2025 Singapore Grand Prix - Marina Bay, Oct 3 - 5

[deadhead]

[ME4ME]

but they showed the Leclerc-Antonelli replay just when Hamilton was about to pass him, so at least added to some confusion

But yeah, Hamilton indeed was still behind when he lost his brakes

Just watched Hamiltons onboard laps near the end of the race. I cannot understand how he and Ferrari got away with passing the pit-lane entry twice with a car in such an unsafe state. He was cutting corners just to make it round the track. He should've been straightup DSQ imo.

[Singapore2008]

but they showed the Leclerc-Antonelli replay just when Hamilton was about to pass him, so at least added to some confusion

But yeah, Hamilton indeed was still behind when he lost his brakes

Just watched Hamiltons onboard laps near the end of the race. I cannot understand how he and Ferrari got away with passing the pit-lane entry twice with a car in such an unsafe state. He was cutting corners just to make it round the track. He should've been straightup DSQ imo.

He did get 5 seconds. They did not completely got away with it.

[venkyhere]

but they showed the Leclerc-Antonelli replay just when Hamilton was about to pass him, so at least added to some confusion

But yeah, Hamilton indeed was still behind when he lost his brakes

Just watched Hamiltons onboard laps near the end of the race. I cannot understand how he and Ferrari got away with passing the pit-lane entry twice with a car in such an unsafe state. He was cutting corners just to make it round the track. He should've been straightup DSQ imo.

He did get 5 seconds. They did not completely got away with it.

that's too lenient. Driving without brakes ? Park the car and trigger a yellow/red. Selfishly driving for points in clear violation of safety norms (Norris got 10s stop-n-go for 'not lifting for yellow' last year) deserves DSQ.

[basti313]

that's too lenient. Driving without brakes ? Park the car and trigger a yellow/red. Selfishly driving for points in clear violation of safety norms (Norris got 10s stop-n-go for 'not lifting for yellow' last year) deserves DSQ.

I do not think you can catch him like this. Since two? years they are much more holding back on the topic with the orange-black flag (that should have been given). Without the flag, I do not see under which rule you can or should punish the brake. There was no "unsafe release", I fail to see the rule under which the team is to punish here.

But the point which is unfair and ruled wrong is surely the "leaving the track and gaining an advantage". Lewis basically stayed on track in most corners, except every corner where he just could go straight. Breaking into these corners at what the car was capable to do would have cost another 10-15sec easily. So I think the 5sec is much too low for cutting corners on purpose. Without cutting he most probably would have ended behind Bea.

[Mosin123]

Just watched Hamiltons onboard laps near the end of the race. I cannot understand how he and Ferrari got away with passing the pit-lane entry twice with a car in such an unsafe state. He was cutting corners just to make it round the track. He should've been straightup DSQ imo.

He did get 5 seconds. They did not completely got away with it.

that's too lenient. Driving without brakes ? Park the car and trigger a yellow/red. Selfishly driving for points in clear violation of safety norms (Norris got 10s stop-n-go for 'not lifting for yellow' last year) deserves DSQ.

No body called for Norris to retire / get DQ'ed when his brakes failed in china. Why the calls now?

Norris front wing damage was more a danger to others than LH's front left brake failing.

[Badger]

He did get 5 seconds. They did not completely got away with it.

that's too lenient. Driving without brakes ? Park the car and trigger a yellow/red. Selfishly driving for points in clear violation of safety norms (Norris got 10s stop-n-go for 'not lifting for yellow' last year) deserves DSQ.

No body called for Norris to retire / get DQ'ed when his brakes failed in china. Why the calls now?

Because Hamilton’s front brakes exploded and he was lapping over 30 seconds off the pace with very limited braking performance. Lando was managing a critical issue but his brakes never actually fully failed, at his slowest he was only 3-4 seconds off the pace due to LiCo. Details matter.

[Mosin123]

that's too lenient. Driving without brakes ? Park the car and trigger a yellow/red. Selfishly driving for points in clear violation of safety norms (Norris got 10s stop-n-go for 'not lifting for yellow' last year) deserves DSQ.

No body called for Norris to retire / get DQ'ed when his brakes failed in china. Why the calls now?

Because Hamilton’s front brakes exploded and he was lapping over 30 seconds off the pace with very limited braking performance. Lando was managing a critical issue but his brakes never actually fully failed, at his slowest he was only 3-4 seconds off the pace due to LiCo. Details matter.

