Site logo

Charlie Whiting press conference

NEWS STORY
18/03/2016

We've seen the Technical Directive from 8.3.16. It has been summarised in this document what the teams can and can't say; have there been any changes since then? Will there be any changes? Is that the definitive list?
Charlie Whiting: No, it was replaced this morning after the team managers' meeting yesterday. There's a few more things that they can say. I suggest you read that first. Or would you like me to tell you what they are? The main changes are that a team can tell a driver to stay out, which we hadn't said before. They are allowed to talk to the driver on the grid, so we've said that the only time they can't talk to the driver is whilst the engine is running. When the engine's off on the grid they can talk to a driver. They can tell a driver when to turn off the delta time procedure once they've crossed the Safety Car line twice behind the Safety Car. The messages telling them to do certain test routines is restricted now to P1 and P2 only. Those are the main additions to that.

Can you just explain overall what was the objective in bringing out these new guidelines? What were you trying to achieve?
CW: Do you mean the guidelines in general, or the latest ones? I think it's fairly clear that what we're trying to do is to make sure the driver is driving the car on his own, that he's not being told how to drive the car. Simple as that, really.

What kind of penalties can we expect if a driver breaches those?
CW: I think it would depend on the level of the breach. If it was a simple one, I think we would let them get away with a warning - at this stage, at least. If it were slightly more serious the stewards might consider a reprimand, but if they were to do something which really helped the driver do something he should be doing himself then I suspect a time penalty might be more appropriate.

How is it decided what a coded message is? If the team says it wasn't a coded message, how can it be decided?
CW: It can't. Not clearly. I can't tell you now how a coded message is going to... It depends entirely on what the message is and what the explanation is for that message. By putting down exactly what you can say, if you go outside of that it's fairly obvious. I've had some very strange questions about 'the birds are flying high in the sky today' and stuff like that. I'd just say it's not on the list. Seriously, I think that even by using some of these things on the list there is probably a way of getting a message across which we weren't intending them to, but we'll have to deal with that on a case-by-case basis.

Have you had to employ any more stewards to do all this? It sounds like it's going to be more work for you. Are you anticipating at all that hours after the race you're still going to be combing through everything?
CW: No. We're listening to it in real time. We've got four people in race control listening to three drivers each, and then we've got four or five software engineers listening to two or three each, so it's relatively straightforward, for a start. Quite honestly, they're not saying that much.

A couple of drivers believe you won't be able to capture every single message that's put across the radio. Is that your feeling, or would you be disappointed if you don't?
CW: We will hear every single message, yes. I'm absolutely sure of that. Going back to the coded messages, we've got to be a little careful about that. We could, for example, if we have some suspicion that a message is odd, say, we could then look at the data from the car and see if the driver did anything in response to that message. Then maybe at the next race if we hear the same message we'll look for the same switch change, or something like that. We'll build up a little knowledge.

Will teams be allowed to use the steering wheel display for messages?
CW: Not to send messages. We have some very strict guidelines about what they can display to the driver. Obviously the dashboard is a very complex and highly powerful piece of equipment, and they can do all sorts of things with it. We've spent a lot of time in the winter going through with teams what they can and can't display. There's a huge document which says what you can do with all of the ECU system, and obviously the dashboard is part of ECU. In very general terms we will only allow real-time information, nothing predictive. So you can't display on it how to use the brakes so they'll last for the whole race - you've got to have warnings for critical problems, but that's about it really.

Obviously the opening laps or the opening minutes of the various qualifying sessions are going to be pretty hectic. What about blocking, etc.? What sort of guidelines will be there?
CW: There are no different guidelines. I think the drivers all know the rules about blocking. There are no changes to those rules. They will obviously have to be more careful. The teams are allowed to tell their drivers, just in the same way that they were. I agree with you, especially at the beginning of Q1 before the seven minute point every car is likely to be out there and it will be more difficult for drivers to find a clean bit of track. As long as no driver does anything silly, I don't think there will be any problems.

