-one 0]

Why don't we listen to the drivers rather than assuming that Pirreli tires makes for more excitement ?

Drivers talk of boycott

30/06/2013

While the FIA has promised a thorough investigation into the tyre problems that threatened the British Grand Prix, drivers are already talking of a possible boycott should the situation not be resolved to their satisfaction... and soon.

In the wake of today's race, a number of drivers were clearly angry, demanding that the situation be resolved as soon as possible.

Amongst these was Lewis Hamilton whose race, much to the dismay of the crowd, was wrecked when his left-rear tyre exploded on the eighth lap of the race whilst leading.

"That's the first time in my whole career that I've felt the danger," said theMercedes driver who subsequently recovered to finish fourth. "You are just trying to drive and do your best to look after the tyres, but I don't think this is about looking after tyres, it's a much bigger problem. The car becomes very loose and out of control, you have to fight to keep it in a straight line.

"I am sure Pirelli and the FIA will react to today's incidents," he added. "I'd be surprised if they don't. But it needs to be done straight away. I had a lot of damage on my car at the end, on the floor and was losing a huge amount of downforce so it surprised me that we still had that kind of pace. I have no doubts that we would have had a one-two today."

"I think what's happened today is unacceptable, because we are talking about safety," said Felipe Massa who was injured when hit by a spring that fell fromRubens Barrichello's car in Hungary in 2009. "What happened today was very dangerous for us.

"This is not the first race it has happened. I already had two (failures) inBahrain. Many others have had problems before. It was not just this track, with this debris. They need to do something for our safety.

"We were lucky that all the places it happened the driver was able to carry on and not to crash," he added. "For sure there are places here where if it had happened, maybe it can be much more dangerous."

Asked if he and his fellow drivers might consider a race boycott, he said: "Well, for sure we are going to discuss that. I am 100% sure that every driver is complaining about today.

"I don't want to say that now," he continued referring to the threat of a boycott, "because I don't want to create loads of problems but this is something that, for our safety, we can do."

"It was not dangerous this time because it happened on the straight," saidSergio Perez who suffered a failure in the final stages of the race when his car was running much lighter having used most of its fuel, "but it could have been really serious. We are risking our lives and if something like this happens again, we don’t want one of us to be killed.”

In a subsequent statement, FIA president Jean Todt revealed that Pirelli has been summoned to a meeting of the Sporting Working Group in Paris on Wednesday, in order that "it take the necessary measures to deal with this issue that poses a safety problem.

"Our priority is the safety of the drivers,” it added. "This is why we have asked for an immediate proposal after the analysis.”

Check out our Grand Prix gallery, here.

[radical-one 0]

Poor Lewis, He would have won his first race with Merc if it wasn't for Pirelli sub-parr tires.

Lewis : Shame on you Pirelli !

Hamilton: It's unacceptable

Sunday 30th June 2013

Hamilton: It's unacceptable

Lewis Hamilton has labelled the Pirelli tyres a safety concern after he was one of three drivers to suffer a rear puncture during the British Grand Prix on Sunday.

The Briton was leading the race when his left rear tyre punctured on just the eighth lap of the race. Ferrari's Felipe Massa was the next to fall victim to tyre woe as he suffered the same fate three laps later, only for Jean-Eric Vergne's Toro Rosso to lose its left rear in spectacular fashion on lap 15.

Hamilton recovered to finish fourth, but the Mercedes man didn't mince his words when assessing the tyre situation.

"The safety is the biggest issue, it's unacceptable," he is quoted as saying by the BBC.

"We had that tyre test to improve the tyre and to have four blowouts is unacceptable. It's only when someone gets hurt that someone will be doing something about it. I think it's a waste of time talking to the FIA, and if they don't do anything that says a lot about them."

The 28-year-old was slightly more relaxed immediately after the race, telling the team: "Great job guys this weekend, just a shame about the tyre."

[Quiet One 15]

Pirelli should go. Not because they are at fault, but because they don't deserve taking all the flak because of some idiotic decision made by the teams and FIA with no foreseeing whatsoever.

