Refuelling should be banned

[garrontower]

Would it not be better if all cars had to carry "Race Fuel" from the start of qualifying?

and

If a tyre change is deemed necessary during a race then the car must stop its engine before the change can commence and remain stationary for 30 seconds?

Surely a race is about the speed of the driver relative to a car and not the speed of the pit-crew?

[timbo]

Surely a race is about the speed of the driver relative to a car and not the speed of the pit-crew?

F1 never was only about the speed of a driver. Team is always a significant part in any driver's success, and pit-crew is the part of a team.

[nae]

So if you spend all Saturday sorting out the fastest car then start that car from the front how does that increase the chance of over taking ?

back in the 70's, 80's and 90's they qualified on fumes with a very specialised car with extra powerful engines to get the grid slot then turned up on Sunday with a almost different car, there was room for a car that didn't qualify well to be a better race car (on a full fuel load) and thus make up places.

in the late 90's and currently pit stops allowed different cars to run at different fuel levels at different times in the race, sometime making up to a 2 second (or more) lap time difference meaning cars could engineer an advantage and perhaps challenge for position

if a car is 0.2 secs a lap slower in race fuel qually trim and cant refuel during the race how can that slower car can ever engineer an advantage enough to firstly close the gap and then over take the car in front

excepting mechanical failure which has been engineered out by homoligation type rules

this leads into bernies mad cap medals idea, drivers can want all the can to pass but if there car is 0.2 sec / lap slower then thats it 12 secs down the field at the end of a 60 lap race

so the proposed 'new f1' will be decided on driver error or mechanical fauilure

sounds exciting doesn't it

there is a slight chance that in the development phase of kers there will be a difference, but those with the best system will walk it

again sounds exciting

there needs to be a variable and i just cant see one any more

[nae]

Surely a race is about the speed of the driver relative to a car and not the speed of the pit-crew?

if that's what you want you should watch athletes run marathons, or triathlon or some such, non team sports where the individual is all there is, and even then they are mainly done in a team sports way (olympics, world championships etc)

or the Race of champions for motor sport

which i must admit was the best days motor sport i saw all year

[nae]

oops double post

[machin]

So if you spend all Saturday sorting out the fastest car then start that car from the front how does that increase the chance of over taking ?

Indeed... its not ideal way of promoting overtaking..... A few years back I watched an Auto Italia race at Castle Combe... grid was a mixture of Ferraris, Alfas, right down to little Fiats... what they did was run the grid in reverse championship order... so the quick cars, the Ferrari 355's etc started at the back, and even though it was a short race there was plenty of overtaking as a result.... perhaps something similar could be done? You could still have qualifying, but this would be more of a test session, with bonus points for the quickest cars?

[timbo]

Parc ferme rule was wrong. So was abandoning of sunday warm-up. I clearly remember Hungarian race 2000 where MS qualified first but between saturday and sunday McLaren mechanics managed to improve the car and on the next day Mika won.

[Rob W]

Would it not be better if all cars had to carry "Race Fuel" from the start of qualifying?

How so? The cars go faster if they can refuel.. surely the whole idea it about racing. In addition, with over three times the current fuel in an F1 car there would be added issues such as, what happens if a car runs out? Can they pit for more? Or will they get penalised?

...must stop its engine before the change can commence and remain stationary for 30 seconds?

Why add in silly penalties like this when it is easier to just let teams change tires. The scenario you suggest is unfair on a car which suffers a puncture and, even if you checked for punctures it adds another area where there is potential for abuse by teams. Likewise, when it starts spitting with rain and two teams pit for intermediates (I'm just guessing this will be 'penalty free') they're screwed compared to teams who can handle the few laps without pitting if it stops raining.

Letting the teams manage their race-distance refuelling/tire changes and you end up with the most practical, fastest and (generally) safest way to finish a race.

Why screw with it because one pit stop in 100 ruins badly affects someone's race? Surely performing under pressure is a skill just as is making a carbon wing.

F1 already has enough finicky details without the addition of all sorts of extra "30 second penalty for *this*" clauses. They just create confusion amongst fans and would ruin races more than the often claimed fuel/tire stop issues. And getting rid of refuelling seems like such an utterly pointless aim. I'm yet to hear any argument for getting rid of it other than basically "some races got ruined by a botched refuelling". How many races have been botched by engines blowing up or cars being hit on turn 1? A hundreds times more.

If you take this to the nth they should just make a rule which says: if any two cars touch at all they're black-flagged immediately. I bet it would stop all on-track incidents in no time.. Why not get this rule in place too?

[myurr]

Rob W the argument for getting rid of refueling is that in the olden days when racing was real racing, done on track, the balance of respective cars would change depending on the fuel loads. This a) causes teams to design cars that are not so knife edge to set up, and b) means that the relative pace of cars will vary thoughout the race. That latter reason in particular will help spice up the racing.

[pgj]

We always get exciting races when there are drying condition. It is the variance in performance from the start to the end of the race that most appeals. It might not guarantee overtaking, but it will result in situations where gaps open up and close in races.

[megz]

All cars will start with the same fuel +-1-2kgs it would just be one more way to even out the field. It encourages efficiency development but otherwise? I don't see how it will "spice" up racing.

[myurr]

All cars will start with the same fuel +-1-2kgs it would just be one more way to even out the field. It encourages efficiency development but otherwise? I don't see how it will "spice" up racing.

Depending on the setup and dynamic characteristics of the car there will be different periods throughout the race where the car works better or worse than it's closest competitors. As an example the Ferrari may handle better with a heavy fuel load but the McLaren is the quickest as the fuel burns off. So in the initial laps the Ferrari might be able to pull away, but after the first stops the balance may shift and the McLarens start to catch and challenge them.

This used to be fairly common with different drivers being quickest during different stages of the race. It was a differentiating skill between the drivers as to how well each coped as the dynamics of the car evolved over the race.

[andartop]

Regardless of anything else (like spicing things up, safety, overtaking, impact on car design or whatever) a race car driver should have to demonstrate his skills on getting the maximum out of a car with fresh and used tires and with a heavy or light load of fuel. Whether that is easier for the average spectator to see by allowing or banning refueling and tire changes, I 'm not sure. I reckon it's easier to draw a safe conclusion by banning refueling but allowing tire changes.

[turnz]

So they'll ban refueling, eh?
Eliminates some strategy and "promotes safety" I suppose we'll be hearing.

I'd have supported gravity fueling to improve safety, assuming that there was a need for it. Makes me wish I could be paid for such short sighted thinking.

Final comment:
ummm, what teams had safety issues with refueling anyway?

[ISLAMATRON]

banning refueling must be coupled with a total redesign of the tires. That alone will make it a no go. In these tough economic times I doubt Bridgestone want to incur the large costs of totally redesigning the compound and construction of the tires to allow for the much larger fuel load needed.

I like the added strategy of differing fuel loads(not in Q3 though) but banning refueling doesnt make much sence unless they provide 4 new tire specs. they should last 100, 50 33, & 25% of the race distances. And whatever tires you qualify on you should start the race on. Other wise we just get 1 less strategy differentiater between cars/teams.