GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: Irisado on January 15, 2016, 04:37:35 PM
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35323338
This reminds me of that song 'Where Have All The Flowers Gone', and specifically the line in it 'when will they ever learn'. Refuelling is not a silver bullet. There is no way that it's going to improve the quality of the racing, and it's a safety issue as well. If the FIA wants to generate better racing and more overtaking, it must do something about aero and not bring back old failed ideas.
-
I feel that bringing back refueling will add another level of strategy to the event that is missing now.
They have proven that it can be done safely as many cars have been refueled during races with no safety issues.
-
Safety has nothing to do with it. I like it for the strategy as well, both for the car weight options at the start and the way you can change the strategy on the fly by simply adding more fuel than originally planned.
Bring it back, I'll be pleased. :good: :good:
-
It will always get my vote. It's adds to the spectacle, changes strategy, errors can change races. Yes overtaking will happen in the pit lane but surely this is better than processions.
-
I'm in favor of it, too. As Scott said, it brings several strategic elements to the sport.
-
Aero would do the samr thing and make the driver
a key part of racing.Exciting racing aero + Pastor =
death defying exciting racing
-
Aero would do the samr thing and make the driver
a key part of racing.Exciting racing aero + Pastor =
death defying exciting racing
Surely you must mean much less Areo Dare?????
Making the equation:- Much less Areo + Pastor = A chance for another win to add to his other one. :P :D :D :D :D 8)
-
Sounds like Pastors patrons are late in their payment and his drive is in jeopardy for next year. Renault is playing hardball.
-
I readsomewhere that Renault didn't want him in the
first place.I hope Kevin gets his seat or maybe bring
back Rueben's[just kidding]
I meant less aero John...youshould know now you have to
translate what I say or mean to say.
-
I disagree that safety is not a concern. Just look at the number of refuelling fires or incidents down the years. There have been quite a few, and it has only been through sheer luck that they haven't caused more injuries than they actually did.
Also, having refuelling is likely to make overtaking even less likely on the track. There would be a danger of a return to the 'let's wait for the stops' mentality.
-
I disagree that safety is not a concern. Just look at the number of refuelling fires or incidents down the years. There have been quite a few, and it has only been through sheer luck that they haven't caused more injuries than they actually did.
Also, having refuelling is likely to make overtaking even less likely on the track. There would be a danger of a return to the 'let's wait for the stops' mentality.
I'm against refueling on a safety point of view as well.
However, we must consider the danger of extra heavy cars trying to negotiate in close quarters for the first few laps. If they start the race lighter, they're more maneuverable, which makes them safer.
-
You can make it safer by going to a gravity feed rather than the pressurized rigs they have used in the past. Cheaper too.
-
IndyCar, IMSA, WEC, Blancpain series, GT Open and even NASCAR manage to handle refueling just fine. like Lonny said, just go back to gravity feed systems.
-
You can make it safer by going to a gravity feed rather than the pressurized rigs they have used in the past. Cheaper too.
Cheaper, safer and the fuel guys can be ex-Rugby players to keep Ian and the girls happy with the big burly types in the pits. :crazy: :crazy: Best of all, is it's also slower, so they can be more careful with the wheels (so they don't always fall off) and give the drivers a moment to stretch their fingers.
-
What are they doing?????
Shouldn't the focus be on wheel to wheel racing... not some strategy game about juggling weigh, fuel economy, pit time, etc.
Some slowpoke will hit it lucky with the safety car / refueling crapshoot and win the parade, then how can I hope to keep my Grid Game Flags??? >:D
-
Wheel to wheel racing won't happen unless they change the Aero rules, and the teams don't want that so might as well bring on the chess match. Any mixing of the result is better than nothing.
-
Agree Lonny, there is not much chance of the rules getting completely overhauled even though most of the rules are so restricting, especially the engine freeze. If they want to restrict something it should be aero, remember the green Lotus (?) of Jimmy Clark.... absolutely beautiful and it would drift around curves within inches of his soul-mates... and you could actually see their faces and not just the top of the helmet! No downforce gimmicks at all, and with actual road tread on the tires, it was up to the driver to try to make the car stick to the road. Please bring back the formula of racecars of the Stirling Moss era (but with better safety features and bigger engines).
-
Seen my avatar? :D :D
-
:fool: :fool: :fool:
Refuelling is dangerous (more dangerous than not refuelling) and introduces yet another 'throw of the dice' element. It is not strategic and it isn't interesting. It just breaks up the 'race'. We are supposed to be 'race enthusiasts'. Car and driver against car and driver. Tyre stops already spoil this, refuelling would make it worse.