The premise? Make Sh#tty tires with no testing whatsoever and hope by some miraculous intervention they will be bad enough to make races fun but not bad enough to be a safety hazard, nor safe enough to be a bridgestone procession racing revival.

On the other hand, they DO deserve all the flak for accepting such a ridiculous premise.

[radical-one 0]

Heard rumors that Pirelli will rename their tires really soon.

It will be called - Pirelli SP = SP stands for SUB Pirellis

Apparently, it will create more excitement in the races to come - more Explosions than 4th of July fireworks

[Quiet One 15]

Two more intriguing points:

1) No idea what this means, as the drivers seemed pretty upset at the end of the race, but...have you noticed that we heard not a single radio from the drivers requesting the race to be red flagged? Even though in previous races they asked for it (because of rain).

2) All the time the failures on the tires were refered to as "cuts". That doesn't sound like a delamination problem or am I wrong?

[Emmcee 0]

I can't understand why they blame the kerbs. The kerbs were the same all weekend, it has nothing to do with that IMO as for the cuts, they could have come from anything, debris from webber and grosjean incident anything. I think they were overheating due to the enormous strain placed on them through the big speed corners. Monza will be the same if something isn't done. That's just my opinion, if it was the kerbs alot more issues would have happened, especially alonso who was attacking those kerbs like a qualifying session.

[The Shadow 0]

I think 2012 was the year where the tyres had the best balance of excitement and safety.

More relevant, Pirelli DID want to bring a new, safer tyre compound from Canada onwards- but no! the teams wouldn't have any of it. Blaming Pirelli solely for what happened yesterday is shameful behaviour.

The teams blocking that compound and construction change should also share the flak for what happened. Fernando was right when he said that those on the podium were the lucky ones because they caught the problems just before they got disastrous

Side note: "Kimi is faster than you"

[Emmcee 0]

Yeah as soon as grosjean flies down the inside before the fast chicanes. Bit of Ferrari in all of them

[Jean-Pierre 0]

They better bring new tires very soon or someone is going to be injured or killed. Fernando was lucky this time.

[radical-one 0]

They better bring new tires very soon or someone is going to be injured or killed. Fernando was lucky this time.

Been pointing this out since April.

Some people thinks that excitement brought by Sub-pirelli is more important than Driver's safety. How sad.

Had something bad happen to Massa last weekend, I would have burn Pirelli factory myself

[radical-one 0]

I can't understand why they blame the kerbs. The kerbs were the same all weekend, it has nothing to do with that IMO as for the cuts, they could have come from anything, debris from webber and grosjean incident anything. I think they were overheating due to the enormous strain placed on them through the big speed corners. Monza will be the same if something isn't done. That's just my opinion, if it was the kerbs alot more issues would have happened, especially alonso who was attacking those kerbs like a qualifying session.

Kerbs my butt. It's Sub-Pirellis. No more lame excuses for Sub-pirellis. 4 Drivers and probably more where put in danger. What else is there to say ?

People who thinks that Sub-pirrelis are not at fault are plain ignorant or under Pirelli's payroll. Enuff said

[The Shadow 0]

Looks more likely that the tyres were vulnerable at the end of their stints. Looking at Vergne and Perez's slow-mo replays it seems to be a delamination between the tyre surface and the "belts" and not a decompression before that, so probably not a puncture situation but a tyre failure. On safety grounds, a new spec tyre should be used to prevent it happening again at other venues.

The new spec tyre that was to be introduced for the weekend had a kevlar belt (similar to 2012), used a different binding agent (possibly due to the use of the kevlar belt) but still retained similar rubber compounds as the current tyre. That specification of tyre would have possibly averted the dramatic issues affecting yesterday's race.

