Do you want Refueling back?

[Giblet]

Other series can refuel...why cannot the epitome of motorsports refuel. I say make the cells smaller and refuel1. It can be made safe.

It can obviously, it just doesn't anymore.

Reasons it doesn't, cost and safety.

How can it be made safe? Any system can fail.

[ringo]

I actually don't agree. tThe old refuelling days opened up the opportunity to just bide time, wait patiently, then slam down the hammer once the other guy pits, and pass them by the overlap. This new formula forces them all to go on the same strategy as they can't risk a different strategy (at least in terms of number of stops... people can still choose which tyres to start on) and they're forced to do their passing on track rather than in the pits.

Exactly, and what if passing is not possible because the following car is slightly slower?
We get what we are seeing now, torturous and boring follow the leader race.
Passing with pit stops was not bad, at least it added strategy and it looked like something was happening on track.
Nowadays i can get up from the tv and return in 30 minutes and know exactly what will transpire.
The fuel stops were something extra that added the excitement of a poor stop, a jammed hose etc.
It was also fun estimating how man laps 5 or 7 secs of fuel could carry you.

Forcing the cars to go on the same strategy is the problem. There is no creativity with no refueling. We all expected to see things like cars running out of fuel, nothing like that has happened.
The teams simply will pick the same strategy becuase there is a convergence of the most optimal way around the circuit.

[ringo]

Other series can refuel...why cannot the epitome of motorsports refuel. I say make the cells smaller and refuel1. It can be made safe.

It can obviously, it just doesn't anymore.

Reasons it doesn't, cost and safety.

How can it be made safe? Any system can fail.

When last have we seen someone severly burned in F1?
They all have fire proof gears in the pits.
In fact lack of refueling is more dangerous becuase the pitstop is wheel change dependent. We all saw what happened in Hungary, and that other race with the HRT mechanic.
Refueling was safer, even with the torn hoses and flash fires.

[jddh1]

i want it back...

[raymondu999]

Other series can refuel...why cannot the epitome of motorsports refuel. I say make the cells smaller and refuel1. It can be made safe.

It can obviously, it just doesn't anymore.

Reasons it doesn't, cost and safety.

How can it be made safe? Any system can fail.

When last have we seen someone severly burned in F1?
They all have fire proof gears in the pits.
In fact lack of refueling is more dangerous becuase the pitstop is wheel change dependent. We all saw what happened in Hungary, and that other race with the HRT mechanic.
Refueling was safer, even with the torn hoses and flash fires.

Monza with the HRT guy being run over, and the Hungary mishaps, could have happened with or without refuelling.

[mep]

I must disagree, as I think some of the racing this year has been some of the best ever.

Not really tell me those races there have been many good races in the last years.

I also think that since the cars don't carry enough fuel to finish the race, and everyone has to go into a fuel miser mode at some point that there is enough a differential to produce some great _on track_ racing.

In practise we don't see this because all drivers go into fuel save mode around the same time. Also the effect of being in fuel save mode or not is to small to allow for overtaking on almost equal cars.

I would prefer that all the cars had tanks big enough and were forced to take enough fuel to go the full distance, flat out.

This doesn’t make any difference. If they go full bore all the time or start to save fuel at some time doesn't change anything with the current parade race problem.

1 - Refueling comes back to offer up different strategies, but drivers are coddled and teams get them clear air for a few fast laps, passing someone in the pits (boring).

That's not boring it is very exiting to watch this. Not because a driver tries to overtake the other all the time but because he tries to set one hot lap after the other and the leading driver has to react to this. Every lap you can calculate how the gab has changed and if the plan will work out. This means you have cars on track with totally different strategies, fuel loads and tire wear so a on track overtaking manoeuvre is much easier and therefore likely to take place.
There have been many amazing races in the last years but it demands some brainpower of the fans to really understand what’s going on there.

2 - Fill the cars to the brim, a mandated amount so every driver can go flat out. Unused fuel can be drained off and used next race weekend. No waste. You still get the chance to pass when your leading opponent goes in for tires and you get to do a few hot laps in clean air, then coming in and getting new tires.

Seems like you didn't really got what is going on at the moment. Drivers use the tires they start with as long as possible. A new tyre then is 0,5-1 second faster a lap. As soon as one of them goes to pit everybody has to follow immediately not to lose a position. As the cars usually don't get closer than 1 second on track the drivers can keep their position when they follow in pits immediately. Going for a few hot laps in clean air is therefore impossible because your tyres are a second slower. Then the drivers are on the hard tyres which last easily the rest of the race.

