Coulthard v Massa - Part II: This Thursday

Does the driver protection round the cockpit introduced this year make the driver's peripheral vision more restricted & lunging from a long way back even more hazardous?

If those pillars do restrict vision it would be ironic as it was DC's brain fart on Wurz last season that introduced the side protection changes to begin with.

Quote:

RuralVic
Does the driver protection round the cockpit introduced this year make the driver's peripheral vision more restricted & lunging from a long way back even more hazardous?

I had read somewhere that the newly-raised cockpit-surround did create a bit of a partial visibility issue, a sort of blind-spot (may even have been something one of our driver's had commented on!?). It almost looked like a role-reversal for DC as in comparison to last year's Australian GP. This time Massa was DC and DC was Wurz. Not too sure that DC dove for the inner-most line at the apex not realising Massa had put his foot down to come-up and attemp a pass up the inside. By looking at the footage, it appeared to be that DC closed the door a little too late. So, it's quite possible it was a visibility-issue.

It'll be intriguing to see, because there aren't that many rivalries in F1 which aren't closely monitored. I mean, even last year's "Hamilton V Alonso" was regulated from within McLaren, and both men have come out this year claiming they're not in a 24 hour headlock. But Massa and DC, two fiery racers, neither will let up, and lets face it, Red Bull won't complain if Coulthard's got his fists up.

DC said he knew he was there so *shrugs*


http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

Quote:

LoudHoward
DC said he knew he was there so *shrugs*

Of course he knew he was there LH as he'd seen him in his mirror's for sometime. Did he say he knew he was practically along-side him? *Double-shrug's*

DC is way too experienced not to know what was going to happen with a significantly faster Ferrari behind him.

Unfortunately DC does suffer from occassional brain farts.

Ahhh, here we go - this says it all. From davidcoulthard.co.uk, DC's blog,

"Most of the current cars have there mirrors mounted out wide on the sidepods for aerodynamic reasons, and it was discussed in the drivers meeting on Friday that we all agree that this limits our close quarter visibility and we all agreed to be aware of this. Unfortunately Felipe Massa wasnt in this meeting so our collision at turn one could have been avoided had he realised that once i started to turn in i was blind to where his car was. A more experienced guy in that speed of car would probably have waited on the run down to turn three where his superior top speed would have easily taken him passed."

That makes alot more sense, and in my view, vindicates DC to some extent.

I don't see how it does, okay, so DC has a blindspot that they chatted about, fine. DC sees Massa in his mirrors in his slipstream, then he sees him pull out to the inside 100m from the braking point, then...DC can do whatever he wants because he has a blindspot? I don't think it works like that.

The fact that DC has a blindspot makes me think it's worse, because he can't go "well Massa wasn't far enough alongside", he's the one who turned in without knowing how far alongside Massa was, just that he was there.


http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

The new pundit....... one Michael Schumacher said -

Quote:

Schumacher said a post-race analysis shows that Massa was in too low a gear when he spun into the barriers on lap one at Albert Park.
"At the moment we do not know why (Massa was in too low a gear)," he said, "but now without traction control, and on cold tyres, the car in that moment becomes very critical."

Schumacher also said that, while Coulthard should shoulder some of the responsibility, Massa was to blame for the crash later in the race.

"You have to say that David could have been a little cleverer about it," he said, "but there is no question that Felipe was the cause."

That is not an overtaking corner. Massa should have waited until turn 3 to make a move as he was much faster than DC. Massa's dive up the inside was childish and sloppy. I doubt DC would not have resisted a move up the inside at turn 3 because thats pretty much racing etiquette at overtaking turns.

Now whats all this talk about looking in mirrors?? This is grand prix racing for gods sake. Can't believe we are even entertaining the thought of the guy on the racing line looking in his mirrors.

I like your posts trollie but that...Not an overtaking spot? ...lol.

So, you don't think a driver with a faster car behind him looks in his mirrors? Thats funny, how are all those grand prix drivers knowing to defend the inside line when someones close? They must see themselves on the big screen...


http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

The press officers are evil @#$%&... wonder if DC is kicking under the table:

In all fairness though LH, it's not like you're impartial to DC 's cause.

So, you don't think a driver with a faster car behind him looks in his mirrors? Thats funny, how are all those grand prix drivers knowing to defend the inside line when someones close?

Well, DC says he knows Massa was there.

Why didn't DC block Massa then you ask?