The reasons (as far as I could glean them from pundits) that the tyres were vetoed against were that the tyres having a kevlar belt would alter the aerodynamic properties of the cars because at speed they would be shaped differently. Second objection to them were the fact that Mercedes were seen to be gaining an advantage upon their adoption due to the tyre test in Spain, because -reasonably, no other team would want to be bringing a knife to a gunfight, and testing is the best ammo a F1 team can get in that particular gunfight

[pabloh20 1]

Two more intriguing points:

1) No idea what this means, as the drivers seemed pretty upset at the end of the race, but...have you noticed that we heard not a single radio from the drivers requesting the race to be red flagged? Even though in previous races they asked for it (because of rain).

2) All the time the failures on the tires were refered to as "cuts". That doesn't sound like a delamination problem or am I wrong?

1. Yes, a bit odd that. Wonder if was because the teams told them around the time of the first failures to stay off the kerbs? Maybe they thought it was track issue rather than a tyre issue. Also possible they thought somebody else would stop the race if it was a safety concern, which, by all accounts, Whiting was close to doing.

2. No, that's what they were suggesting each time as far as I could hear as well. We have had a few delamination issues this season, but nothing like this. I heard reference to grids (as in drainage grids) being changed at the circuit which might not have been inspected as part of the pre-race track inspection, but I haven't seen any suggestion that this may have been the cause and indeed I have not seen anywhere they could have been going over the grids. There is also a suggestion some of the kerbs could have been 'sharp', but again I have not heard anything saying that these have been changed to previous years. The fact that we have not had this number of issues before in a race would suggest something on the track caused it, or there was something different with the tyres, maybe a bad batch?

[pabloh20 1]

Been pointing this out since April.

Some people thinks that excitement brought by Sub-pirelli is more important than Driver's safety. How sad.

Had something bad happen to Massa last weekend, I would have burn Pirelli factory myself

I don't think safety has been an issue before today, certainly no more than any other season. The debate over how long they last, etc, aside and if this constitutes a sub-standard tyre is a different argument, I think.

[pabloh20 1]

Looks more likely that the tyres were vulnerable at the end of their stints. Looking at Vergne and Perez's slow-mo replays it seems to be a delamination between the tyre surface and the "belts" and not a decompression before that, so probably not a puncture situation but a tyre failure. On safety grounds, a new spec tyre should be used to prevent it happening again at other venues.

The new spec tyre that was to be introduced for the weekend had a kevlar belt (similar to 2012), used a different binding agent (possibly due to the use of the kevlar belt) but still retained similar rubber compounds as the current tyre. That specification of tyre would have possibly averted the dramatic issues affecting yesterday's race.

The reasons (as far as I could glean them from pundits) that the tyres were vetoed against were that the tyres having a kevlar belt would alter the aerodynamic properties of the cars because at speed they would be shaped differently. Second objection to them were the fact that Mercedes were seen to be gaining an advantage upon their adoption due to the tyre test in Spain, because -reasonably, no other team would want to be bringing a knife to a gunfight, and testing is the best ammo a F1 team can get in that particular gunfight

I think it's a reasonable argument from the teams, to be honest. As I said above, I don't think safety has been a real concern until yesterday's race. I guess there will be a lot of finger pointing for a while, considering what has happened the last few weeks. It will be interesting to see what the investigation turns up.

If it is a tyre construction issue, maybe the best solution is for all the teams to be able to do the same test as Merc, obviously with Merc being excluded and then the tyre being updated in accordance with the data they obtain.

As a side note, I wonder if any of the teams have been running the tyres outside the recommended Pirelli specs, as has been suggested in previous years?

[Quiet One 15]

1. Yes, a bit odd that. Wonder if was because the teams told them around the time of the first failures to stay off the kerbs? Maybe they thought it was track issue rather than a tyre issue. Also possible they thought somebody else would stop the race if it was a safety concern, which, by all accounts, Whiting was close to doing.

2. No, that's what they were suggesting each time as far as I could hear as well. We have had a few delamination issues this season, but nothing like this. I heard reference to grids (as in drainage grids) being changed at the circuit which might not have been inspected as part of the pre-race track inspection, but I haven't seen any suggestion that this may have been the cause and indeed I have not seen anywhere they could have been going over the grids. There is also a suggestion some of the kerbs could have been 'sharp', but again I have not heard anything saying that these have been changed to previous years. The fact that we have not had this number of issues before in a race would suggest something on the track caused it, or there was something different with the tyres, maybe a bad batch?

