Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
I think removing the compulsory tire change could result in some interesting alternative strategies. A driver could go easy on the tires and gain +-30 seconds on opponents who need to pit for fresh rubber. Thoughts?
it may be but the FIA should work with the tire supplier and make sure that no tire should survive more than half of the race. This year we saw cases as when Vettel drove the whole race with the same tires and did not see significant drop of his laptimes.
Refuelling has to come back.
Those races we have now are predecided after the start with a little highlight when the single stop comes but usually it's hard to pass the leading car with strategies now.
About on track action we don't even need to talk about.
I agree, that it could lead to some interesting strategies.
Let´s keep in mind, that there are some tracks, where track position is
paramount, and even if you are 1 sec slower a lap, people still can´t overtake (Monaco for example).
As long as the tires are conversative enough, to survive a racing distance, as they are at the moment, I could see some people (one of the new teams maybe) playing the track position card. Keep in mind, you won´t get a blue flag while you are leading, you can drive as slow as you like, if you do it clever enough.
Not sure if it would be better overall, but I think we have way too many artificial rules in F1 at the moment. (both technical and sporting)
"Make the suspension adjustable and they will adjust it wrong ......
look what they can do to a carburetor in just a few moments of stupidity with a screwdriver." - Colin Chapman
“Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.” - Leonardo da Vinci
Better to say that teams don't have to change tyres. Then you'd get different strategies and, where the lead drivers all decide on a no-stopper, they would need to overtake on track.
There would be races where it would be touch-and-go whether a guy could change tyres and still get back up behind, and overtake, a guy who tries to stay out on one set all race. Look at the races these days where there is often only a handful of seconds covering the first few drivers; with a 25 second penalty for pitting but the chance of 3-5 s/lap faster times, we could see people chancing their arm on a late change.
It would need the tyres to be marginal for a race distance though. The current "long life" tyres wouldn't be helpful.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
The compulsory tyre change should be removed. I would like to see a return of the old system of a driver gets X amount of tyres each race weekend and they can use as many as they like and use whatever compund they like, whenever they like.
Just_a_fan wrote:Refuelling is a dangerous gimmick.
This argument is ridiculous when you do motorsport which is dangerous in itself.
Refuelling or not doesn't change anything in the general danger of the sport which everybody should be aware of.
Btw: Refuelling is not a gimmick its a logical and natural solution to improve for race strategy. Banning it is a artificial limitation.
The awareness that the tires last to long I have since beginning of the season but nobody cares about this opinion:
Just_a_fan wrote:Refuelling is a dangerous gimmick.
This argument is ridiculous when you do motorsport which is dangerous in itself.
So perhaps we should remove the requirement for HANS and helmets then. How about banning flameproof overalls for the mechanics too?
Seriously, the argument that motorsport is dangerous so we should add refuelling (with proven fire risk) is daft. Refuelling was brought in as a way to try to add to a sport that was processional and dull at the time.
If we encourage on-track overtaking we don't need refuelling to "add spice".
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
I agree that the re-fuelling is too dangerous in its previous forms. Yes, motor racing is dangerous, but I can guarantee that there were more re-fuelling mechanics injured in the past 16 years as compared to drivers. It had become the most dangerous job in the sport and that is just ridiculous.
But I still liked the extra variable that re-fuelling added. I think it could be brought back in a safer form, perhaps with an electrical throttle override or something to ensure the driver didnt take off until 1-2secs after the fuel hose was removed.
But anyway, this is a discussion for another thread.
On the tyres, yes I think something can be done with them to spice up the racing but this is really a very difficult development path.
Comparing refuelling with hans and helmet is even more ridiculous.
Pit stops are still dangerous and with the ban of refuelling a new danger is greated because the pit stop time is only releated to the tire change now.
Before there was enough time to change the tires. There already have been more trouble to tire changes, lose wheelnuts ect. than to spilled fuel.
No tyre company wants to produce a tyre that can't do the distance, It's too much bad PR, even if it was a requirement by the FIA. F1 would not be attractive to any tyre firm. That will always be the case under these rules. One way to solve the problem is allow another tyre company to enter to start another tyre war, but that will cause more problems than it would solve in my view.
If you really want tyres that can't do the distance for entertainment value alone then the FIA or Bernie would probably need to hire a company to produce the right tyre for this and brand the tyre themselves.
Overall it might be even more dangerous now that there is no refuelling. Mechanics are hard-pressed to shave tenths off tyre changes and wheel locking systems have become more complex and thus more prone to fail at a bad moment.
We have seen maybe the worst cases that could happen since Benetton fiddled with the rig- hoses being torn and driven through pit lane, but it wasn't awfully dangerous. Now, we have already seen plenty of loose wheels and luckily there weren't any big consequences to that, but that doesn't mean that will always be the case. We have even seen the nasty Yamomoto accident in the pitlane when the person in charge of a safe exit was too busy watching the four corners of the car to see the man who would have been right in the centre of his eye-sight if he would have been waiting for refuelling to finish.
So at least it isn't certain, that refuelling ban lessened the dangers of F1.
Paul wrote:Overall it might be even more dangerous now that there is no refuelling. Mechanics are hard-pressed to shave tenths off tyre changes and wheel locking systems have become more complex and thus more prone to fail at a bad moment.
We have seen maybe the worst cases that could happen since Benetton fiddled with the rig- hoses being torn and driven through pit lane, but it wasn't awfully dangerous. Now, we have already seen plenty of loose wheels and luckily there weren't any big consequences to that, but that doesn't mean that will always be the case. We have even seen the nasty Yamomoto accident in the pitlane when the person in charge of a safe exit was too busy watching the four corners of the car to see the man who would have been right in the centre of his eye-sight if he would have been waiting for refuelling to finish.
So at least it isn't certain, that refuelling ban lessened the dangers of F1.
