I doubt it, RB clearly stated that they will consider their "internal" drivers pool before venturing out. I

Not the interview I saw with Christian Horner. He clearly stated that were was a single objective - The fastest driver possible and he said if that was Kimi then thats would they would want but they were also looking at the torro rosso drivers too.

Yes, he did and what I wrote did not contravene that statement . They want the fastest driver, which is as obvious a statement as could be made, but they will first look "internally" before venturing out. Natirally this does not exclude anybody really since having had an "internal look" they can conclude nobody with enough speed, experience, etc, etc is available and get Kimi or JB or Dannika Patrick .

Surely they are two mutually exclusive comments. You can't go for the fastest driver if you considering your internal drivers first. The only way you can work out if they are the fastest drivers is consider them against all the other drivers i.e. you have to consider Kimi from the outset. Then who ever is the fastest gets it, if its internal or not.

 

From the way Christian answered the questions it sounded very much like he would prefer to get Kimi if he could. When asked about others such as DiResta he essentially wrote him off saying its probably between Kimi and the other two. They will have known it was coming by the fact that he had not signed up to extend so they will have already been putting the feelers out.

Driving seats are very complicated to fill. Just saying the fastest driver available is simply not true. Factors like suitability of their background (i.e. where are they from) and the image they have with the main sponsor's marketing strategy, the amount of money they will bring with them, driver preferences as to the extra-racing commitments, management company "inside track" info etc. Politics play as much a role as the outright speed of the driver. Then there's a question of consistency - Grosjean might be the fastest driver but he is not able to bring the car to the chequered flag and therefore is useless...

Kimi is the coolest customer in the paddock at the moment and his increadible consitency in a car which is frankly crap and only works on certain types of circuits is astonishing and he's worth his weight in  gold to any team at the moment. Red Bull has the deepest war chest and it would be a logical conclusion if you were to discount politics.

Talk that Honda are trying to lure Ross Brawn back to run their F1 programme in 2015 but Brawn claims he "knows nothing about it" and that he wants to remain at Merc despite Paddy Lowe coming in.

I hate those knee jerk reactions! Such a shame they will be reverting to 2012 rubber...

Pirelli have released a statement as a result:

 

A series of different causes led to the tyre failures at Silverstone:

- We didn’t know the cars would be driving that fast.

- Uneven wear caused by too much turning right.

- The teams repeatedly put new wheels onto the cars too quickly.

- Excessive braking, accelerating and swerving about.

- Extremely sharp leaves on track.

- Failure to proceed to approved Pirelli stockist upon kerbing tyres

- We were asked to make **** tyres. Stop ****ing complaining when the tyres are indeed ****.

 

A FOLLOW UP STATEMENT FROM PAUL HEMBERY

Oh God, I’m so sorry. Forget all that, forget I spoke. It’s not you, it’s me.

^LOL

I thought "wrong kind or leaves" are only to be found on British rail tracks

 

Pirelli have released a statement as a result:

 

A series of different causes led to the tyre failures at Silverstone:

- We didn’t know the cars would be driving that fast.

- Uneven wear caused by too much turning right.

- The teams repeatedly put new wheels onto the cars too quickly.

- Excessive braking, accelerating and swerving about.

- Extremely sharp leaves on track.

- Failure to proceed to approved Pirelli stockist upon kerbing tyres

- We were asked to make **** tyres. Stop ******* complaining when the tyres are indeed ****.

 

A FOLLOW UP STATEMENT FROM PAUL HEMBERY

Oh God, I’m so sorry. Forget all that, forget I spoke. It’s not you, it’s me.

 

Seriously, according to Autosport some of the teams were:- 

1. Running lower than recommended tyre pressures.
2. Running right side tyres on the left side of the cars and vice versa.

Its all a bit woolly for me. List the reasons for each teams failure. Which were running low pressure? For all we know it was only 1 car running all the faults (bar the swapping round wheels) and the real cause was the sharp edges on track etc.