Because,..it gets back to racing etiquette. DC didn't defend his line because you just don't expect a professional driver to dive up the inside on a such an aggressive corner. 9 times outa 10 it will end in tears for both drivers.

What DC would expect is for Massa to tail him down to turn 3 where Massa would have effectively checkmated him under brakes and DC would have willingly yielded.

Thats a proper joust, thats racing etiquette.

The truth lies somewhere in between. Fact is DC turned into Massa. Fact is Massa squeezed into a pretty tight space. Both should have known the likelihood of an accident given eache others actions. End of story.

Just read this from DC's press conference.

DC: You can read it on the website. The reality is, in this situation, Felipe is not racing me for the World Championship so he can do the same manoeuvre for the next 17 Grands Prix and have the same result, because quite clearly my eyes point forward, they don’t point rearward. He’s got a much clearer view as to how much space there is and I didn’t take a different line than I took any other lap so… I was fully prepared for him to pass me in corner three because a Ferrari has a much better top speed, it’s a much quicker car. He made his choice. If he makes the same choice (again), he’ll get the same result. I can’t make my car invisible but as I say, I’m not fighting for the World Championship, he is, so next time he should wait until corner three.


*gloats*



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:03:20:10:49:05 by trollie.

The "my eyes point forward" quote is an absolute cop out. Or do his mirrors also point forward? Take the things off if they don't work. As LH says, the know how to defend their line going down the straight.

How is it a cop out? If his eyes were rearward, he'd be seeing nothing more than the back of his cockpit - the car would block the view of Massa

Plus, those RBR wing mirrors have been all over the shot. DC made a calculated presumption that Massa wouldn't have been so eager and aggressive to pass there. Massa, in all fairness, should have realised it was safer to pass him in turn 3 than turn 1. DC should have accepted that Massa might have overtaken him in Turn 1. Then again though, it's a lose lose situation. I can almost see some Racing Bulls posters calling DC a slouch for not holding Massa back.

Hats off if DC had just let Massa through.

It would have showed his experience, unlike Barrichello who ruined his lap times trying to prove his Honda was better than Kimi's Ferrari.

You have to know who it is you are trying to race, and if you are in a Red Bull or Honda then you are definitely not racing Ferrari.

So in your view, Jez, overtaking should be second priority to letting cars through? Surely that defeats the purpose of overtaking? Maybe we should have the ECUs deliberately stick cars into neutral when a 'faster' car is behind them.

No not at all.

Overtaking is always welcome and so too are tight scraps for position.
They are a joy to watch as a fan.

But from a driver and team perspective, if you lose your own time holding up a faster car and this makes you lose positions to cars you are actually racing, then it is completely stupid.

Gloating that DC is defending himself by grasping at straws? He clearly said in his first interview during the race he knew Massa was there and that he thought Massa divebombed him, when anyone whos looked at the replay knows isn't true. Then it was it's hard to see out the side because of the cockpit surrounds. Then it's his eyes are looking forward and not rearward. Then it's the car is too oversteery so the mirrors are useless and so forth.

Massa could've waited for T3, but then he could've done a lot of things. It's a legit passing spot, OK it might not be the greatest spot on the circuit to pass but if you get a run on someone you're going to take it into 1. Like Nurburgring 2002, DC tried to go around the outside of JPM at T1, not the smartest place or way to do it one could argue, going into the chicane would've been much better, but he got a run on him and had a go - they're racing afterall.

Sure Keppel, but that doesn't make what I'm saying wrong.


http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

But it does say something clearly about the mentality of your viewpoint. Same reason why I'm probably inclined to accept that DC wasn't largely to blame. I mean, using terms such as "Gloating" ... that's unnecessarily provocative. I'm hardly proud that DC defended himself, it cost him a points finish. I'm not sure why but this forum has become increasingly cynical this year.

massa vs coulthard...

i wonder what will happen next haha. the heat is on...

______________________________________________________
'Senna is the greatest student of the art of motorsport of all-time'
-Carrol Smith

Keppel, so in qually when people block, they can say "well my eyes point forward you see. He was behind me. What can I do?". You see, this makes very little sense and borders on a stupid thing for DC to say.

