Talk:Silverstone Circuit

December 2005

---

Don't want to screw something up, but I'd like to see mentioned the date of the first F1 event, 13 May 1950. Trekphiler 23:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Lap Record

I know it's nice to see Seb flying around earlier, but lap records only count in races. What Seb set was a qualifying record. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.139.35 (talk) 13:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Exact same as above about Hamilton's qualifying time at the 2013 British Grand Prix - it's unofficial, practice and qualifying laps do not count. Edited back to original and correct information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.233.67 (talk) 13:32, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

and corrected today again, Hamilton's fastest lap was during qualifying 2020, so it's still Verstappen who set it during the 2020 race. 2A02:A45A:7CE8:100:2CA5:368F:B978:743D (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Brands Hatch?

Why are Brands Hatch winners listed in this Silverstone Circuit page? Those winners are already listed under British Grand Prix.

Indeed, why list F1 Silverstone Circuit winners here anyway? isn't it better to link to the British Grand Prix for the list. Richard Allen 15:21, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I corrected the coordinates of the circuit. The coordinates given are for the start/finish line, taken from Google Earth.--Ciroa 17:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)--

Old circuit images

Can we move those to a different article or something? It does seem a bit ridiculous to have so many images. Maybe just an animated GIF showing the development...

For what it's worth, I like them. DH85868993 12:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, the previous anonymous poster seems to be volunteering to produce an animated GIF - that might be good. Until he does, let's keep the pictures, eh? -- Ian Dalziel 13:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The pictures are really good, I don't think I would prefer a GIF over them. --Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 09:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Why has no layout been included for 1948? Here is an image of the layout that I have found: http://www.silhouet.com/motorsport/tracks/silv1948.jpg - it appears to match the track as described in the article for the 1948 British Grand Prix: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_British_Grand_Prix#The_circuit Brewphilip (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we need an image which meets Wikipedia's license restrictions - we probably woudn't have permission to use the image you have linked to. DH85868993 (talk) 23:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Wording

"however, overtaking can be difficult for less able drivers" - doesn't sound right, put Senna in a Honda NSX versus a Mclaren F1 car and he couldn't overtake, he most likely wouldn't be a less able driver than the F1 pilot, that is a factor to not overtaking, but is not the only reason, I think the line should be removed or changed to something like - - "overtaking, however, is, as ever in modern motorsport, not easy". Rdog 21:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

On another front, I altered the infobox to give info on the other circuits based at Silverstone. This article is about Silverstone, not the British GP. mattbuck 15:43, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

External links

I added links to BBC & official F1 site--Cheetaih (talk) 23:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Why not Rockingham?

It has an infield F1 track. Good stands and facilities. It keeps the Grand Prix in Northants. Smacks of elitism, not allowing Rockingham to host the race. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.162.125.117 (talk) 10:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure this debate even has a place here, but in reply I think that track is too crapled for F1 - F3 looks tight on that track.--Amedeo Felix (talk) 10:35, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Woodcote Corner

Hi,

I've suggested that Woodcote Corner is merged here. It has no links, and isn't even linked from this article. It is a non-notable corner, that happens to have seen 'two incidents'.

—MDCollins 23:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The article has been redirected to here. Cs-wolves(talk) 06:35, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Silverstone International F1 Airport

Hello there,

somewhere I've read that the runways of the former RAF base are still in use today which seemed reasonable seeing the recent aerial photo included in that article. So, does the circuit itself still work as an airfield off-racing-season? Or ist it even used to transport gear and personell from and to the events? The maps given here do not include the runways and the more detailed map up in the box makes it look rather unlikely that there still could be an usable aviation infrastructure. Has anyone any information on that? Regards, 194.246.46.15 (talk) 11:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

No. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.71.242 (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure about that. Looking at it in Google Earth, I see one paved runway with markings which appears to be a smaller version of one of the WWII runways. I also see markings on the grass for a runway. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

according to google earth it is a heliport Tony Spike (talk) 10:05, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Circuit modifications

I'm pretty sure that the last few series of modifications on the circuit don't fit the timeline that is featured in this article. 1991 did indeed see the redesign of the track with the addition of the three complexes, but 1994 didn't just see the Abbey chicane installed, it also saw Stowe Corner being tightened significantly. I remember footage from the 1994 and 1995 races and Stowe was being taken at very slow speeds compared to previous years. Also, the Bridge-Brooklands-Luffield-Woodcote complex stayed the same way from 1991 to 1997, and for 1998 it was reprofiled in the shape we pretty much see today (with the inner cut at Luffield being added later). Onboard footage from 1998 certainly shows that Luffield was no longer double-apex, it was just a constant-radius 180-degree corner, and from then onwards, except for very minor adjustments (like opening up exits of various corners with more tarmac run-off), Silverstone has been relatively the same.