The re-introduction of fuel stops would probably be the final straw for me. I would stop following F1 and watch series that have got proper racing - Touring Cars, MotoGP, Superbikes....
-
Sure refuelling is dangerous, hell I'm old enough to remember when F1 racing without refuelling was even more dangerous, but I still think it can add something to the spectacle.
I love trying to guess the strategies that teams or drivers are employing in the races, indeed I even shout at the TV when Brundle or Coulthard don't seem able to keep up with what some drivers are actually doing when they previously reported information that clearly points to a driver's counter strategy to others.
Refuelling will add extra layers to the strategy games the likes of Symonds, etc can bring on race day. I welcome it to add more obfuscation and therefore, for me anyway, more interest.
-
What are they doing?????
Shouldn't the focus be on wheel to wheel racing... not some strategy game about juggling weigh, fuel economy, pit time, etc.
Some slowpoke will hit it lucky with the safety car / refueling crapshoot and win the parade, then how can I hope to keep my Grid Game Flags??? >:D
It's always better to be lucky than good. There's a few WDC who can attest to that.
If they're going to bring back refueling, perhaps some rules that might make it more interesting:
- Each Car uses the same amount of fuel per race. If your car is more efficient, then you're hauling ballast to the finish line. (My theory here is that there is no reward for 'running lean')
- Enough of this 'pump petrol' crap. The engine and tire manufacturers are pushing the limits, why not the fuel suppliers? There's not a single piece of F1 technology in my 2012 Ford Escape. Why should it use the same gasoline?
-
C'mon, Jeri. Do you really thing that the Shell in Seb's Ferrari has much in common with the stuff down at the local gas station? ;)
-
C'mon, Jeri. Do you really thing that the Shell in Seb's Ferrari has much in common with the stuff down at the local gas station? ;)
That's the rule, and we know they actually test the fuel.
Indycar wouldn't run on ethanol if it wasn't a better fuel for racing.
-
Count me as another one who would like to see re-fueling come back, for all the reasons already discussed. It adds another level of strategy and gets away from the present situation where cars start super heavy and end up super light. If we want to talk about more racing, how often have we heard the call "stop pressing for a few laps...we have to save fuel". That sure makes for excitement.
Yes, it would add some element of risk but Formula 1 is a dangerous sport. The risk can be minimised with gravity feed fueling and some form of fail-safe mechanism.
Obviously, fueling is just one change needed to make the sport exciting again. Sort out the aero. Get rid of a lot of the computers that do the driver's job. Etc. etc.
-
One of the biggest things for me are these awful 'power unit's' and we are stuck with them until 2020. Get back to real engines please.
-
Seen my avatar? :D :D
Or Mine?
-
So many changes to how we do business have occurred in the past decade or so. We stopped refueling. We went from slicks to grooved tires and back to slicks. We changed the rules drastically regarding wings and even added a movable aero-dynamic part in the form of DRS. We went from V-10s to V-8s to a turbo-charged V-6.
That doesn't even take into consideration the changes regarding other aspects. There was a tim when teams had "qualifying" engines, changed out be qualifying and the race. We changed the qualifying format a bizillion times it seemed.
A majority of the changes were to slow the cars down.
Some were to try and regulate competition to make it more interesting.
None of those things worked because the engineers made the cars quicker under the changes. The quicker cars got quicker exponentially, widening the gap between cars instead of closing it.
Many changes were introduced in an attempt to cut costs. Those ideas too were failures in large part, with the end result costing teams more to be competitive.
I completely disagree with the notion that refueling is such a dangerous thing to do. Really, when (and how many) pit crew or drivers were burned during refueling during a race, over the more than 60 years of Formula 1 racing? I do not know the answer; although, it is probably readily available, my point being that it is a small number because it would otherwise be easily recalled without looking it up.
Even in 2008, when Massa was released with the rig still engaged with his car, and he drove all of the way down the pit lane, nobody was burned. There had to have been some fuel spilled in that incident.
I am fully in favor of putting refueling back into the equation.
-
I'm not saying I am right and everyone that wants refuelling is wrong (that is what I think but I am definitely not saying it) but I really do not understand why people think it will be an improvement.
When I think back to the races when refuelling was normal, I can't think of a single occasion where the refuelling added to the excitement of the race - not once! Yes certain accidents and mistakes actually changed the result of the race but unless such mistakes elevated your driver of choice, I can't see how this could be considered as more exciting. The fastest cars were fast, the slowest cars were slow and refuelling changed nothing.