Landos brakes could have failed completely at any time, his issues started 15 laps before the end, he was leaking brake fluid, just a few more laps and he would have been completely out of fluid according to Norris......

LH brakes never completely failed, he just lost his front left, so nursed the car to the end... for 3 laps......

No driver was put at risk, in fact, Landos front wing damage for the whole race was more a risk to other drivers than LHs brake issue.

IF i was in an F1 car, i would be more worried about my front wing failing than my brakes, just by lifting and coasting i would already be slowing down faster than i would in my road legal car that has 4 perfectly working brakes.

[Badger]

No body called for Norris to retire / get DQ'ed when his brakes failed in china. Why the calls now?

Because Hamilton’s front brakes exploded and he was lapping over 30 seconds off the pace with very limited braking performance. Lando was managing a critical issue but his brakes never actually fully failed, at his slowest he was only 3-4 seconds off the pace due to LiCo. Details matter.

Landos brakes could have failed completely at any time, his issues started 15 laps before the end, he was leaking brake fluid, just a few more laps and he would have been completely out of fluid according to Norris......

LH brakes never completely failed, he just lost his front left, so nursed the car to the end... for 3 laps......

No driver was put at risk, in fact, Landos front wing damage for the whole race was more a risk to other drivers than LHs brake issue.

IF i was in an F1 car, i would be more worried about my front wing failing than my brakes, just by lifting and coasting i would already be slowing down faster than i would in my road legal car that has 4 perfectly working brakes.

But they didn’t fail, Hamilton’s did. Not being able to decelerate well is extremely dangerous in an F1 race needless to say. The lap times tell the story.

Not having brakes is far more dangerous than a slightly bent front wing end plate, which isn’t a critical part.

[Mosin123]

Because Hamilton’s front brakes exploded and he was lapping over 30 seconds off the pace with very limited braking performance. Lando was managing a critical issue but his brakes never actually fully failed, at his slowest he was only 3-4 seconds off the pace due to LiCo. Details matter.

Landos brakes could have failed completely at any time, his issues started 15 laps before the end, he was leaking brake fluid, just a few more laps and he would have been completely out of fluid according to Norris......

LH brakes never completely failed, he just lost his front left, so nursed the car to the end... for 3 laps......

No driver was put at risk, in fact, Landos front wing damage for the whole race was more a risk to other drivers than LHs brake issue.

IF i was in an F1 car, i would be more worried about my front wing failing than my brakes, just by lifting and coasting i would already be slowing down faster than i would in my road legal car that has 4 perfectly working brakes.

But they didn’t fail, Hamilton’s did. Not being able to decelerate well is extremely dangerous in an F1 race needless to say. The lap times tell the story.

Not having brakes is far more dangerous than a slightly bent front wing end plate, which isn’t a critical part.

But his brakes didnt fail - His front left brake disc fialed, not his brakes, please, details matter right?

An end plate can come lose, at high speeds and hit another driver, could be potentially lethal, its why we have regulations that force teams to pit and change them if the structural intergrity of it is compromised, not just for others safety, but for the driver too, cause if your front wing fails, you wont have any brakes, or be able to turn at all at high speeds. Ask Kobayashi.........

If your saying a f1 car running a little off pace is dangerous, then quali sessions should be banned out right for cars moving much much slower on out laps and cool down laps, seeing as motor racing is dangerous by nature, maybe we should give up real racing and just do sim racing. much much safer.

[De Wet]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdyKXxRiitU


Good One.

[Badger]

Landos brakes could have failed completely at any time, his issues started 15 laps before the end, he was leaking brake fluid, just a few more laps and he would have been completely out of fluid according to Norris......

LH brakes never completely failed, he just lost his front left, so nursed the car to the end... for 3 laps......

No driver was put at risk, in fact, Landos front wing damage for the whole race was more a risk to other drivers than LHs brake issue.

IF i was in an F1 car, i would be more worried about my front wing failing than my brakes, just by lifting and coasting i would already be slowing down faster than i would in my road legal car that has 4 perfectly working brakes.

But they didn’t fail, Hamilton’s did. Not being able to decelerate well is extremely dangerous in an F1 race needless to say. The lap times tell the story.

Not having brakes is far more dangerous than a slightly bent front wing end plate, which isn’t a critical part.

But his brakes didnt fail - His front left brake disc fialed, not his brakes, please, details matter right?

An end plate can come lose, at high speeds and hit another driver, could be potentially lethal, its why we have regulations that force teams to pit and change them if the structural intergrity of it is compromised, not just for others safety, but for the driver too, cause if your front wing fails, you wont have any brakes, or be able to turn at all at high speeds. Ask Kobayashi.........