 

I'm pretty sure Redbull were running low pressure going on the fact they pumped the wheels up after the issue started to happen, no doubt up to the minimum recommended pressure.

Look at this rear tyre with the arrow pointing the wrong way.

Its a pretty common place thing to do. 'If' it was such a safety risk then Pirelli should have said so. Unless they say "Don't do this" then people will try it.

Look at this rear tyre with the arrow pointing the wrong way.

Wrong race, but it seems like pretty conclusive evidence that Mercedes have been mounting tyres other than in accordance with Pirelli's instructions. As they suffered a failure and at least one cut LHR at Silverstone, I think this is proven at least on balance of probabilities.

I realise it's Monaco but just to highlight they are running tyres again what Pirelli say is right

THe swtiching round of tyres is done all the time and is probably a fact underestimated by Pirelli, something which they are not blaming the teams for. The internal and external sidewalls are constructed to deal with different and specific loads, switching them round will affect how they work. In effect they are asymmetric, hence the arrows which Martyn has highlighted in the Monaco pic above.

 

They are more concerned with the fact that the teams ran low pressures or pressures lower than those recommended by them.

Red Bull have always been know to run lower pressures because it increases the contact patch for the tyre but it affects how quickly it heats up and cools too. Every team will be different. 

Kimi's response for the tyres was best. Was something along the lines of we all know the risks, tyres are part of the game, I got hit by bits of rubber but that's what my helmet is for. 

They all switch the tyres about, not just merc. They do this to even the wear on them. Eg silverstone put alot of pressure on the left hand side so they would have put the fresher tyres from the right onto the left from qualifying to the race for example. I think this is smart and making the most of what you have. Pirelli should have made the tyres evenly imo so this wasnt a risk. But they have forbidding the swapping of them from now on.

I do not think slicks are directional so swapping makes no difference really, not so for inters or wets.

On the other hand why would they bother to put the arrows on then ?!?

 

@Martyn - I love Kimi's approach, I was preaching exactly the same thing - bad tradesmen always blame their tools. Just drive the living daylights from what you have, everybody has the same tyres but only a very small percentage failed or got cut. If it was a systemic failure (i.e. tyres unsafe and unsuitable) then all of them would be at least cut and most of the blowing out like water baloons. As for the helmets, didn't help Massa that much, now did it....

 but only a very small percentage failed or got cut.

 

Not sure I agree with small percentage got cut. 4 drivers had blow outs. Vettels got cut and was close to going. Alonsos also was cut on the way to the pits. Another driver confirmed (can't remember which) he had something similar. Thats 7 out of 22 drivers. 1 or 2 drivers would be a small percentage not quarter of the field.

Pirelli will view from a total tyre count perspective, yes 7 out of 22 drivers is a high percentage but they will look at 22 drivers with 3-4 pit stops each. 7 tyres against a total run of c250, that's less than 5%.

 As for the helmets, didn't help Massa that much, now did it....

Well he didn't die and in fairness it was a spring at 160mph+

that's less than 5%.

Still too high when traveling at >100mph though

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Sam Michael has now revealed Mclaren ran within all the specs, pressures, camber, correct way round etc, yet stil suffered two blow outs over the weekend. 

Tyres should not fail by running over the kerbs,F1 drivers have been running the kerbs for years. Those Pirelli tyres were dangerous. The last time I recall a tyre disintigrating like those on Sunday was Mansell's back in 1986. In those days teams would often run the race on one set, how many laps did Hamilton's last?

Pirelli only supply tyres to F1 for image and advertising, I wonder how sales were on Monday?

Is it just me that's struggling with the concept of uni-directional slicks?  The outside is still outside whatever side you put them!

Is it just me that's struggling with the concept of uni-directional slicks?  The outside is still outside whatever side you put them!

 

that a very good point. They have mentioned a number of times about how the outside sidewall is designed differently to the inside sidewall but its still the same if its flipped to the other side. I guess if the weave in the material is in a certain direction that may affect it.

 

I wonder what Pirellis reason for the McLaren failure is then.