Question Help with few German words

[fred18]

Hi guys,

I know that some of you here are native german speakers.

In the recent Brazilian GP of Formula 1 Sebastian Vettel let himself shout some words in German on the radio after his collision with Leclerc.

Here's the video:

I used google to translate the words but I need to be sure about the feeling of those words, since I have an idea about an article to write about it.

it seems to me that he's saying something on the line of "my god, it always has to go bad", something like this. Like he's exploding in anger for his bad luck (which in recent times has been incredible...). Am I right? can someone give me some hint?

thanks in advance for any help guys!

Fred

 

[Marijn]

Mein Gott! Muss das sein?!

I am not native German speaker, but it's very similar to Dutch. Literally, it means: 'My God, does it really have to be like this?'

When I first heard it I also thought it was quite interesting. He seems to blame an external factor.

Of course, in the heat of such a moment, one could yell anything. Also, perhaps the drivers are instructed not to swear on radio. Then they have to come up with something different.

 

[Urwumpe]

"Muss das sein?" can also apply to persons: Is it really necessary to do that?

You can likely hear that very often in German car traffic. :rofl: For example, when somebody is aggressively switching lanes and forcing you to stomp on the brakes.

 

[fred18]

Thank you! What about so ein *** aber auch?

 

[Marijn]

I was about to ask the same. That part doesn't translate into Dutch on first sight.

 

[Urwumpe]

Thank you! What about so ein *** aber auch?

Not sure what "***" really means, since there are millions of adequate curses around to choose from. Since it was censored instantly, you can be sure it wasn't one of the words, which are harmless for international ears - and maybe barely among the many words that a German would consider tolerable.



It translates about to "Such a *garble*, really!"

EDIT: OK, found an uncensored version. He used the word "Bockmist", which is actually very harmless for Germans, our Duden spelling reference categorizes it as "casual". A "Bockmist" is a very unfavorable, nonsensical result. If you did something and a German tells you that it was Bockmist, he just friendly tells you that it was a very very bad idea to do that in first place.

 

[fred18]

Thank you very much guys! this was very helpful!

For those interested I made a small analysis about the incident not to get whose fault was but to figure out why what seemed such a small touch resulted in double DNF.

Here's my video:

and the full article with the analysis (it's in italian but others translated with google and it came out fine)

https://f1ingenerale.com/f1-incidente-vettel-leclerc-perche-un-contatto-cosi-leggero-ha-provocato-un-disastro/

Cheers guys, and thank you again!

---------- Post added at 21:31 ---------- Previous post was at 21:22 ----------

Not sure what "***" really means, since there are millions of adequate curses around to choose from. Since it was censored instantly, you can be sure it wasn't one of the words, which are harmless for international ears - and maybe barely among the many words that a German would consider tolerable.



It translates about to "Such a *garble*, really!"

EDIT: OK, found an uncensored version. He used the word "Bockmist", which is actually very harmless for Germans, our Duden spelling reference categorizes it as "casual". A "Bockmist" is a very unfavorable, nonsensical result. If you did something and a German tells you that it was Bockmist, he just friendly tells you that it was a very very bad idea to do that in first place.

So from all this it really seems to me that he is basically complaining about leclerc, not the bad luck or anything, he's angry with his teammate. "does he really need to do it? that was such a stupid move" or something like that

 

[Marijn]

...but to figure out why what seemed such a small touch resulted in double DNF.

At the point of contact, the tire of Leclerc is spinning upwards. And Vettel's tire is spinning downwards. Wouldn't that double the effect of the speed difference from 14 to 28 km/h?

 

[Urwumpe]

At the point of contact, the tire of Leclerc is spinning upwards. And Vettel's tire is spinning downwards. Wouldn't that double the effect of the speed difference from 14 to 28 km/h?

Actually not - the difference between the two rotating tire surfaces would be over 600 km/h (328 km/h down plus 315 up).

 

[fred18]

At the point of contact, the tire of Leclerc is spinning upwards. And Vettel's tire is spinning downwards. Wouldn't that double the effect of the speed difference from 14 to 28 km/h?

that is actualle even more: the the two surface are going one against the other at 644 km/h. That is surely something that made the contact even much worse. I didn't mention it because of the following reasons:
- studying the dynamics of the tire of leclerc in the instants after the contact you can tell that the face of the tire is intact but the contac with vettel literally took the tire away from the wheel and vice versa with vettel's tire.
- the counter spinning effect was in my mind included in the longitudinal part
- it was 3 am so I did not specify it :lol:

anyway I also gave again another good look at it and the counter spinning effect is making it worse but the tire is coming out of the wheel due to the difference in speed.

