F1 set for new high-speed safety cameras in 2016

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: F1 is set to be supplied with new high-speed onboard cameras in 2016 to help the FIA investigate accidents during race weekends.

Author information

Will Wood
Will has been a RaceFans contributor since 2012 during which time he has covered F1 test sessions, launch events and interviewed drivers. He mainly...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

43 comments on “F1 set for new high-speed safety cameras in 2016”

  1. Pirelli is awful. F1 with out the tyre war is awful.

    What’s worse than that? Supression of freedom.

    Anything worse than that? McLoser McHonda McFail.

    1. At least your mood seems cheery. :-)

      Actually, a tire war could be even worse than what we have now. Imagine Mercedes on what turns out to be the better of the two tire offerings and their closest competitors locked into a whole season with what turns out to be the inferior tires.

    2. F1 with out the tyre war is awful.

      2000, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012?

      1. 2011 wasn’t awful. Neither the whole first half of 2013. For some reason people act like those years were truly awful. Either you lot didn’t watch, or you forgot the whole thing.
        There are other years between 2000-2007 that wasn’t awful too.

        1. Agreed, the first half of 2013 had 4 teams fighting it out, 2011 still saw Mclaren win more races than 2010.

          2001-2006 are irrelevant to the point however, as we’re talking about years with no tyre war.

    3. What’s worse than that? Supression of freedom


      Not bad idea if we consider that some so called F1 fans has a disgusting compulsion to criticize every aspect of this sport without a good reflexion on how complex it is.

      1. “Disgusting”? I think you overreact slightly, and the complexity (or otherwise) of the sport is largely immaterial.

        Why shouldn’t fans of the sport complain about things they don’t like? Or are you going to pretend that everything is hunky-dory and nothing needs changing?

    4. People seem to forget easily. Or don’t think it’s a good season because their driver or team isn’t winning.
      I remember with a tyre war that one team (especially Ferrari) has a tyre perfect for their car. And they dominate because of that (as the tyre is probably the most important component on a car for performance).

      I really don’t want to see a tyre war ever again. Sure it’s a great topic for us to discuss, but it has the potential to be very very boring (remember the Ferrari-schumi dominance)

      1. +10. A tyre war will bring us back to an era where the preferential team of the lead tyre supplier will always win, and the only other team, who might get a chance could be the preferential team of the tyre competitor. A bit like the present Engine war, except that only 2 suppliers will be fighting. That would surely be a negative step for F1. The opposite end of the spectrum would be to rule that every team should bring their own Tyre and Engine/Powertrain – expensive.

        1. Not necessarily. The tyre supplier could easily be forced not to favour teams by splitting testing of their product equally between all their teams and requiring them to supply all their teams with the same construction and so on.

      2. I remember 2005 when there was a tyre war and Bridgestone-Ferrari-Michael were hopeless.

        1. Yeah we pretend it never happened :D

  2. Better cameras make the cars look slower by the way :P

    1. I don’t think they’re meant for public broadcast

      1. I don’t think it’s a bad idea to show slow-mo onboard replays, for instance when there is a close call or something like that. I’d very much like it, it’s something that’s not seen often.

    2. I think it doesn’t. Bad camera angles do, and F1 uses a lot of them :(

      1. Bad angles is another one.

  3. Those cameras seem like a good idea but it makes me wonder why it took them until 2016 to roll them out when small high speed cameras have existed for many many years even in the consumer market, look at the gopros for instance.

    1. I think they’re a bit smaller than gopros but F1 was only 7 years behind Nascar in broadcasting in HD so they probably think this is cutting edge…

      1. And for Ballistic and Missile tests +1000 frames a second has been used for years and very necessary to be able to discriminate events as they unfold.

      2. Gopros can’t stand 6 G’s accelerations…

        1. Gopros can’t stand 6 G’s accelerations, neither does a stock car…

    2. Isn’t this a) a LOT smaller (compare USB stick to what your “average” go-pro looks like) an b) high speed – 400 fps is quite a lot and about double what the best of those gopros can do and c) its tested to be reliable in for a race, with all the temperature and vibrations that brings with it.

