12-11-2014, 22:59
Could Raikkonen have finished higher up with better strategy and without pit stop problem?
Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen was the only one of the front runners to try to do the race in two stops. On top of that he had a problem in the second stop, where he lost 4.5 seconds due to a front jack issue. So was he on the right strategy and how much did the mistake cost him?
The two-stop plan was surprising as the high track temperatures dictated three stops for the cars starting on soft tyres. Raikkonen stopped for the first time on Lap 8 along with the three stoppers, but then did a 27 lap second stint and a 36 lap final stint.
In the second stint Ferrari was dealing with its lead car, Alonso, coming under attack from the Red Bulls with Vettel pitting very aggressively on Lap 24 and undercutting the Spaniard, taking 8th place from him after he stopped on Lap 28.
At the same time Raikkonen had the possibility (if he was three stopping) to undercut Ricciardo, who was only one second ahead, but the team didn’t take it, perhaps as they were dealing with Alonso as the lead car on the road. After that had been sorted out, the moment had passed for an undercut and Raikkonen was under pressure from Hulkenberg, who was doing a sterling job having started on the medium tyres. So he stayed out and went for two stops.
In the end the tyre performance curves for Raikkonen at the end of the race show that, even without his delayed second stop, he would still have finished behind Alonso and also would have been passed by Button and Vettel anyway. Two stopping didn’t gain him anything, but it did have quite a large downside risk and he almost lost out to Hulkenberg.
And because Alonso spent six laps behind him, not running at his true pace, Raikkonen’s two-stopper actually affected Alonso’s race too. It is hard to see why Ferrari thought that the two stop plan had an upside possibility, beyond a chance safety car.
As for the jack problem, it only meant that he had more pressure from Hulkenberg, without it he would still not have been ahead of Alonso.
Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen was the only one of the front runners to try to do the race in two stops. On top of that he had a problem in the second stop, where he lost 4.5 seconds due to a front jack issue. So was he on the right strategy and how much did the mistake cost him?
The two-stop plan was surprising as the high track temperatures dictated three stops for the cars starting on soft tyres. Raikkonen stopped for the first time on Lap 8 along with the three stoppers, but then did a 27 lap second stint and a 36 lap final stint.
In the second stint Ferrari was dealing with its lead car, Alonso, coming under attack from the Red Bulls with Vettel pitting very aggressively on Lap 24 and undercutting the Spaniard, taking 8th place from him after he stopped on Lap 28.
At the same time Raikkonen had the possibility (if he was three stopping) to undercut Ricciardo, who was only one second ahead, but the team didn’t take it, perhaps as they were dealing with Alonso as the lead car on the road. After that had been sorted out, the moment had passed for an undercut and Raikkonen was under pressure from Hulkenberg, who was doing a sterling job having started on the medium tyres. So he stayed out and went for two stops.
In the end the tyre performance curves for Raikkonen at the end of the race show that, even without his delayed second stop, he would still have finished behind Alonso and also would have been passed by Button and Vettel anyway. Two stopping didn’t gain him anything, but it did have quite a large downside risk and he almost lost out to Hulkenberg.
And because Alonso spent six laps behind him, not running at his true pace, Raikkonen’s two-stopper actually affected Alonso’s race too. It is hard to see why Ferrari thought that the two stop plan had an upside possibility, beyond a chance safety car.
As for the jack problem, it only meant that he had more pressure from Hulkenberg, without it he would still not have been ahead of Alonso.
Fernando es de otro planeta