“毫无意义”——F1车手质疑荷兰大奖赛安全车编队圈
在赞德沃特举行的F1荷兰大奖赛因发车程序期间开始下雨而陷入混乱，多名车手认为在安全车后无法充分为轮胎升温。维斯塔潘在第一圈最后一个弯道出口处严重撞车，并承认这完全是自己的失误。
“这完全说不通”——F1车手质疑安全车带跑一圈的安排，荷兰大奖赛开局即陷入混乱
多位F1车手认为，在安全车后方行驶时，他们无法让轮胎充分升温，导致无法进行原地起步。国际汽联（FIA）解释了出于安全考虑为何选择这种方式
在发车程序进行期间开始下雨，导致赞德沃特举行的F1荷兰大奖赛开局阶段陷入混乱
马克斯·维斯塔潘在比赛第一圈最后一个弯道出口处发生严重撞车。这位红牛车手承认这完全是他自己的失误。这位荷兰车手以为自己可以重新踩下油门，但那一段赛道显然仍然太湿了。
在维斯塔潘身后，加布里埃尔·博托莱托也差点撞车，不过他奇迹般地让自己的奥迪没有撞上护墙，而更令人惊讶的是他的队友尼克·霍肯伯格竟然成功避开了他。
这位德国车手立刻通过无线电表示，他当时担心自己会拦腰撞上博托莱托的车。
“就是那个弯角，我跟你说实话。那个地方全是全雨胎打滑的状况。我想这就是维斯塔潘失控的原因，我也是一样，”博托莱托在赛后媒体采访区说道。
“我当时在赛道路拱的下坡一侧。当我看到前方冒起大片烟雾时，我想我向左做了一点反应动作。而我一做那个动作，我也跟着失控了。”
据加斯利所说，如果没有安全车带领而完成完整的暖胎圈，F1车手本可以更有效地让轮胎进入工作温度。
正常的暖胎圈会不会更好？
据车手们表示，赛道其余部分在那时已经变干，所以问题只在于能否挺过最后两个弯道。因此使用光头胎起步是合理的，国际汽联选择原地起步的决定也同样合理。
话虽如此，仍有几位车手对赞德福特站起步程序的执行方式提出了批评。
“如果我们按原定方案走，也就是在安全车后面跑一圈然后进行静态起步，那我更希望直接正常做一次出场圈，这样我们就能跑得稍微快一点，”加斯利在接受Motorsport.com采访时表示。
“我原以为重点是至少要在做正常比赛起步之前，让安全车带我们过一次最后一个弯道和倾斜弯道一次。而且当时赛道是潮湿的。”
据这位阿尔派车手所说，国际汽联本应在两种常规方案中选择其一：在安全车后面滚动起步，或者进行正常编队圈后静态起步。
“我相信我们会在下一站比赛时复盘车手们的反馈，”加斯利继续说道，“但在我看来，要么不放安全车、只跑一圈编队圈，要么放安全车并至少多带我们跑一圈。”
红牛替补车手利亚姆·劳森也表达了同样的看法，并补充说他在比赛开始前就已经知道这个程序会导致混乱。
劳森强调，在最后一个弯道时，他刻意比他的队友维斯塔潘留出了更多的余量。
"我不明白为什么我们出动了安全车。既要做静态起步，又要在安全车后面跑一圈，这毫无意义，"劳森在接受Motorsport.com采访时被问及此事时说道。
"我不确定这样做的原因是什么，但我感觉我们都能预料到会发生这种情况。当我们收到消息时，我们可能都在说同样的话，但我们对此没有控制权。"
国际汽联解释安全车带领编队热身圈的原因
当Motorsport.赛车运动网提问时，国际汽联澄清称，自己是根据当时可获得的信息采取行动的。
比赛总监首先派出医疗车进行勘察圈，一位国际汽联发言人表示，这种情况通常不会发生。
医疗车反馈的信息是，2号弯和3号弯仍有积水，而3号弯——即胡根霍尔兹弯——也是赛道上第一个带坡度的弯道。基于这一信息，国际汽联认为在安全车带领下完成热身圈更为安全。
当时的意图是进行静止发车，但由于安全车带领完成了编队圈，比赛控制部门保留了两种选择。如果积水被认为过于危险，仍然可以选择动态发车。
然而，威廉姆斯车队的车手卡洛斯·塞恩斯认为，动态发车并不是解决办法，也无法避免最后一个弯角的混乱。
塞恩斯说："我认为，由于那时已经接近一圈的尾声，不采用静止发车而采用动态发车，结果也会一样，因为到那个时候我们都是一辆跟着一辆的。所以我不认为这会带来多大改变。这是一个不幸的局面，只有一个弯角积了很多水。"
因此，这最终取决于车手们自己的判断，劳森强调他刻意留出了更多余地——比跑在他前面的维斯塔潘要多得多。
“这简直就是不可能的。整圈的前半段是干的，然后最后几个弯角完全被水浸透了。所以，当你用光头胎（光头轮胎）还带着这么大动力时，就很容易做出马克斯那样的举动，”他说。
“我真的松开油门了，因为说实话，我对我们在那里会有多少抓地力完全没有信心，我想马克斯可能是想靠近一点完成一次超车，结果就失控了。”
不过，维斯塔潘本人并不想归咎于任何外部因素，他强调自己只是犯了一个错误。
英文原文
"It made no sense" – F1 drivers question safety car formation lap after early Dutch GP chaos
Several F1 drivers believe they were unable to warm up their tyres sufficiently behind the safety car ahead of a standing start. The FIA explains why it opted for this approach on safety grounds
The opening stages of the Formula 1 Dutch Grand Prix at Zandvoort descended into chaos after rain had started to fall during the grid procedure.