In my (almost 'humble') opinion all pit stops simply break up the race. In F1 I believe pit stops were introduced to provide an opportunity for overtaking because it was almost impossible to overtake out on the track. Of course I recognise that these now have to be strategically timed but isn't that fact a slap in the face for race enthusiasts? Every change to the F1 regs should now be focussed at making overtaking on the track possible.
-
In my (almost 'humble') opinion all pit stops simply break up the race. In F1 I believe pit stops were introduced to provide an opportunity for overtaking because it was almost impossible to overtake out on the track. Of course I recognise that these now have to be strategically timed but isn't that fact a slap in the face for race enthusiasts? Every change to the F1 regs should now be focussed at making overtaking on the track possible.
Sure it's better to have overtaking on track but somehow I don't see this happening when the likes of Red Bull put so much store on aero as the only differential between cars. Also F1 is a team game, has been for the last 30 years, and because of this we are not able to have real head to head races from the drivers in big teams.
I am just as interested in strategy as the on track fights - or rather lack of them these days - and variable fuel loads makes another level of strategy to be considered both by the teams, drivers and many of us spectators.
I also like seeing the commentators and so called experts make fools of themselves trying to keep up with the twists, turns and curved balls of strategy battles on track - and usually getting their knickers in a right old crumpled state. :D :D
-
I can understand you point of view Monty; however, I don't agree with part of your logic about the car and driver v car and driver being what it is about.
This is a little off the topic of refueling, but the same logic should apply across the board, not just to refueling.
If we truly want that, and in a very general way, I am with you, then we need to stop waving the blue flag all of the time. I watch a lot of racing and Formula 1 is the only series where the blue flag is used to any great extent. If faster cars stack up behind a slower car, over-taking the slower cars without one's self being over-taken should be part of racing.
-
If we truly want that, and in a very general way, I am with you, then we need to stop waving the blue flag all of the time. I watch a lot of racing and Formula 1 is the only series where the blue flag is used to any great extent. If faster cars stack up behind a slower car, over-taking the slower cars without one's self being over-taken should be part of racing.
I agree and believe me I could produce a long list of things that are not right about F1. I just don't want yet another bad decision (bringing back refuelling) to make things even worse!
-
Regardless of whether there is agreement about safety (there isn't, because I remain very unconvinced about the argument that it can be made safe enough), I have yet to see any persuasive evidence that bringing back refuelling will spice up the show. All that will happen is that drivers will 'wait for the stops' and try to do all their overtaking in the pit lane. Yes, this happens now to some extent with the undercut approach to tyre stops, but it would be even worse with refuelling being introduced.
If we want to have better racing, the teams have to stop messing around and sit down with the FIA and change the aero rules. That's the only way to improve the show sufficiently in my opinion.
-
No and no. First of all, how many injuries have their been from fire in the pits over the decades? I think you can count on one hand. That doesn't make it very dangerous.
Secondly, changing fuel levels bring plenty of variations on strategy for length of stints, length of stops and tire degradation that weren't available with the no refuelling, plus with no refuelling the car simply got lighter towards the end, so the FL was always in the last 3 laps. I like the strategy. I like the pit to driver info, I like the fact that the team, especially the pit wall, has a direct affect on race results. I like team vs team racing. The more factors available to make the right call or the wrong one makes or breaks plenty of teams races, including boosting the occasional back marker with a bold strategy into sniffing distance of a podium. It used to happen, but that was back with refuelling.
-
No and no. First of all, how many injuries have their been from fire in the pits over the decades? I think you can count on one hand. That doesn't make it very dangerous.
Secondly, changing fuel levels bring plenty of variations on strategy for length of stints, length of stops and tire degradation that weren't available with the no refuelling, plus with no refuelling the car simply got lighter towards the end, so the FL was always in the last 3 laps. I like the strategy. I like the pit to driver info, I like the fact that the team, especially the pit wall, has a direct affect on race results. I like team vs team racing. The more factors available to make the right call or the wrong one makes or breaks plenty of teams races, including boosting the occasional back marker with a bold strategy into sniffing distance of a podium. It used to happen, but that was back with refuelling.
Just because there has been no conflagration in the pits doesn't mean we need to wait for one to declare fueling unsafe. However, I agree that banning refueling solely on safety issues seems a little silly.
The real reason for the ban was to encourage on track action. Some of us do quite enjoy the long term strategic approach that refueling brings to the sport. There are other people who want to see wheel to wheel racing. As long as you can beat someone in the pits, why would you risk contact on the track? Eliminating that option forces drivers to take chances on track. In theory.
I think that having the cars loaded heavy at the beginning leads to LESS overtaking opportunities. We've seen in the refueling days that some cars would start super light, and slice through the field. That option is gone.