[Yartonbler]

Is it that hard for Ferrari to get it right they are gonna ban it?

Or are they going to use this as an ootunity to bring in new fuels and ask the teams to be more economical with there fuel. Ie the less fuel carried the faster the cars will go, but will they finnish?

Whole host of stuff here for everyone to argue about.

[posimoka]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71398

I've long thought that refuelling should be banned, but that tyre changes should continue to be allowed.

It seems FOTA are looking at a wide range of possible changes. It doesn't mean all will be adopted, but it's good that these things are being discussed in a positive way among the teams

[Yartonbler]

I think it would be a shame to ban the refueling. I think the teams should be more concerned with reducing the number of people in the pitts. Ie one person per tyre. Two people refueling and air jacks.

Less people in the pitt lane has to be safer, and I think in years to come we will look back and think we were crazy....

[Gintovtosik]

Yes, yes, yes, yes, a million times yes.

Link to Autosport story about this, and also a few other things proposed: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/71398

If anyone gets the chance (if you don't remember them first-hand) watch footage of races in the late 80s and early 90s when refuelling was last banned.

Not only was overtaking far more common (although there may be aerodynamic reasons for that), the races themselves were much more complex. Someone like Alain Prost would sometimes hang back in 7th or 8th place conserving fuel and tyres, then come into play towards the end of the race and often win (I think this was more during the turbo/fuel consumption era though).

Pit stop strategy will still play a part, but it will all be about the tyres instead, and will hinge much more on a driver's feel and intuition than the strategists on the pit wall (fuel load is easier to measure by telemetry than tyre wear). Do you drive like a madman, race away into the distance but require an extra pitstop for tyres, or do you conserve your tyres and hope to make the time back when your opponent pits? Drivers who have the skill of conserving their tyres to avoid a pit stop while still maintaining a decent pace will effectively buy themselves 20-25 seconds over the course of a race.

Also, the sport is increasingly safety-obsessed. It is a matter of opinion whether they have taken the safety thing too far or not and both viewpoints are valid, but I don't see how they can justify emasculating circuits, run-off areas and such in the name of "safety" while still allowing 10 potential bombs to be operated in the pits during the race.

Yes refuelling post-94 has a great safety record, but so does the sport in general (nobody has been killed in an F1 race on the track since the 3rd race of refuelling's introduction), and given the massive safety drive in terms of run-offs, barriers, and the cars themselves, is refuelling a potential hazard we really need, even if the chances of a pitlane disaster are 0.00001%?

I'm not sure if I agree with the idea to shorten races though, the race length is perfectly fine the way it is. They managed to do 300km races without refuelling from 1984-1993, so the cars will need a much bigger fuel tank, it's been done before, let the designers deal with it

Finally, there has been talk about bringing a competitive element to Fridays. Would it be really that painful to just go back to an hour of free running on both Friday and Saturday, with the fastest times set in either session making up the order for the grid?

I tried explaining the current qualifying format to my girlfriend on Saturday while we were watching it, and as a new viewer it made absolutely no sense to her, and as a long-time fan, I was unable to justify it to her. I told her how qualifying used to work back in the good old days and she said "Yeah, that makes a lot more sense." Go figure.

[MwhwF6bp]

They managed to do 300km races without refuelling from 1984-1993, so the cars will need a much bigger fuel tank, it's been done before, let the designers deal with it

But cars running out of fuel at the end of the race was very common. There were many occasions when cars suddenly slow down just so they could finish the race.

[dr-eavealer]

Revival of Nash and Mobil Economy Run

[Retapleapse]

Have it like le mans where you can't work on the car while it's being refuelled. You won't have these sorts of incidents happening.

[NEWyear]

I think it would be a shame to ban the refueling. I think the teams should be more concerned with reducing the number of people in the pitts. Ie one person per tyre. Two people refueling and air jacks.

Less people in the pitt lane has to be safer, and I think in years to come we will look back and think we were crazy....

Banning refueling would do exactly that cut the number of people around the car during the pitstops by at least 2!

[casinochniks]

Have it like le mans where you can't work on the car while it's being refuelled. You won't have these sorts of incidents happening.

also doing this would double the amount of time cars are in the pits (while we're at it reduce the number of people per wheel and the speed of the fuel flow), therefore increasing the penalty for having to pit, giving the opportunity for drivers and teams to gain by trying to make tyres and fuel last longer

[Retapleapse]

That's certainly something to be looked at. You could even make it so only one corner on each side can be serviced each time so you have even less mechanics.

[Verger99]

I don't want to see pit-stops banned but it would be good to see them made longer so that teams could seriously consider a no-stop strategy.

[NEWyear]

That's certainly something to be looked at. You could even make it so only one corner on each side can be serviced each time so you have even less mechanics.

Better let the driver do it all by himself! Or maybe helped by the team manager!