When I had initially seen the accident, it looked as though the contact had been a by-product of DC turning inward to block Massa. When I backed it up and replayed it clip-to-clip, it was quite easy to see that Coulthard had infact never altered his racing-line. Quite interesting to see what a difference the clip-to-clip speed had to show as opposed to live film speed. What also became apparent was Massa trying to make a pass inside of DC's line at the upmost narrowest point of the turn. My very first take on it was that it was Coulthard who was at fault, after further viewing, my opinion could'nt help but alter. BTW, my wife is a Ferrari fan and she even commented after we'd backed the DVR up (several time's), that "Massa was clearly at fault" and "what the f*ck was he thinking?"





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008:03:20:22:51:15 by winged scot.

Duffer: When you are in Qualy and not on a hot lap you are naturally inclined to be looking behind you to avoid blocking.

DC's point is that when he is in mid corner and fully committed to take the racing line for optimum speed through the corner, which is what racing drivers do, his eyes are pointing forward not looking in the mirrors.

having reviewed the video the only way massa was going to get past DC was going to be if DC "gave" him the corner. That is what Massa has been implying he had expected. DC knew he was behind him, he just didn't think he was close enough to make it cleanly (correct) and had expeceted him to take him at turn 3 which would have been lower risk and the ferrari speed would have made somewhat easier.

DC's words on vision were also in the context of an actual race , naturally quali is going to have a different emphasis.

Either one of them could have yielded and the accident would not have occurred.

That's the definition of a racing incident.

I mean, using terms such as "Gloating" ... that's unnecessarily provocative.

Go up a few, read trollies post with the blue lettering, then read my post, no provoking on my part.

Quite interesting to see what a difference the clip-to-clip speed had to show as opposed to live film speed. What also became apparent was Massa trying to make a pass inside of DC's line at the upmost narrowest point of the turn.

It's called the apex, when cars pass each other they tend to overlap at that point, it's the "narrowest" point from their perspective, you have to give each other room.

DC's point is that when he is in mid corner and fully committed to take the racing line for optimum speed through the corner, which is what racing drivers do, his eyes are pointing forward not looking in the mirrors.

I think this is the point, it's that DC turned in on the racing line as though Massa wasn't there, and that Massa only went to pass him after DC had turned in. Neither of these points are true, Massa pulled out of DCs slipstream before the braking zone to pick up the pass. Now either DC didn't see this happen and just took his normal line, or DC saw this happen, assumed (because he can't see through his cockpit surrounds) that Massa wasn't far enough alongside and turned in on his normal line anyways. Both instances lay blame on DC. The first way through inattention, the second through a little bit of a brain fade.

DC not providing room for Massa is what caused contact, there are subfactors like the hard to see in mirrors, the corner in question, how many inches away Massa was from the midpoint of DCs car, the cockpit surrounds. But they all melt away if the cars give each other racing room, Massa went on the grass to give DC room while DC just went for the apex as though Massa didn't exist. The sad thing is, he didn't have to give him a car width, Massa was awake and under control and willing to go off the track to avoid a shunt, DC probably needed to give him about 2 feet from the apex to avoid the shunt, and he would've kept the spot and ruined Massas run down to T3 as well.


http://www.patronisef1.com - My solution to F1's 'bore' problem.

Loud Howard wrote:
It's called the apex, when cars pass each other they tend to overlap at that point, it's the "narrowest" point from their perspective, you have to give each other room.

An "apex" in most case's, will fall short of providing an ideal passing lane when the driver attempting the pass on the inside of his opponent, has completely run out of race track. At that point it's no-longer referred to as an "apex", but is more commonly refered to in the modern day world as grass.

Quote:

winged scot
An "apex" in most case's, will fall short of providing an ideal passing lane when the driver attempting the pass on the inside of his opponent, has completely run out of race track. At that point it's no-longer referred to as an "apex", but is more commonly refered to in the modern day world as grass.

"grass" or "point of impact" as was the case on Sunday!

I initially thought it was mostly DC's fault but on hearing the various arguments and seeing the replay i'd say it was 75% blame to Massa for not using his head and 25% blame to DC for trusting that Massa would choose the sensible passing option.

You're quite accurate with your fault percentage's Duffus. DC could be 50% at fault. 1) because he had assumed that Massa, a proffessional and experienced F1 driver would have looked for the more safer place to attemp his over-taking manouvre (especially being aware of turn 3 coming up), and 2) because he is the one who'd left his crytal-ball in his helmet-bag back in the garage.

Of course Massa should have waited until turn 3. Sometimes Massa is a crazy driver and I rate Raikkonen as a much better driver in the red cars.

Johan

Even Brundle was speculating that the Massa in Oz was like the erratic Massa of the Sauber days.