FIA解释荷兰大奖赛安全车编队圈决定，回应车手批评
荷兰大奖赛发车程序期间开始下雨导致开局混乱，多名车手批评安全车编队圈后轮胎升温不足，FIA以安全为由解释了这一决定。
在荷兰大奖赛上F1车手提出批评后，国际汽联解释安全车带队的编队圈
多位F1车手认为，在安全车后方他们无法充分为轮胎升温，以便进行静态起步。国际汽联解释了为何出于安全考虑选择这种做法
由于发车程序期间开始下雨，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的出口发生严重撞车。这位红牛车手承认这完全是自己的失误。这位荷兰车手以为自己可以重新踩下油门，但赛道的那个路段显然仍然太湿。
在维斯塔潘身后，加布里埃尔·博托莱托也差点撞车，不过他奇迹般地把奥迪赛车控制住了，没有撞上护墙，而更了不起的是他的队友尼科·霍肯伯格居然避开了他。
这位德国车手立刻通过无线电表示，他担心自己会侧面撞上博托莱托。
"说实话，就是那个弯角的问题。那个地方用的是全雨胎。我想马克斯就是在那里失控的，我也是一样，"博托莱托在赛后媒体采访区说道。
"我当时在赛道的低洼一侧。我看到前方冒起大片烟雾，我想我下意识地向左打了一下方向。就在我这么做的时候，车也跟着失控了。"
据加斯利表示，如果安全车没有引导暖胎圈，而是让车手们自己完成正常暖胎圈的话，一级方程式的车手们本可以把轮胎升温得更有效
正常的暖胎圈会不会更好呢？
据车手们所说，赛道其余部分在那时已经干了，也就是说只需要熬过最后两个弯角即可。因此使用光头胎起步是合理的，国际汽联（FIA）选择定.from起步的决定也是如此
话虽如此，还是有多位车手对赞德沃特起步程序的具体执行方式提出了批评
当Motorsport.com向皮埃尔·加斯利提问时，他说：“如果我们按之前的方式走，也就是在安全车后面落后一圈然后再进行静止起步，那我更宁愿直接做一圈正常的暖胎圈，这样我们就能跑得稍微快一点。”
“我原本以为重点在于，在正常比赛起步之前，至少要跟着安全车过一次最后一个弯道和那个倾斜弯道。而且当时赛道是潮湿的。”
据这位阿尔派车手所说，国际汽联本应在两个常规选项中做出选择：要么在安全车后面滚动起步，要么进行正常暖胎圈后的静止起步。
加斯利继续说道：“我相信我们会在下一场比赛中回顾车手们的反馈。但我认为要么不放安全车、只跑一圈暖胎圈，要么放安全车，至少多给我们一圈。”
红牛的替补车手劳森也持相同看法，并补充说他早在比赛开始前就已经知道这套程序会导致混乱。
劳森强调，在最后一个弯道他故意比他的队友维斯塔潘留出了更大的余量。
“我不明白为什么我们要出动安全车。既要做静止起步，又要在安全车后面跑一圈，这完全说不通，”劳森在接受Motorsport.com提问时说道。
“我不确定这样做的理由是什么，但我感觉我们所有人都能预料到会发生这种情况。当收到消息时，我们可能都在说同样的话，但我们对此没有掌控权。”
国际汽联解释安全车带队热身圈背后的原因
当Motorsport.赛车运动网站问询时，国际汽联澄清说，他们是根据当时掌握的信息采取行动的。
赛事总监首先派出医疗车进行勘查圈，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——也是赛道上的第一个倾斜弯。基于这些信息，国际汽联认为在安全车带领下完成热身圈更为安全。
当时原本的意图是进行原地起步，但由于车手们在安全车后面完成了编队圈，赛事控制保留了两种选择。如果积水被认为太危险，仍然可以选择滚动起步。
然而，威廉姆斯车手卡洛斯·塞恩斯认为，滚动起步并不能解决问题，也无法避免最后一个弯道的混乱。
塞恩斯说："我认为，由于事发时已经接近一圈的末尾，不采用原地起步而采用滚动起步，结果也会一样，因为那时我们都是一个接一个排着队的。所以我不认为这会改变什么。这是一个不幸的情况，只有一个弯道积了很多水。"
因此，最终还是要靠车手们自己的判断，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留出的余地要大得多。
他说：“那简直是不可能的。整圈的前半段是干的，然后最后几个弯却完全湿透了。所以，当你用光头胎还带着这么大的动力时，就很容易出现马克斯那样的情况。”
“我真的在那儿松了油门，因为说实话，我对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得更近并尝试超车，结果就失控了。”
然而，维斯塔潘本人不愿归咎于任何外部因素，并强调这只是他自己犯的一个错误。
英文原文
FIA explains safety car formation lap after F1 driver criticism at Dutch GP
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.
Autosport ·
内容来自公开信源，聚合内容版权归原作者与来源所有。