[Eunatis]

It seems that the pitstops are a highlight of the race for the viewers, so they've even gone so far as to force cars to use both compounded tires in the race which means they have to pit at least once.

[NEWyear]

It seems that the pitstops are a highlight of the race for the viewers, so they've even gone so far as to force cars to use both compounded tires in the race which means they have to pit at least once.

Forcing them to use both compounds has nothing to do with the existence of the pit stops. It is rather being done because Bridgestone doesn't want to produce tires that aren't used.
Anyway given the compounds used now in F1 it's impossible to make the tires last the whole distance.

[Sleedyhex]

Since I am not a proponent of shortening the already too short races, I would like to see the following:

Qualifying - time the practice sessions. Fastest times are used no matter when posted and regardless of fuel load since that will be open. You put in however much you want for the session.

Race - Only 1 fuel stop. If you want to stop 20 times for tires, so be it, but only one for fuel. If someone wants to try doing the entire race without a stop it should be allowed.

Points - award 1 point for fastest lap during the race, 1 point for most laps led. Restructure the points so that a win is worth much more than a second place finish (at least 4 points spread, if not more).

One final note, if you are going to show these changes in the best light, you need to make changes to the cars that will promote more passing. It would defeat the above changes if a fully loaded, slower car is able to hold up a faster car. That leads me to another rule change: If you are lapping slower than a car trying to get past you, you should be forced to more over or suffer a penalty drive through. All this would do is turn what used to be sporting conduct into an enforceable rule.

[NEWyear]

That leads me to another rule change: If you are lapping slower than a car trying to get past you, you should be forced to more over or suffer a penalty drive through.

I can't agree with transforming F1 racing into f1 rallying.

[niemamczasu]

Pit stop strategy will still play a part, but it will all be about the tyres instead, and will hinge much more on a driver's feel and intuition than the strategists on the pit wall (fuel load is easier to measure by telemetry than tyre wear). Do you drive like a madman, race away into the distance but require an extra pitstop for tyres, or do you conserve your tyres and hope to make the time back when your opponent pits? Drivers who have the skill of conserving their tyres to avoid a pit stop while still maintaining a decent pace will effectively buy themselves 20-25 seconds over the course of a race.

I'm not sure if I agree with the idea to shorten races though, the race length is perfectly fine the way it is. They managed to do 300km races without refuelling from 1984-1993, so the cars will need a much bigger fuel tank, it's been done before, let the designers deal with it

I'm in favour of banning refuelling, it would several advantages from my point of view. The issue of some drivers conserving their tyres more than others would be very interesting, and the increased safety has to be a bonus.

From another point of view, it'd fit in quite nicely with the FIA's new clean 'n' green policies that they're pushing for, because all of the teams would surely try to increase the efficiency of their engines so they could run the race with less fuel onboard? Alternatively it may split the field - a big engine and a big fuel tank for some, and a much more efficient and lighter engine from others, although this would mean the minimum weight requirements would need looking at. No refuelling would also get rid of that stupid safety car rule!

Also, do we really need 20 people servicing each car? (or however many it is nowadays - that may be completely wrong). One person on each wheel, two on jacks, one with a lollipop and one with the extinguisher. Easy enough!

[Gintovtosik]

I don't agree with being forced to let a faster car through when you are racing for position, different strategy or no. I'm still struggling with the whole idea of blue flags moving lapped cars out of the way. The likes of Senna made negotiating traffic an art form, it was another skill that formed the set of a complete racing driver. As long as a car doesn't DANGEROUSLY keep another at bay (be they racing for position or on different laps), then it should be no problem.

I'm waiting to see what effect the new 2009 aero regs have on overtaking, but at this stage I have to be optimistic that there will at least be an improvement.

While I agree that banning or restricting refuelling stops needs to go hand-in-hand with making natural on-track overtaking more possible, since 1994 many drivers have developed the mentality of "waiting for the stops" - where an overtake may be just about possible, but they understandably don't want to risk it all going wrong. If they can't "wait for the stops", they may be required to take a few more risks in trying to get around another car.

[stoneeZef]

I would like to see each pit stop restricted to either fuel or tyres - not both. At the moment when refuelling takes around 6 - 8 seconds, the tyre change is effectively a freebie.

[Kolokireo]

Am I the only one who would prefer to have 50 mechanics during the pitstops? More mechanics means faster pit stops, resulting in more on-track racing

Banning refueling would result in cars wallowing around like pigs for the opening laps of the race... Defeats the purpose of motor racing IMO.

If the sport wants to portray a greener image, then perhaps they can impose a limit on the total amount of fuel available to teams on race day. Teams could pit all they want and manufacturers would be forced to develop fuel-efficient engines. Drivers wouldn't have to race with a full bladder of fuel, and could manage consumption by running lean.