Just thought I'd post this here as a subject of debate; what I said here is based on observation of footage from F1 races at Silverstone in the 1990s. 86.105.254.20 (talk) 07:35, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The circuit is being modified again (2010) and needs a new image anyway —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.122.33 (talk) 15:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

According to the circuit, they will be keeping the Grand Prix Layout for other events, its not just the Arena Layout now y'know! [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.11.204.100 (talk) 21:38, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Missing 2010 GP Map

The article references Silverstone GPmap 2010.jpg which is not there. Any ideas? Bjmullan (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

not sure it was ever there. You could try File:Silverstone Circuit 2010 version.png...—MDCollins (talk) 23:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I've changed it. Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 02:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

New corner names

Hey guys,

The image is probably going to have to be updated, since the new corners in the Arena configuration have all been named. The right-hander at Abbey keeps the Abbey name, while the left-hander after it has been dubbed Farm. The next right is now Village, while the left after it is The Loop. The fast left-hander after The Loop is Aintree, and the National Straight is now Wellington. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 22:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Raikkonnen picture

How's that picture of Kimi Raikkonnen relevant to Silverstone? It says it was taken while he was testing there but all you see is a bit of grass and a bit of road, it could be from any circuit. Should be removed and replaced with something a little more evokative, showing at least a couple of corners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.82.21.86 (talk)

I've done the first part (i.e. removed the image). DH85868993 (talk) 01:32, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Location

I added some location details to clarify the cross border situation of the circuit, and I am surprised to see my edit regarding the main entrance reversed twice. I know what county the entrance is in as I pass the county signs every few weeks when I drive past, and I also submitted a map from the relevant planning authority (Aylesbury Vale District Council: AVDC Planning Map 1 and AVDC Planning Map 2) to reference this fact. I will revert back in due course, but will wait a few days for further comment here. Warren Whyte (talk) 22:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

The problem may be one of terminology. The main spectator entrance to Silverstone, the entrance arch and the circuit offices, are north of the circuit and definitely in Northamptonshire. The roundabout giving access to the centre of the circuit is in Buckinghamshire. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 23:48, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I think the answer has to lie in rewording. The roundabout is the main entrance to the complex most of the time - and I see is labelled "Silverstone Circuit Main Entrance" on Google Maps. There is no public access to the track that way during major meetings, though. The main spectator entrance is the one opposite Litchlake Farm. -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 08:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

The main entrance arch is on the edge sure, but the maps show Bucks, so I am still not clear why you keep changing Bucks for Northants. You are indeed right that some offices are located on the Northamptonshire side, but don't forget that the new pitlane and finish line is moving into Buckinghamshire. The circuit is also open all week, and if visiting the Lotus or Porsche sites, for example, I always use the main entrance, not to mention bigger meets such as the classic weekend. For a more reliable mapping source compared to Google, I would recommend Streetmap that use British OS data Streetmap Silverstone link. Warren Whyte (talk) 10:00, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

As I explained, I changed it because I was thinking of the entrance further up as the main entrance - it used to be, and for some purposes it still is. Actually, I was thinking of the Classic meeting as well - you can't use the roundabout unlesss you have a centre pass. I have no real objection to changing it back, given that the roundabout is indeed labelled as the main entrance on Google - it might be preferable to say that there are entrances in both counties, though? -- Ian Dalziel (talk) 18:17, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Bridge chicane?

The article states: "in no lower than 4th or 5th gear (depending on the transmission of the car) except for the Bridge chicane, which was usually taken in 2nd gear)" - was there a Bridge chicane? As far as I knew, Abbey (the fast left hander) always led to Bridge which was a fast right hander. When was it ever a chicane? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.108.156.49 (talk) 12:07, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

There was a "Bridge chicane" in the last few years before the redevelopment that introduced the Luffield complex.Pauln1964 (talk) 11:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Track outlines are confusing

Hi there. While it's great to see the variety of the layouts used by Silverstone, the way the images are laid out is rather confusing; for a brief moment I did wonder whether the track had been rotated in the course of development (of course it hasn't) but the images are not all aligned in the same way. This makes comparison across the years a bit tricky. Ultimately it would be great to see each image rotated in the same way, but it is possible to have an indication of North (say) on them so it is clear what the comparison is? Ben (Major Bloodnok) (talk) 10:23, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

You would need the permission of the authors of these track maps to modify them. I'm not sure those editors are still involved in Wikipedia. --Falcadore (talk) 11:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