1) We are forgetting another option: the "FIArrari-Ecclestone-Pirelli-Gestapo-CIA Conspiracy" err..Conspiracy. Maybe "they" told the drivers not to complaint or simply censored their comunications so as not to damage F1 reputation. Or something like that!

2) Another thing you just made me realize: Same cars, same tires, same track, except for FP1, I think. Yet, besides Perez case in FP3, there was no ther case in the pre race sessions. Some factor must have changed between those and the race itself.

No idea...what it seems obvious at least to me is that this is not obvious. At least to me.

Am I clear?

[pabloh20 1]

1) We are forgetting another option: the "FIArrari-Ecclestone-Pirelli-Gestapo-CIA Conspiracy" err..Conspiracy. Maybe "they" told the drivers not to complaint or simply censored their comunications so as not to damage F1 reputation. Or something like that!

2) Another thing you just made me realize: Same cars, same tires, same track, except for FP1, I think. Yet, besides Perez case in FP3, there was no ther case in the pre race sessions. Some factor must have changed between those and the race itself.

No idea...what it seems obvious at least to me is that this is not obvious. At least to me.

Am I clear?

1. Ermmmm yes

2. Good point. I believe Perez's failure in free practice was due to a new part on the car cutting through the tyre, so I heard? If that is the case, then you are talking about no similar failures in free practice and qualifying, then all hell breaks loose in the race.

[Massa 0]

Pirelli should go. Not because they are at fault, but because they don't deserve taking all the flak because of some idiotic decision made by the teams and FIA with no foreseeing whatsoever.

The premise? Make Sh#tty tires with no testing whatsoever and hope by some miraculous intervention they will be bad enough to make races fun but not bad enough to be a safety hazard, nor safe enough to be a bridgestone procession racing revival.

On the other hand, they DO deserve all the flak for accepting such a ridiculous premise.

Yeah. Pirelli deserve both a lot of praise for being willing to do this, and a lot of questions for being willing to do this.

Ironically, in America, the teams all miss Pirelli now that they're gone, talking about how it was a superior tire with more grip and more speed than the rock-hard Continentals they run now.

I think 2012 was the year where the tyres had the best balance of excitement and safety.

More relevant, Pirelli DID want to bring a new, safer tyre compound from Canada onwards- but no! the teams wouldn't have any of it. Blaming Pirelli solely for what happened yesterday is shameful behaviour.

The teams blocking that compound and construction change should also share the flak for what happened. Fernando was right when he said that those on the podium were the lucky ones because they caught the problems just before they got disastrous.

Agreed.

The problem with 2012, though, is that the teams knew those tires. They were figured out. They wouldn't have been a variable if you brought them back in 2013 because they were already mastered. So, a change had to be made...we'll find out soon enough if the changes made were too much. But I think if you don't change the tires year-to-year, it will get stale. How you make those changes without compromising safety will be the key if Pirelli is ever back again.

As for the teams, yeah, what a mess. They reject the changes after demanding them, and now demand more. They're right to demand them this time assuming there is something in these tires that is going to cause a risk of this to happen again, but they're so wrong to pretend this isn't of their doing, either.

Some people thinks that excitement brought by Sub-pirelli is more important than Driver's safety. How sad.

Had something bad happen to Massa last weekend, I would have burn Pirelli factory myself

That's wrong. It's flat wrong. There is no factual basis for saying that people care more about the excitement than safety. Everyone here cares about safety in my experience with past discussions of safety.

