Cable Forum - View Single Post

MovedGoalPosts · 21-06-2005, 01:53

I think Michelen have no doubt that they messed up. I don't think naivety came into it. They just got their sums wrong. Plain and simple.

Problem is that affected the majority of teams. Tyres are just about the only "common" component in F1. Everything else the teams do is independent. Yes some teams have had parts that may not be reliable in the past, but that places the individual team with that fault at a disadvantage, the rest are free to get on with the job.

The problem here is that Michelin were virtually certain that their tyres would not last. Moreover they knew that if they failed, ther probability would be when they were under most stress, repeating a crash that had already ocurred, with possibly far more serious consequences. IN today's liable world I don't see that Michelen had any other choice but to put their hands up and admit the tyres were unsafe. Comparisons with Boeing, etc just don't relate especially when you consider all the efforts made by airlines to get a high safety record.

The issue is thus not so much that Michelin had a fault, but how F1, the teams and the rule makers handled or failed to handle it.

The press statement from FIA is an appalling whitewash trying to blame everyone and basically saying they had nothing to do with it. http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press...200605-01.html

The fact is that their idea that all but 6 cars would have had to run, vastly slower than the others round a high speed bend was practical and safe strikes me as ludicrous. Does F1 not still have the 107% rule (cars slower than 107% of the fastest car do not qualify for the race)? That was there precisely because of the risks of incompatible closing speeds.

I'm sure this one will run and run. It's about the only "interesting" thing to hit F1 for years.

21-06-2005, 01:53	#185
MovedGoalPosts Inactive Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: 127.0.0.1 Age: 61 Posts: 15,868	Re: All F1 2005 Discussions I think Michelen have no doubt that they messed up. I don't think naivety came into it. They just got their sums wrong. Plain and simple. Problem is that affected the majority of teams. Tyres are just about the only "common" component in F1. Everything else the teams do is independent. Yes some teams have had parts that may not be reliable in the past, but that places the individual team with that fault at a disadvantage, the rest are free to get on with the job. The problem here is that Michelin were virtually certain that their tyres would not last. Moreover they knew that if they failed, ther probability would be when they were under most stress, repeating a crash that had already ocurred, with possibly far more serious consequences. IN today's liable world I don't see that Michelen had any other choice but to put their hands up and admit the tyres were unsafe. Comparisons with Boeing, etc just don't relate especially when you consider all the efforts made by airlines to get a high safety record. The issue is thus not so much that Michelin had a fault, but how F1, the teams and the rule makers handled or failed to handle it. The press statement from FIA is an appalling whitewash trying to blame everyone and basically saying they had nothing to do with it. http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press...200605-01.html The fact is that their idea that all but 6 cars would have had to run, vastly slower than the others round a high speed bend was practical and safe strikes me as ludicrous. Does F1 not still have the 107% rule (cars slower than 107% of the fastest car do not qualify for the race)? That was there precisely because of the risks of incompatible closing speeds. I'm sure this one will run and run. It's about the only "interesting" thing to hit F1 for years.