You say the ban of refuelling was made because it was expensive but also you want tyres that last only 15-20 laps.
In fact this is a funny argument. Do you know how many tires they already carry around the world? There are 1632 tires needed for one weekend at the moment. Two fuel rigs per team doesn't count much compared to this. If you compare those fuel rigs to the total amount the teams carry around the world and then this argument of cost saving becomes ridiculous.
They would safe more money if they do more races in Europe where they can go with their trucks.

[komninosm]

And as Timbo said, the racing has been great there is no reason to shake things up right now.

I think to spice up the racing however and strategy calls, teams should not have to use two compounds, but there should be some performance risk against running hards all race.

Not really that great. It would have been greater with refuelling to make more strategies available too.

Thanks for reminding me about tires. That's my other pet peeve. That rule has to change too as you say. Should I make a poll on that too or is it more unanimous?

[aral]

When last have we seen someone severly burned in F1?
They all have fire proof gears in the pits.
.

That is a poor reason to have refuelling! The fact that nobody has been burnt, seriously or otherwise, for a while, does not mean that it cannot happen. Better to not have the risk in the first place.

[raymondu999]

I don't think the racing is great this year... but it never has quite been IMO. The championship this year, however, is great.

[komninosm]

I actually don't agree. tThe old refuelling days opened up the opportunity to just bide time, wait patiently, then slam down the hammer once the other guy pits, and pass them by the overlap. This new formula forces them all to go on the same strategy as they can't risk a different strategy (at least in terms of number of stops... people can still choose which tyres to start on) and they're forced to do their passing on track rather than in the pits.

I'm sorry to correct you, but we saw tons of overtaking in the pits this year. So this new formula failed, like your argument

[multisync]

I am against it's return as it just makes a mess of the race -no one knows who's 'winning' till a few laps of the end. It stops from being one race to 3 sprints..

Far too messy and I don't think it improved the racing in fact if a race can be won when the car is at a standstill, it's not really racing at all!

One tank of fuel one set of tyres -Lets go racing!!!!!!!

[komninosm]

I'd rather have soft tires with enough of a performance difference to make a 2 stop an option again.

The problem is, without the lighter fuel-load, it is hard to make soft tires give enough of an edge to make 2 stops a net gain (even without taking into account having to overtake more cars). So we're back to the need to bring refuelling back.
As for the safety concerns some have voiced, there are solutions to those problems, if FIA wants to enforce them. Easy ones too.

[ecapox]

I am against it's return as it just makes a mess of the race -no one knows who's 'winning' till a few laps of the end. It stops from being one race to 3 sprints..

Far too messy and I don't think it improved the racing in fact if a race can be won when the car is at a standstill, it's not really racing at all!

One tank of fuel one set of tyres -Lets go racing!!!!!!!

Been there, done that with the tires. Remember, it sucked.

[komninosm]

I remember 1994, when refuelling was first introduced : despite the fact that it was a brand new factor in the sport (at least, for me it was new) I couldn't help but be underwhelmed by the racing it produced.

Even by comparison to the years of Williams domination that had preceeded, refuelling made the races much more boring for me. Sure, teams occasionally got the strategy wrong and things got messed up, but it became a procession where drivers refused to risk anything on track because the pits offered an easier method of overtaking.

Another thing that people overlook when assessing refuelling is that is removes one of the great variables : as cars handle differently according to their fuel loads, some will behave better on full tanks than others ... conversely, some will be better when running on empty.

When cars are perpetually running low fuel (as they are when they can refuel) then cars will behave predictably, operating within the same narrow performance window throughout the entire race.

For good racing, you want cars to have a variable performance differential at different stages of the race, otherwise the fast cars just sprint off and the viewer sees lots of beauty shots as cars circulate on their own : refuelling removed that variable and I cannot say that I miss it after 15 years of excitement free sprint stints *yawn*

What you say is patently untrue. Refuelling brings more strategy options (you can still do a 1 stop if you want) and 1994? Try 1982 :
http://www.yupeee.com/video.html?task=v ... nk&id=2639

[komninosm]

Oh dear:

1. When refuelling was introduced the fastest car qualified on pole and the team then simply ensured that they short filled as necessary to stay in front. It provided no opportunities for cars behind to do anything.

2. In order to get around this race fuel then started to be carried over from qualifying to the race itself in an attempt to nullify the boring scenario 1.

3. Alas, all that did was to devalue qualifying and for people to question just how much fuel a driver and car was carrying.

4. To get around this we then got published fuel weights. Unfortunately, all this did was to ensure we knew exactly what was going to happen in the race and when a driver would stop, putting us right back to point 1.

In short, refulling was crap and provided no excitement whatsoever unless another variable, like staying on one set of tyres for the whole race, was introduced.

Your number 1 premise is wrong as is your conclusion.