Ferrari intend to have discussions about a claim for compensation over the damage done to Carlos Sainz Jnr’s car when he struck a loose water valve cover during first practice for the Las Vegas Grand Prix.
The team wants to know why the session was not immediately red-flagged when the broken cover was noticed. Team principal Frederic Vasseur said it caused “millions” in damage, in addition to causing Sainz to receive a 10-place grid penalty for using his third energy store of the season, exceeding the maximum allocation.The incident occured eight minutes into the opening practice session at the new Las Vegas Strip Circuit. Yellow flags were displayed at the Strip before Sainz arrived at the broken cover.
Pierre Gasly, Alexander Albon and Fernando Alonso all passed through the area before Sainz arrived and hit the loose cover. At that point the session was still under yellow flags, and was only red-flagged after Sainz came to a stop.
Vasseur said the session should have been stopped more quickly. “The main issue for me on this case is that when you put the first yellow flag, it means that you saw something,” he said. “You don’t put the yellow flag by anticipation.
“It means that the guy who put the yellow flag – and the yellow flag obviously on my board, this is coming from the race control – it means they saw something and then took one minute before putting the red flag. When it’s a straight line and you have metallic parts and [drivers] are at 340kph.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
The team intends to seek compensation for the damage. “This will be a private discussion that I will have with the stakeholder of this,” said Vasseur. “But again, I’m a bit more upset with the way [they] managed it than with the incident itself.”
He acknowledged similar problems have occured at other tracks in recent years. “The incident we had precedent [for] in the past. Even in Monaco which is probably the top of the top of the street circuits, they had this kind of incident two or three years ago I think on the kerb exit turn one.
“We had the case in Malaysia, you had the case two times in Baku with the pit entry with Bottas a couple of years ago and with Russell. I think this is difficult to anticipate and to fix. But then the way you manage the incident [matters].”
Ferrari are also frustrated that Sainz was given a penalty for the damage caused by the cover, but Vasseur reiterated the handling of the incident is their biggest concern.
“We’ll have time to discuss next week about this,” he said. “I think it was not a very fair decision given the circumstances. It was very harsh for Carlos, very harsh for the team.
“We will have to discuss about the circumstances of the incident also because it’s not just about the cover coming out, it’s also for me that we had one minute between the yellow flag and the red flag coming out. It means that when they put the yellow flag it means they saw something on track and it took one minute before to put the red flag and I think it’s too much.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Ferrari asked the stewards to consider granting Sainz an dispensation from the rules to avoid a penalty, which was refused. Vasseur said it would have been possible to do it without giving his team a performance advantage.
“Considering that we missed FP1, that we had a couple of millions of damage, that we had mechanics working like hell to come back and so on I think it was not too stupid to consider the case of force majeure.”
The team will have to bring a replacement chassis for the final race of the season. “We can’t repair the chassis, even the seat was damaged,” he said.
“For sure you have a lot of extra cost that we have. The loom was damaged, the gearbox was damage, the battery was damaged, the engine is dead. We have a lot of consequences on the financial side and the sporting side on the stock of spare parts and on the budget side. For sure it’s not an easy one.”
Bringing the F1 news from the source
RaceFans strives to bring its readers news directly from the key players in Formula 1. We are able to do this thanks in part to the generous backing of our RaceFans Supporters.
By contributing £1 per month or £12 per year (or the equivalent in other currencies) you can help cover the costs involved in producing original journalism: Travelling, writing, creating, hosting, contacting and developing.
We have been proudly supported by our readers for over 10 years. If you enjoy our independent coverage, please consider becoming a RaceFans Supporter today. As a bonus, all our Supporters can also browse the site ad-free. Sign up or find out more via the links below:
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2023 Las Vegas Grand Prix
- Tost blames track inspection oversight for Sainz’s damage in Las Vegas
- Hard to repeat “rare” combination of factors behind Vegas shunt – Norris
- Las Vegas Grand Prix “got a lot more hate than it deserved” – Sargeant
- Williams’ “incredible” Vegas qualifying made us “poor” in race – Vowles
- Piastri is first rookie to take two fastest laps in a season since Hamilton
RR
19th November 2023, 16:15
Of course. Negligence has consequences. And in this case Liberty owns the track unless I aim very much mistaken.
Nick T.
19th November 2023, 19:21
It’s kind of like what answers? The answers are 100% obvious: their car was damaged by a loose drain cover and the millions would normally be no big deal if it weren’t for a budget cap and the rule in which makes it their responsibility, which does make it a big dea. So basically they have to take up the issue with the FIA and the teams even if Liberty reimbursed them.
So, theirs your common sense answers.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
19th November 2023, 23:35
That doesn’t answer what happens with the financial consequences, which are the answers that it sounds like are needed.
baasbas
19th November 2023, 16:39
A lawsuit, just to make it more American
I luv chicken
20th November 2023, 2:25
$200 voucher for the online store.
Alesici
19th November 2023, 17:08
23 seconds of yellows before Sainz hit it is shocking.
In a slightly related note, I noticed 2 separate incidences in practice in which a driver lost control under braking and came across another driver already in the escape road. In neither case had the yellow flag been shown at the time they slid off the track into the occupied escape road.
Motor racing should use the GPS trackers to automatically identify stopped cars and automatically show race control that area’s camera views to ask them whether it needs to be a yellow. They’re just not fast enough with yellows.
MichaelN
19th November 2023, 17:26
It’s a natural consequence of making yellow flags largely irrelevant and race control instead relying solely on safety cars; it also decreases the urgency for those who are supposed to wave them.
F1 could handle the 1996 Spanish GP in a torrential downpour with only a handful of cars making it to the end – all without a single lap of FCY. That they can’t do so now is 100% on the poor level of race directors F1 has had since.
Esploratore (@esploratore1)
20th November 2023, 12:00
Indeed, such a shame we have to rely on recording of past races to see racing in those conditions and we can’t just look forward to new ones, brazil 2016 was the last decent one, I say decent because it was still plagued by safety cars and interruptions, but at least they ran in heavy rain conditions, and then we have spa 2021, which should’ve been like brazil 2016 at least, but we know what happened.
nmgn (@nmgn)
19th November 2023, 17:09
A similar precedent in this case, is Haas being compensated by Sepang circuit owners, running over a loose drain cover in practise in 2018.
Jere (@jerejj)
19th November 2023, 17:56
They did get compensated, iirc.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
19th November 2023, 18:33
What are the damages for potentially winning the inaugural Las Vegas race?
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
19th November 2023, 18:31
Actually with Sainz starting from P2, Ferrari may have won the race.
SpaFrancorchamps (@spafrancorchamps)
19th November 2023, 20:19
Could this cause Ferrari to breach the cost cap?
S
20th November 2023, 1:09
No, because they already had the replacement parts made and ready to be put into use, while HR is a constant.
It didn’t cost them anything at all, financially, over what they’d have spent anyway – and these new parts can be used again at the following event (or, in the case of aero, parts that weren’t used in Vegas and therefore weren’t affected).
While Ferrari can make an argument that they’ve lost a car/parts they might otherwise sell post-season, that isn’t accounted for in the budget cap.
I luv chicken
20th November 2023, 2:29
Vasseur, in an interview with Ted Kravitz, said that there would be NO impact on the cost cap, since they had a lot of spare parts