It seems to me that it is entirely within the spirit of Wikipedia and Wikicommons to determine how a picture is oriented on the page. Actually changing the image itself is a different matter but even then if the maps have been provided under full Creative Commons licence (see what it says on the metadata) then of course it can be changed. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:53, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Why no mention of the old international circuit

i know the south circuit is now the international configuration ....but the old international isnt even mentioned any more ....it ran pretty much the same shape as the national but was extended to include chapel, arena, ireland, and abbey corners ....and also included the bridge section ....it was used by BTCC in 1998 and is on all of the Toca games that were released before the circuit change

http://images.pistonheads.com/nimg/25598/International-L.jpg

it should be included in the layouts ....especialy if the bridge layout is getting included as theoreticaly it can still be used

Tony Spike (talk) 10:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

more recent changes to the circuit

Unless im missing something, there appears to be no mention of the changes to the circuit that occurred some time after 2005. the track is clearly longer now, evidenced by the two different fasted lap times shown in the info box (one by Schumacher in 2004 & a different one by Alonso in 2010).Mr Morden76 (talk) 13:36, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

2011?

What change was made to the circuit for 2011? There's nothing on Forix or in the article about it. Ian Dalziel (talk) 00:00, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

According to 2011_British_Grand_Prix#Background, "the pits and the start/finish line were moved to the straight between Club Corner and the new Abbey". The changes should probably also be described in this article. DH85868993 (talk) 00:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

That in itself isn't a change to the track. I'm thinking perhaps Club was remodelled when the new pits were brought into use? Can't remember - we need a decent source. Ian Dalziel (talk) 10:10, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Apart from the creation of the pits and related works, the track changes were in 2010 (BBC news article has some info). There seems to be a bit of confusion between Silverstone Circuit Developments and the circuit article's history section. Some casual readers they may assume some track changes should be mentioned in the history section. Warren (talk) 17:15, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Who holds the current lap record?

In the info box Mark Webber is credited with the lap record on the 2011-present circuit (10 meters shorter than 2010), yet in the lap record table below Fernando Alonso is given as the record holder on the 2010 circuit, at a considerably faster speed.

The BBC thinks it's Webber: the BRDC, who own Silverstone, thinks it's Alonso. The FIA also think it's Alonso. To be honest I wouldn't like to say who is correct. Technically, and pedantically, it must go to MW, but the FIA are the bosses.Kletzmer (talk) 09:18, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

You've answered your own question. By acknowledging the 2010 circuit is ten metres shorter than the current circuit, then 2010 is not the current circuit is it? --Falcadore (talk) 10:29, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I know that, but I don't authorize lap records. I have found this frequently copied comment on Google:

"Circuit lap record: 1m 33.401s - Mark Webber (2013), Red Bull (Fernando Alonso set a faster lap time on the current track configuration during the 2010 race, but this was when the start/finish line was still between Woodcote and Copse. The following year the start/finish line was moved to its current location, something that constituted a ‘change of circuit’ under the International Sporting Code)."

If this is true then the BRDC (circuit owners) and the FIA (F1 authority) are wrong, or just several years out of date. I think I will amend the page to reflect the reason for the circuit change, but I think that the FIA has the last word on who holds the record, and will write the history books. Kletzmer (talk) 13:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

History section sounds like it was written by a motorsports journo

some parts read like a magazine review, rather than an encyclopedic description31.209.163.158 (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh dear God... What happened to this page?? I don't think I have ever seen such a hopelessly trivial, unencyclopedic, trashy page in all my time on Wikipedia. How did I not notice this before? I think I want to cry. Pyrope 22:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

Progression of records

It is not the role of Wikipedia to record statistics because the exist. Where is the evidence that a qualifying record has any real significance? I would suggest that A Formula One specific wiki is a better place for such statistics of little significance. --Falcadore (talk) 08:44, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

The qualification is an official part of race weekend and the lap times are official recorded. I see no qualitative difference to the lap times in the race. --Mark McWire (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Apart from this, this table has been in this article for years. So there must already be a significant reason to delete them now. --Mark McWire (talk) 18:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I would like to ask since when has the progression of a record - particularly in the case of the qualifying record record, a record without significance - been considered noteworthy? I am then told, that because the record is sourced it should not be deleted. But it has not been sourced, it has been copied from a table on a website which gives no indication of the significance of such statistics. This table of the progression of the lap record and much less significant qualifying lap record, it extensively lists obselete records. Does anyone think this table rises above the level of WP:INDISCRIMINATE? Surely a statistic should be more important than just existing to be included in a wikipedia article. I would suggest this is precisely the kind of statistic that belongs at a Formula One specific wiki rather than at Wikipedia. --Falcadore (talk) 10:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

