Literally everything happens in a crazy and endless Brazilian Grand Prix. In addition to the investigations initiated due to the unauthorized extra formation lap after the aborted first start, the stewards of Interlagos had a lot of work to do evaluating the countless incidents that occurred both before and during the race.
No disqualification for Mercedes
One of the many incidents under scrutiny involved both Mercedes, with Lewis Hamilton and George Russell (the latter already investigated along with Lando Norris and the two RB cars), but they managed to avoid disqualification.
The reason for the investigation? The Mercedes mechanics allegedly modified the tire pressures on both cars “between the 10-minute signal and the 5-minute signal” in the second starting procedure, which is obviously not allowed by the regulations.
Despite this, the federation decided to spare the silver arrows, imposing only a fine of 5,000 euros for each car, totaling 10,000 euros.
The stewards’ explanation
“After the interruption of the race start, a 10-minute warning was immediately given for the new start,” the stewards stated – “Given the layout of the circuit and the access point to the starting grid from the pit lane, the time available for the team to reach the starting grid was extended. The access gate to the grid was not opened immediately. The FIA admitted that, given the short notice, it was extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the teams to follow the procedure outlined in the technical directive. The FIA Technical Delegate determined that the tire pressure, although adjusted by the team, was within the permitted parameters.”
“Given the unusual circumstances related to the compressed schedule, the interrupted start, the logistics of accessing the grid, and the Technical Delegate’s statement that the tire pressure was within the correct parameters, the Stewards believe that a fine for the procedural violation is appropriate in this case.”
“Normally, a violation of this nature within a competitive session would result in a sporting penalty, but in this case, it is not appropriate. However, this decision should not be seen as a precedent for any similar violation in the future, as the circumstances are considered unique.”
Leave a Reply