If your saying a f1 car running a little off pace is dangerous, then quali sessions should be banned out right for cars moving much much slower on out laps and cool down laps, seeing as motor racing is dangerous by nature, maybe we should give up real racing and just do sim racing. much much safer.

Hamilton had a brake failure and Lando didn’t, yet you said he did. Why did you misrepresent such an important fact? Then you immediately pivoted to a bent end plate when you realised you were mistaken. It’s almost as if there’s some other motive here, the way you felt the need to cast Hamilton as the victim when in reality he was lucky to get away with only a 5s penalty for cutting.

Any road car that has a brake failure is immediately illegal to drive. All those risks are elevated even more in an F1 race. It’s about as dangerous as it gets when it comes to car related failures.

[venkyhere]

No matter which way the narrative is bent, a car with failed brakes (partially or fully) doesn't deserve to stay on track. Has to be forced to retire. Because it's Ferrari and because it's Hamilton, and because race control is a bunch of temporary staff who are afraid of media criticism and don't want to upset anyone's applecart, they didn't pick up the phone and issue a directive to Ferrari's pitwall. We can have all kinds of excuses and all kinds of stories from Tifosi and from LH44 fans, but that's the simple matter of fact - race control were too chicken, and issued a pathetic 5s penalty.

[f1isgood]

No matter which way the narrative is bent, a car with failed brakes (partially or fully) doesn't deserve to stay on track. Has to be forced to retire. Because it's Ferrari and because it's Hamilton, and because race control is a bunch of temporary staff who are afraid of media criticism and don't want to upset anyone's applecart, they didn't pick up the phone and issue a directive to Ferrari's pitwall. We can have all kinds of excuses and all kinds of stories from Tifosi and from LH44 fans, but that's the simple matter of fact - race control were too chicken, and issued a pathetic 5s penalty.

Bingo.

[Farnborough]

But they didn’t fail, Hamilton’s did. Not being able to decelerate well is extremely dangerous in an F1 race needless to say. The lap times tell the story.

Not having brakes is far more dangerous than a slightly bent front wing end plate, which isn’t a critical part.

But his brakes didnt fail - His front left brake disc fialed, not his brakes, please, details matter right?

An end plate can come lose, at high speeds and hit another driver, could be potentially lethal, its why we have regulations that force teams to pit and change them if the structural intergrity of it is compromised, not just for others safety, but for the driver too, cause if your front wing fails, you wont have any brakes, or be able to turn at all at high speeds. Ask Kobayashi.........

If your saying a f1 car running a little off pace is dangerous, then quali sessions should be banned out right for cars moving much much slower on out laps and cool down laps, seeing as motor racing is dangerous by nature, maybe we should give up real racing and just do sim racing. much much safer.

Hamilton had a brake failure and Lando didn’t, yet you said he did. Why did you misrepresent such an important fact? Then you immediately pivoted to a bent end plate when you realised you were mistaken. It’s almost as if there’s some other motive here, the way you felt the need to cast Hamilton as the victim when in reality he was lucky to get away with only a 5s penalty for cutting.

Any road car that has a brake failure is immediately illegal to drive. All those risks are elevated even more in an F1 race. It’s about as dangerous as it gets when it comes to car related failures.

Relevance to road vehicles doesn't exactly translate in judgment here.

But for argument sake, many (virtually all) HGV and coaches will systematically do more or less what Hamilton has done here, that is not use much friction brake to conserve that for emergency use in ultimately arresting the vehicle. Heavy vehicles are nearly always operating with transmission system as speed control on serious decent/gradient, that to leave the friction system as emergency (it leaves them cold) should that eventually arise.

The front and rear system are discreet on race cars (virtually all road vehicle too) for hydraulic independence, the rears seemed to be still operational, plus the PU braking effect he was using.
Certainly it seems injudicious of him to leave track designated surface in cutting corners etc, for which he received penalty, correctly it appears.
By slowing his pace he was able to operate the car without it seems risk to others.
The front "failure" appears to have run out of friction material, but it will still operate with just the backing pad, in an emergency. That may be view as drastic, but it will still work. He attenuated his pace to suit what he had, in reality. Its not definitive for anyone outside that specific knowledge sphere to judge otherwise.
Lando's in China was arguably more serious with apparently the loss of hydraulic fluid, making it more likely to be a total system failure.

Judgement of Hamilton, in this case is just a load of hot air without knowing the final state of his used components.