      All in all, i think its a nice new bit of equipment to monitor the car etc @mantresx

    3. Luis Rodrigues
      7th September 2015, 9:46

      They develop a usb stick size camera that does 400fps and your question is:
      ” Why didn’t they bought a Go Pro ? ”

      ” Hey Maurizio, why you blow that much $$ in building 2 Ferraris ?? Why don’t you buy them from the dealership ? I herd them La Ferraris are pretty quick, Im sure they will catch the Merc’s…. ”

  4. I am getting fed up with everybody asking for Michelin to come back. Michelin chose to leave the sport when the organisers were looking for a single supplier. Pirelli came in after Bridgestone also left and they met virtually no testing.
    Certainly there are commercial reasons for their participation, they still risk being ridiculed for their made to specification tyre.

    1. Don’t worry, there’s absolutely no chance Michelin will get the next contract…

  5. “Alonso: On a circuit that has six corners, on the GPS, we lose two or three tenths in those corners. The rest of the three seconds, we need to find on the straights.'”

    Rounding up to 3 seconds makes this sound so much worse than it is. Firstly they are 2.6 seconds behind, and from the above account around 1.5 seconds of that is caused by the chassis, so around 1 on the straights.

    It sounds like it’s fair to say that as McLaren have produced a chassis that is as inferior to the Mercedes chassis as Honda have produced an inferior engine relative to the Mercedes engine. So yes it’s Hondas fault they aren’t fighting with Torro Rosso and Force India, but they are jointly to blame for not fighting at the front.

    The real mistake here was signing Alonso. They should have had Magnussen and Vandoorne in the car cutting their teeth while the stakes are so low.

    1. I think it’s more like that with a Mercedes engine, they would be where Rosberg is in relation to Hamilton, but from a small chassis deficit instead of engine. This is why they could score points in Monaco and Hungary.

      However, I agree, in the current situation, KMag-Vandoorne and more cash for the car makes more sense.

      Ideally, it would have been ham-vet-alo-rai-but-ros all close tomorrow!

    2. +1000000

      As a Ferrari fan I was petrified when Alonso left but at this stage for some season I am so so happy he went to McLaren but I do not know why. As an overall package I think Vettel is a net gain for Ferrari. A few years ago there is no way I would of said that.

      Mclaren have a world class pr but too much bs mean people suss you out and you become a laughing stock, expected as made in Rons image. Once great now a crusty fat old man who lost his way, wheres the sponsor he had lined up by end of last year? Now Johnnie Walker and Santander leaving. Johnnie Walker pay 15m a year offered 43m in 2013 for title sponsorship but Ron said was too cheap. Suppose he is a multi millionaire so not too hard up but so is Eddie Irvine and he could not be competitive in F1 nowadays. Ron must quit.

    3. I think he said 2 or 3 tenths overall on the corners, the rest on the straights.

    4. It’s not 2 to 3 tenths per corner, more like 2-3 tenths per lap. So no, the McLaren Honda chassis is not bad at all.

      1. Don’t forget Alonso likes to exaggerate. He thinks Ferrari or Vettel is 3rd and 100 points behind the leader too.

        1. It kind of sounds like you’re conflating two different comments by Alonso there – are you sure that the comment on the points wasn’t about Vettel being in 3rd and Ferrari being over 100 points behind in the WCC? If so, both of those comments would be valid (Vettel 3rd in the WDC and Ferrari are currently 184 points behind in the WCC).

          As things stand, it would certainly appear that there are issues with the chassis as well as the powertrain – however, out of the two, the general impression is that the powertrain is responsible for more of the deficit (the Motorsport magazine, for example, estimated it to be responsible for around 60-70% of the deficit) and Honda themselves have admitted that their thermal energy recovery systems are not as efficient as their rivals.

          1. 184 is not equal to 100, it’s twice as much. I’m not confused. Just google it. Sounds like Alonso is the one confused. Or exaggerating things to make his point.

  6. Alonso and Button are all McLaren has to sell to sponsors

  7. 43M is way too cheap for title sponsorship

    1. I think that’s an awful lot of money for the 2015 Caterham.

      1. Or generally for a team fighting for P9 in constructors. That said, would Manor be ahead of McLaren if they had those 43M? They probably would have been able to finish their 2015-car (instead of a modified 2014-version), thus use the 2015-engine…

  8. Comment of the day is absolutely brilliant and very true.

  9. Not that you will hear anyone complain about it publicly after the meeting on Friday but there’s been a lot of cuts found in tyres again over this weekend.

    As to the ‘safety cameras’ They won’t be available to use on a live broadcast as they will be hooked upto the accident data recorder & not the live transmitter. They will also be rear faced looking at the driver so likely wouldn’t show anything worth airing on TV anyway.

    1. hm, certainly looks like these softs are not really up to it, doesn’t it?

Comments are closed.