A clarification on what is allowed on the dash display. You said no predictions can be shown - is the fuel a prediction? Like when they say target +/-1? Or can it just display current fuel consumption?
CW: You're allowed to see how much fuel they've used and how many laps they've done in general, but you can't tell a driver what to do based on the fuel prediction. He has to look at it and do it himself.

You're not afraid to build a claustrophobic environment, that the basic relationship between driver and team should be affected by this situation? The situation where every conversation - even a normal conversation in a race between the driver and the team - can be scrutinised, can be subject to investigation?
CW: It will only be subject to an investigation if it's not one of the permitted messages. I don't see any change in that respect, no. The teams will speak much less to the drivers during the race. During practice - especially free practice - there's quite a lot of talk about gaps, there's test sequences and stuff like that. Once it gets to the race, there won't be that much they can say that will be of any value.

Coming back to the display, is it allowed to have a kind of menu there? Not reacting to certain situations, but let's say in general? If he presses a button then he sees what kind of buttons he has to press for pit stop or...
CW: No. No, no. You can't do that. You can have brake temperatures, tyre temperatures, tyre pressures, those sort of things.

How will you control the pit boards to avoid any messages?
CW: They're allowed to give the same messages they're allowed to pass on the radio and no more. There has been some suggestion that by putting the lap count - for example - in red it means something, if it's yellow it means another, white another... We do have a camera looking at all the pit boards, so if we see anything unusual we will ask why. They will do their very best to try and get as much information to the drivers as they can. I just hope they do it in a legal way.

It would seem that in the past radio communications between the driver and the pits has been integral to TV coverage. Do you feel this might water down the viewer experience at home?
CW: Not really. First of all, we heard many many complaints from viewers who were a bit fed up of hearing the continual engineering assistance the driver was getting. That's fundamentally what we want to cut out. ...But the driver is allowed to say anything he wants - there's no restrictions in what he says; it's what the team can say to him. You'll still get what I would call the juicy content - if someone has done something silly on track, the driver can call him an idiot and all that sort of stuff. Those are the things that generally I think people like to hear.

What happened red flag in qualifying? What about happened with the one is on a fast lap? He is abandoned and maybe falls out? What is exactly is the rule? Is bad luck.
CW: That's exactly right - just bad luck. The difference between previous qualifyings is you have to actually finish the lap before the time runs out - you can't finish the lap unless the chequered flag is out, in which case the cars on track can finish that lap. But it is no different to before other than normally you were able to restart the session and then they could have another go. Unfortunately, that's not possible any more.

Is it right now that when there is a stoppage in qualifying the time will continue?
CW: No, the clock will always stop in qualifying.

There were some concerns when the qualifying format was originally raised to be changed that the timing systems mightn't be in place. Are you confident they're in place? What processes have been undertaken in the past couple of weeks to make sure it all works as intended?
CW: The guys who write all the software appear to have done a fantastic job - it looks good. You'll see in qualifying it will look quite good; you'll have a separate countdown clock counting down from 60 seconds to zero before each of the elimination points. So you'll have the normal countdown clock, and in a different colour you'll have another countdown to each elimination which will look quite good, I think. If a driver is eliminated he'll be greyed out, the colour will change and that means he's gone - next! and so on. I've seen a demonstration of it, I've seen it working and it all appears to be spot on.

The clock stops in qualifying. When it then resumes, does the elimination clock resume at the same time? If you're last, there's no point in going out?
CW: Yes, exactly. There would be no point in going out.

