Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hamilton, Maldonado there sides of the story

pf1

(Maldonado)

Hamilton told his team it was "done deliberately", however, Maldonado insists that wasn't the case.

"It was a difficult moment, there was no reason from my side to have contact and from the side of Lewis," he told the BBC.

"It wasn't rainy conditions and we need to understand what happened. There was no need for contact after the chequered flag."

Pressed as to whether his coming together with Hamilton was deliberate, he said: "No, no, I don't."

(Hamilton)

The Williams was just sitting there, it was very slow. I had to try and get past, which I did

"He came around me, I didn't move anywhere, and he tried to swipe across me. I don't know if it was intentional.

"The front wing was quite badly damaged, the sidepod and I think front suspension was damaged, front toe-in was a little bit out."

He added: "Once the flag was out and the red light was on there is no need to be racing. There should never be an incident but unfortunately there was."

(end result)

the stewards believed Maldonado deserved more of the blame for the incident and have penalised him just five places on Sunday's grid.

Hamilton, though, did not escape entirely as he was given a reprimand.

schumi

pf1

"Well, obviously I would have wished for a different end to today's qualifying, but it is difficult to drive on three wheels - even if I should have the experience to do so in Spa.

"Seriously, this is certainly something that should not occur, but then this is also Formula One; we are working at the highest level but still things can happen.

"At first, I wasn't sure what had happened, as I just felt myself lose the back end suddenly which is why I instantly apologised to the team. But then I saw the wheel off the car and understood the reason why I had lost control.

"Trying to find the good in the bad, I'd probably say that I still have some fresh sets of tyres left, and that there is only one direction to go tomorrow: forward."

do you like my newer shorter post whoring posts?

Hamilton, Maldonado there sides of the story

Having only seen the one vid on youtube, how did Maldonardo get the harsher reprimand?

Lewis was the one ducking and weaving and looked to turn right into the Williams.

I know they were coming up to eau rouge, but if a car is beside you, generally you don't tune into it.

Anyone got other vids of the incident?

Snowie, they have layed concrete at Snowy corner. You are now good to go :)

And because I am a tragic with no life i often go back and watch this over and over...I came so close to holding the lil R400 flat :)

I havent experienced the birth of children, marriage, or much sex for that matter. so sadly, this is truly two of the most fun days of my life :)

100% Hamioltons fault. Moving over on the poor Williams driver...he didnt even have both hands on the steering wheel. Hamo should start from the back row...which puts Webz 2nd :)

i dunno about that. i've looked at both and straight out of the corner hamilton swerves across a little bit then backs out of it. then after that he keeps his steering wheel in pretty much the same spot when the accident occurs. if you watch the incar footage from hamilton you can see that his car stays parrallel to the grip markings the whole time before the crash (other than the initial swerve), while maldonado swerves over to the right hand grip positions then starts to come back across. i think they are both to blame, but maldonado more than hamilton. oh and i'm not much of a hamo fan, so no bias, just going off the footage.

The in-car is the damning footage for Maldonado imo. Hamilton does have a bit of a go as Maldonado pulls out from behind him,hence the reprimand, but then from the in-car Maldonado clearly comes straight across the front of him and continues across the front until he's pretty much on the opposite side of Hamo...

both at fault at monaco. maldonado should've been watching his mirrors and known that sir ramsalot was coming up the inside and to keep well clear. hamo should've realised that he wasn't going to make it and pulled out of it earlier

pf1

Mercedes have launched an investigation into the cause of Michael Schumacher's accident.

Team principal Ross Brawn said: "I'm disappointed for Michael because the conditions would have suited him perfectly.

"We need to look at exactly what happened, but it would appear there was something amiss with the right-rear wheel attachment.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...