TBK-Light.com

I think FOM should look at using a PIP system for the start replays at least. Lets them show the replays while were still able to keep track of the live action.

Something like this, Replays full-screen with live action in the PIP box:

Yeah, that would be a good development.

Another one would be copying the MotoGP graphics in how they deal with the final qualifying segment - makes for such better viewing. eg:



Red = fastest sector times, Orange = PB sector times (I think), Grey = slower sector times.

_________________
Dan Wheldon | 1978 - 2011

Yes yes yes ! I've been wanting to have this since 2006 lol.

I want to see those hilarious NASCAR bump drafting air flow FX and track camber tilting onboard cameras in F1.

_________________
"Indy doesn't give you a second chance. You have to earn it."

This. Brundle said (in Working the Wheel, I think) corners like this are almost boring because you're basically a passenger, hoping the car will hold together.

As an aside, Autosport have an interview with Ian Harrison (Williams team manager in '94) about the events of the weekend, which I can post if it's appropriate to this thread. He is firmly of the opinion that the combination of low tyres from the (dreadfully) slow safety car, full (for '94) tanks and the bumps on Tamburello caused Senna to lose the front of the car. Apparently, the team tried to simulated mechanical failures compared to the data recovered from his car, and couldn't match the behaviour.

Out of all the features and gimmicks offered by coverage of other motorsports, I'm still amazed that F1 doesn't do this. Bernie could even charge broadcasters double!

What? that's responsible for FOM not using PiP replays of the starts?

I guess that figures

_________________
remembering Jeff Krosnoff
>>>>>> 1964 - 1996 <<<<<<

From a different POV, people that claimed Tamburello to be anything other than an easy bend that took nonsense to a whole new level

The roll smile was used because he said a plain obvious and simple thing with a "lecturing tone", which is not the first time for that member

Anyway, the foe's list is here for a reason


Not possible(apart from passing out, big bumps on tarmac and etc), ant that was my initial claim about this. Then gkmotorsports came with a "Berger thinks otherwise post" and some people backed him up.

I never saw Berger says so but even if he had said that, let's keep on with this "bring the insider view into the discussion" and throw the Piquet's opinion, a triple champion far more qualified than Gerhard, who said there is no way a driver can make a mistake there.

But in the end, I guess we can all agree to disagree and stop this digressive issue. Plus, I shouldn't have increased an OT debate, so, sorry for that

F1 in the 1990's twitter feed: https://twitter.com/1990sF1

although it was horrible to see the car in that state (with holes in the monocoque), that Simtek was a lovely looking car. The helmet livery of Roland simply added to that.

I have never seen Roland race, and I'm pretty sure that the ones who did saw him as a backmarker - if they took note at all (as far as I recall, Imola was the last race of his contract).

Every year I see people posting about "So sad about Senna, but people forget about Roland". I don't agree at all. The tragic nature of the weekend means both will be remembered. If Ratzenberger's accident had been "the only" accident that weekend, then it is quite probable it would have been forgotten (and honestly, additional safety measures might not even have been introduced).

Anyway, 20 years on, RIP Roland.

Its not completely clear to me from the amateur footage, but did Roland actually flip after contact with the wall?

no, I think he was nearly on the side though

Rencken's latest column on F1's finances has this:

'Rumours are rife that one of the four is down to its last £5m (10 per cent of the most parsimonious budget) with no relief in sight, and fears abound that even Thursday's meeting, regardless of outcome, could be too late.'

The four he is referring to are Force India, Sauber, Caterham and Marussia (the teams which wrote a letter to Todt questioning the legality of the Strategy Group under EU abuse laws).

_________________
Dan Wheldon | 1978 - 2011

Yeah, I think I may have been misunderstood. Artur, you said:



I pointed out that Berger may disagree with you because his crash was *caused* by a loss of front downforce. His front wing broke. This doesn't have anything to do with what Berger thinks of the corner. It's a figure of speech.



I'm not really sure how we all ended up here. I thought the consensus was that it is a relatively straightforward corner unless something goes wrong. Has anyone said otherwise?

I doubt it's Sauber because why go test someone who's not even a Friday driver if the situation is that dire?

_________________

Sponsorship obligations or Simona's team paid for it?

_________________
BTCC Pick Em's Champion 2010
Formula Fun Cup Champion 2013
http://www.the-fastlane.co.uk

Have to say Marussia considering the road car department was shut down.

adding to the discussion we had on page 113 (Tamburello vs Curva Grande). I believe the first 'turn' of Sochi is equally in that class. Can't believe nothing much has been made of it so far.

This thing(people debating when they think the same thing) is quite common here

It's good that we stop digressing with this At least here we didn't go the "Vettel and Kimi are horrible hyped drivers, only ever won races and tittles because had super cars" kind of debate that prevailed on many forums after China.

Phil, thanks for bringing in what is the most important aspect of F1 nowadays. Income money is not well spread, sponsors are scarce and costs skyrocketed. It was a matter of time until we would lose another team. But hey, let's keep giving Ferrari 100 million Euros or Dollars, apart from their WCC position, because they are mega important and the main reason people watch F1