What about the principle WP:Wikipedia is not paper? This statistic needs no place. I consider this table to be expandable. There is no information about the length of the circuit and the variant for which these times are valid. --Mark McWire (talk) 10:34, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Funny you should mention WP:Wikipedia is not paper. It refers directly to WP:NOTEVERYTHING, which includes WP:INDISCRIMINATE. --Falcadore (talk) 10:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Also - did you miss how Template:Motorsport venue at the top of the page covers lap record and length of circuit? --Falcadore (talk) 11:10, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

If there were any practise times, I could understand your concern. The qualifying times are related to the starting position for the races. So they have significantly higher weight. In addition, these are usually also the race track records. In the articles about the oval racetracks of the IndyCar/NASCAR I have always written all official records, not only the lap record from race. --Mark McWire (talk) 18:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Significantly higher weight than no weight at all does not mean much. Lap record has always been an exclusively racing lap statistic. It is the one that is always referred to. And you still have not established the notability of a qualifying lap in any manner other than your own opinion. Your only reference is to a statistics website that gives no indication of its worth. The table is still also full of obselete statistics as well which have been copied from statistics already in the article in the template at top.

So far, your opinion is the only measure in its favour. And that is not remotely enough. --Falcadore (talk) 02:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

How are you going getting around the flaws? --Falcadore (talk) 03:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Since the table is not my work, I could not care. In my opinion, the person must provide a reasoning that wants a change. It's not the job of me. Since the qualifying times are published everywhere in the race reports, I consider them worth mentioning. For example on the official page of Formula1 -> https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/1950/races/94/great-britain/qualifying-0.html --Mark McWire (talk) 09:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

That's not really how it's meant to work. If you are defending the inclusion of information, it's up to you just as much as the original contributor to show how it meets Wikipedia guidelines when challenged. Despite what some occasionally think, you are meant to assert eligibility with the rules before adding content, not assume you can add anything before being proven otherwise.

Lap records, which specifically refer to times set in a race, have proven notability, referenced in multiple sources. Qualifying records do not; they are just a statistic, and are not followed or recorded to any great extent. QueenCake (talk) 16:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

If you are defending the table, and re-inserting after deletion, then by definition, you do care. --Falcadore (talk) 23:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

As mentioned previously - lap records are available in the circuit details template at top right. The template is expandable for older versions of the circuit - duplication is unneccessary --Falcadore (talk) 01:46, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Rather big error in History (1963)

Text reads: Clark was to win the British Grand Prix when it returned to Silverstone in 1963, driving the Lotus-Climax 25. By now, even Ferrari had succumbed to the rear-engined layout,

Ferrari adopted the rear-engine layout in 1961 and dominated, winning the World Championship. Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_156_F1 Recommend delete this sentence. Kcrossle (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Citation reference for the nickname in the infobox

Per wp:lead cite, it is not essential to cite everything in the lead if is cited in the body. This may be extended to the infobox. The formatting of the nickname in the infobox is controlled by the template and consequently the ref tag must be big and ugly. The solution is not to try to fight with the template but transfer the citation to body text. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:34, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Tone

I think this article is way too long, and in general very badly written. I have just edited two of the sections, but while I have fixed many of the grammar errors, use of cliches and idioms, misuse of commas and generally unencyclopaedic tone, I have not addressed the issue of length.

I think one needs to think about what this article should actually contain. The text under "History" adds up to nearly 10,000 words, with many excessively detailed descriptions of individual events. I think it should be cut to more like 1,000 words, with the emphasis being on the circuit itself rather than the events. So, basically, I think it needs entirely rewriting. Does anyone disagree? Cinagroni (talk) 10:48, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Alonso Räikkönen 2005 British Grand Prix.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

The Silverstone track chart

need some update on the track chart, because it's confusing and it's still using 2007 version.Jacxgarrett (talk) 11:33, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jacxgarrett: How is it confusing. Additionally (if your talking about the infobox) thats the current version, not the 2007 version.
SSSB (talk) 18:15, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

I think that's because I've reverted it to the current version since the comment was made. Ian Dalziel (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Section for "Notable" crashes

I was searching to see whether Verstappen's Crash (Crashtappen lol) with Hamilton at the fastest corner (I think) was here. But there wasn't so I think it would be a good idea to include those. --LostCitrationHunter (talk) 07:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Adding notable crashes is only WP:DUE if the circuit played a part in what makes them notable. As the notabillity of the Verstappen-Hamilton contact isn't affected by the circuit, it isn't relevant here. SSSB (talk) 08:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)