Can I ask about track limits? It's been clarified a bit seemingly over the winter as to best intentions, best efforts to stay on track. Who is going to be the ultimate arbiter of whether a driver has made his best effort to stay on track? What actually defines being on the track? Is it all four off? Is it going to be on time per sector, or the mini sectors? Who's going to determine it?
CW: All of that hasn't changed. The rule has just changed to say that a driver must not leave the track without justifiable reason. Leaving the track is very well defined and always has been: the white line is considered to be part of the track. So if any part of the car is in contact with the white line, he's still using the track. That hasn't changed. The ultimate decision will obviously be made by the stewards, and if I think that a driver has left the track and gained an advantage from doing so, he'll get reported to the stewards. An advantage, as you know, in qualifying is normally expressed in time. In the race it can be expressed in more than one way. None of that's changed. It's just a bit about leaving the track without justifiable reason, so it stops drivers from going way off wide maybe in order to try and get a bit of a run at the next corner. Like Abu Dhabi - the last corner in Abu Dhabi, drivers were trying to go wide there. Not on the lap that they were going to set their time on, but for the following lap.

Can I just go back to one detail? You said there's four people looking at three drivers. Does that mean they're rotating on the different drivers they're watching? Because that's only 12.
CW: No, it's four people with three drivers each plus five engineers also doing the same thing.

I'd like to change tack slightly and look at something for '17, although it's something you're probably going to make a judgement on in '16. It's to do with the cockpit protection - obviously we saw it trialled by Ferrari in testing in Barcelona. What was the feedback on it? How far advanced are you with it? Are you looking at the Red Bull canopy as well?
CW: I think it's going pretty well. Obviously you know that we've tested the so-called halo. It's been tested quite extensively now, and I think it will offer very good protection for a flying wheel, for example. That's the main way in which it's been tested so far. We need to do a thorough risk assessment on it, and we need to look at a number of related things like extrication; we've got to talk to the medical crews about it. I think it's going quite well. We've got a separate working group just to deal with that by Mercedes and Ferrari, and I would say they're doing a really good job on that. The Red Bull is an alternative to that. It's considerably further behind in development, it's never been tested, but it could offer additional protection. I've got my doubts as to whether it could actually be implemented for 2017, whereas I think the halo could.

Check out our Friday gallery, here.

LATEST NEWS

more news >

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images
  • Pitpass.com latest F1/Formula 1 images

POST A COMMENT

or Register for a Pitpass ID to have your say

Please note that all posts are reactively moderated and must adhere to the site's posting rules and etiquette.

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

 

1. Posted by father guido, 19/03/2016 11:40

"Chris. Was this an encrypted message? Were you trying to pass along illegal information? "

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

2. Posted by scf1fan, 18/03/2016 17:10

"At the end of the day, when it's a safety issue, the teams just better say what needs to be said regardless of the "legality" concerns. Obviously they probably should be more circumspect when it comes to general info, at racing speed, about performance issues . . . (Personally I don't care, as long as they aren't discussing their team mate's plans (during the race), or are giving "Team Orders," but whatever. They all have the same rules.)
.
But if they see/think a part is going to fail, or they can help to avoid a bigger impact on the event, they had better get on the horn!!"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

3. Posted by Editor, 18/03/2016 16:15

"test"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by DDKindleVille, 18/03/2016 15:57

"With regard to the limitations on radio messages today was a prime example of things not having being thought through fully. Mercedes afraid to tell Rosberg to pull over after the accident & having to be directed to by the FIA for Health & Safety reasons, i.e. danger of more carbon fibre being left on track. Surely it didn't take much to work out that this was a Critical situation. Have no common sense rules been written in to determine what is Critical? The qualification rules also appear, in my opinion, to be overly complicated. Knee jerk reactions, tinkering but never getting anything right until something like an accident happens. Especially with regard to qualifying 1 & 2 sessions due to too many drivers, of differing abilities & levels of experience, jostling for track space, seem to be the order of the day for the FIA. New quali, radio message & tyre choice rules all imposed in one foul swoop is a recipe for disaster in the first few races. Charlie Whiting really does need to make meetings more driver friendly regardless of what he says"

Rating: Neutral (0)     Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

Share this page

X

Copyright © Pitpass 2002 - 2024. All rights reserved.

about us  |  advertise  |  contact  |  privacy & security  |  rss  |  terms