 

[Marijn]

So from all this it really seems to me that he is basically complaining about leclerc, not the bad luck or anything, he's angry with his teammate.

I am not sure if that's the correct conclusion. I think the wording leaves some space for interpretation about where 'das' (that) refers to. That's why it caught my attention. Normally, drivers are less mysterious if they blame someboody else. He could mean bad luck in general, his puncture, both punctures or even his own driving.

 

[Urwumpe]

anyway I also gave again another good look at it and the counter spinning effect is making it worse but the tire is coming out of the wheel due to the difference in speed.

Actually in first place, the right radius rod did fail on Leclerk, which was causing the sparks below the car and gave the wheel an additional degree of freedom - not sure if the collision already tore the tyre from the rim.

In slow motion, the wheel was able to rotate quite a while halfway intact, before the gyroscopic forces caused it to rotate to far off track.



Not sure if the upper wishbone was also already damaged after the initial contact - it sure was damaged in the end.


EDIT: Vettels tyre clearly went up during the collision, as expected. it was also pushed off the rim.

 

[fred18]

In slow motion, the wheel was able to rotate quite a while halfway intact, before the gyroscopic forces caused it to rotate to far off track.

from watching very carefully the onboard from leclerc I could notice that basically the two tires compressed up until the tire walls of one car touched the rim of the other. This moved the tires from their rim. Being leclerc on the straight its front right stayed there for another 200 meters rotating in sync even though almost no pressure was there. as soon as it just moved a bit then everyhing of course collapsed. It seems to me that the suspension might be good, but I blame the difference in speed because the face of the tires remained intact so it was this "can opener" effect of the vettel tire over leclerc's one (and the reciprocal) that started everything IMO.

 

[Urwumpe]

It seems to me that the suspension might be good

But what did then cause the visible sparks from Leclercs car?



Something metallic must have been broken and pushed below the car.

 

[fred18]

But what did then cause the visible sparks from Leclercs car?

Something metallic must have been broken and pushed below the car.

My best guess is that the cars were already really low over the asphalt at 320 (in the main straight they usually made sparks by their own). so the front tire without pressure and still the high downforce due to the speed pushed the car even further down. that's what it seemed to me.

 

[Urwumpe]

My best guess is that the cars were already really low over the asphalt at 320 (in the main straight they usually made sparks by their own). so the front tire without pressure and still the high downforce due to the speed pushed the car even further down. that's what it seemed to me.

But then, the remaining suspension is still a triangle and the origin of the sparks seems to be close to the center of the intact rear axis - not somewhere at the front or on the right side.


Maybe the rear diffuser did something there for centering the sparks, but that alone is not enough to explain the origin.

 

[fred18]

But then, the remaining suspension is still a triangle and the origin of the sparks seems to be close to the center of the intact rear axis - not somewhere at the front or on the right side.


Maybe the rear diffuser did something there for centering the sparks, but that alone is not enough to explain the origin.

I thought it was just the t-tray. It s the lowest part of the car so as long as the car goes down a couple of centimeters it starts to touch the asphalt. But of course it coud be also some other part that flew there due to the damages, hard to say

 

[Urwumpe]

I thought it was just the t-tray. It s the lowest part of the car so as long as the car goes down a couple of centimeters it starts to touch the asphalt. But of course it coud be also some other part that flew there due to the damages, hard to say

Yes, exactly, the footage is not very precise there. I doubt its just caused by the flattening of the tyre or the remaining three tyres having to carry the load of four tyres.



Formula one cars are known to have easily ground contact at high speeds when the road is very uneven, especially when configured for a higher downforce - but the sparks seem to be constant here and only on one car.


At least, it can be said, that the double wishbone suspension was clearly badly damaged already early in the accident sequence, otherwise the camber of the front wheel would not have oscillated at all. So, even if it was not visible where the lower wishbone or the radius rod had been after the collision, the footage suggests they had been detached from the upright.