What everyone here doesn't do, however, is jump to conclusions. We need to wait for their findings on what caused this, and see the potential solutions. It's hard to say "Pirelli is a safety risk" if it turns out some other factor caused this. Likewise, it's hard to say "we need to do this" until we know what's actually a doable option for a race weekend that starts in under five days. I don't think it's that people don't care about safety; we do care. It's just a matter of being patient, and a matter of not wanting to go to extremes over this. Let's take a measured action that can pose no additional safety risk to the drivers/marshals/fans/crew members/etc. without completely reinventing the nature of the series mid-season if such action exists. We have to see if they find that. If there is no balance to be found, I think most all of us would say, "fine, go to the side of safety" if that is real, and not just perceived, safety. But I would bet a balance can be found, one that makes the racing no more dangerous and no less exciting. Now, will it be found in five days? No idea. Having a Grand Prix this weekend may necessitate the foresight to make a temporary decision and work out a permanent solution before Hungary or during the August break. Unfortunately, I get the feeling the FIA will do something permanent in a rush.

Proposing (even jokingly) to commit arson against a factory filled with guiltless workers in a post about safety and protecting others, for what it's worth, is classic irony.

Kerbs my butt. It's Sub-Pirellis. No more lame excuses for Sub-pirellis. 4 Drivers and probably more where put in danger. What else is there to say ?

People who thinks that Sub-pirrelis are not at fault are plain ignorant or under Pirelli's payroll. Enuff said

Ignorance is concluding without analysis. More than likely, there is something going on with the tires. But let's see the facts; in light of those facts, all of us will make better conclusions. It could be a combination of many things.

Looks more likely that the tyres were vulnerable at the end of their stints.

Vergne, in particular, had been on that set for much longer than anyone else had wanted to go on those tires.

I don't think safety has been an issue before today, certainly no more than any other season. The debate over how long they last, etc, aside and if this constitutes a sub-standard tyre is a different argument, I think.

Agreed.

[rwgordon 0]

Is anyone still arguing that the current batch of tyres are fine and make for good racing? That Red Bull should stop complaining and everyone else is fine with the tyres (even though they were spared explosions)?

[radical-one 0]

JULY 1, 2013

F1 begins to respond to tyre-exploding crisis

The world of formula one has already begun to respond to the crisis triggered by Sunday's tyre-exploding British grand prix.

Earlier this year, because Pirelli insisted the problem was merely aesthetic rather than a matter of safety, a few teams blocked moves to introduce a new tyre to stop delaminations.

Red Bull designer Adrian Newey, hitting out at those resisting teams including Lotus, Ferrari and Force India, blamed the Silverstone chaos on their "short-sightedness".

"It's a sad state of affairs but such is the nature of formula one, really," he is quoted by the Telegraph.

However, Lotus team boss Eric Boullier has reacted immediately to Silverstone by insisting that because it is now a safety issue, the team will no longer block any changes.

And Telegraph correspondent Tom Cary said on Monday that Ferrari and Force India have also now acknowledged "that safety came before their own competitive interests".

Nonetheless, Force India owner Vijay Mallya has been quoted as questioning the seriousness of the tyre explosions, while Lotus' Alan Permane told Auto Motor und Sport that Kimi Raikkonen and Romain Grosjean had no problems at all on Sunday.

Force India sporting director Otmar Szafnauer added: "We had no problems.

"Maybe it's because we adhere strictly to Pirelli's guidelines regarding tyre pressures and camber."

The most immediate issue for F1, however, is how to react to the Silverstone crisis just days ahead of the next race at the Nurburgring.

A step in the right direction is the immediate decision to relax F1's strict testing ban for Pirelli.

Sir Jackie Stewart is quoted by the Daily Mail: "They've got to open up the regulations and do as many tests as they need to drive in order to feel comfortable their (Pirelli's) tyres are durable."

Indeed, Germany's DPA news agency said the most powerful men in F1 - Bernie Ecclestone and FIA president Jean Todt - met at Silverstone and arranged for Pirelli to be able to conduct two three-day tests.

F1 chief executive Ecclestone said Pirelli can even use 2013 cars, even though the Italian marque's recent test with Mercedes was scolded by the FIA.

"They can use what they like," said Ecclestone. "No restrictions. None at all, so they can do what they want."