Max Verstappen crashed heavily on the exit of the final corner on the opening lap of the race. The Red Bull driver admitted that it was entirely his own mistake. The Dutchman thought he could get back on the throttle, but that part of the track was clearly still too wet.
Behind Verstappen, Gabriel Bortoleto also came close to crashing, although he miraculously managed to keep his Audi out of the wall, while it was even more remarkable that team-mate Nico Hulkenberg managed to avoid him.
The German immediately said over the radio that he feared he was going to T-bone Bortoleto.
"It was just that corner, if I'm very honest with you. It was full wets, that place. I think that's why Max lost it and it was the same for me," Bortoleto said in the media pen post-race.
"I was on the downside of the banking. I did a little reaction move to the left, I think, when I saw big smoke coming up ahead. And when I did that, I just went as well."
According to Gasly, F1 drivers would have been able to get their tyres up to temperature more effectively if the formation lap had been completed without the safety car
Would a normal formation lap have been better?
According to the drivers, the rest of the track had already dried by that point, meaning it was simply a matter of surviving the final two corners. Starting on slicks therefore made sense, as did the FIA’s decision to opt for a standing start.
That said, several drivers were critical of how the start procedure was carried out at Zandvoort.
"If we would go the way we did with one lap behind the safety car and a standing start, then I would have preferred to just do a normal out-lap, so we would have pushed a bit faster,” Pierre Gasly said when asked by Motorsport.com.
"I thought the point was to go at least once through the last corner and the banking with the safety car before doing the normal race start. And yeah, it was damp."
According to the Alpine driver, the FIA would have been better off choosing between two conventional options: a rolling start behind the safety car or a standing start with a normal formation lap.
"I'm sure we'll review at the next race what the drivers' feedback was," Gasly continued. "But I think it was either no safety car and only one formation lap or with the safety car at least giving us one extra lap."
Red Bull stand-in Liam Lawson shared that view and added that he already knew before the start that the procedure would lead to chaos.
Lawson emphasises that he deliberately left more margin than his team-mate Verstappen in the final corner
"I don't know why we had the safety car. To do a standing start and also do a lap behind the safety car makes no sense," Lawson said when asked by Motorsport.com.
"I'm not sure what the reasoning of that was, but I feel like we could all see that coming. We were all probably saying the same thing before when we got the news, but we didn't have control over that."
FIA explains reasoning behind safety car formation lap
When asked by Motorsport.com, the FIA clarified that it acted on the information available at the time.
The race director first sent the medical car out for a reconnaissance lap, something an FIA spokesperson said does not normally happen.
The feedback from the medical car was that there was still standing water at Turns 2 and 3, with Turn 3 – the Hugenholtz corner – also being the first banked corner on the circuit. Based on that information, the FIA considered it safer to complete the formation lap behind the safety car.
The intention at that point was to have a standing start, but by completing the formation lap behind the safety car, race control kept both options open. If the standing water had been deemed too dangerous, it could still have opted for a rolling start.
Williams driver Carlos Sainz, however, felt the latter would not have been a solution and would not have prevented the chaos in the final corner.
"I think, given it was towards the end of the lap, a non-standing start, a rolling start, would have ended up in the same result, because by that time we were all one by one," Sainz said. "So I don't think it would have changed much. It's an unfortunate situation with a lot of water in only one corner."
It therefore came down to the drivers’ own judgement, with Lawson stressing that he deliberately left more margin – considerably more than Verstappen, who was running ahead of him.
"It was just impossible. The whole first half of the lap was dry and then the last few corners were completely soaked. So, it was really easy to do that [what Max has done] when you have this much power on a slick tyre," he said.
"I really lifted out of it because honestly I had no confidence in how much grip we were going to have there and I think Max was probably trying to get closer and make an overtake, and just lost it."
Verstappen himself, however, did not want to blame any external factors and stressed that he had simply made a mistake.
Motorsport.com ·
内容来自公开信源，聚合内容版权归原作者与来源所有。