Do you want Refueling back?

[N12ck]

have a mandated fuel tank size, and be ordered to fill so many litres of that tank size

[beelsebob]

have a mandated fuel tank size, and be ordered to fill so many litres of that tank size

And handicap anyone with an engine that drinks more than that, worse, give no motive for improving fuel efficiency? That sounds like a terrible plan.

[strad]

My point was that they no only "save" fuel cause they think they arer Colin Chapman

[raymondu999]

It would handicap even more those whose engine takes less fuel, as they're carrying fuel weight for nothing. Probably the only way would be to mandate no changing of fuel mix? It would only be taking the no-quali-engine-maps rule further

[i70q7m7ghw]

A better idea would be to mandate 110% of fuel (or more if that isn't enough) for race distance, that way it would scale to the efficiency of the engine.

And in answer to the topic question, no. Refueling was far too dangerous and didn't justify any additional interest it may have added to races. I personally believe there are still far too many engineers in the pits during pits stops, I'm sure teams could manage with half as many.

[raymondu999]

Diesel - how do you stop people underfuelling though? They could say, "we anticipated less traffic" or "we didn't anticipate that our drag level would consume this much fuel." I get what you're saying, but this whole thing (getting them to run flat out 100% of the time) is unpoliceable IMO

[i70q7m7ghw]

It would have to be 110% fuel to race distance based purely on stats from their engine. So perhaps you force all teams to submit the figures for how much fuel their engine consumes at the start of the season, and then the fuel they carry is calculated based on this.

You are right though, it is very difficult to police, which is why it hasn't been done.

In my opinion a better solution is to do things the other way around. Give teams a fuel allocation for every race which is only good for 80-60% of the race distance. Then force them to use KERS or improved engine efficiency to make the most of that allowance. This way they could loosen up the rules on engine development and KERS development but police it with hard fuel limits. If the teams do a good job and engines start getting too powerful, reduce the fuel allowance.

[beelsebob]

Honestly, I don't think anything needs to change here... All you do by restricting the teams is remove more strategy options. The interest at the moment may not be in "who's going to refuel, and how high is their load" but instead on "who's got to fuel save, who can carry on until the end without saving, who's pace at the moment is being dictated by saving a little".

[Mr Alcatraz]

Honestly, I don't think anything needs to change here... All you do by restricting the teams is remove more strategy options. The interest at the moment may not be in "who's going to refuel, and how high is their load" but instead on "who's got to fuel save, who can carry on until the end without saving, who's pace at the moment is being dictated by saving a little".

True dat.

[Tyler]

I voted no.
I think that Giblet's earliest post hit the nail on the head - it just doesn't bring enough excitement to justify the risks.
Although I'm sure it can be made safer, there's always going to be a risk when fierce competition and gasoline are involved!

[N12ck]

I voted no.
I think that Giblet's earliest post hit the nail on the head - it just doesn't bring enough excitement to justify the risks.
Although I'm sure it can be made safer, there's always going to be a risk when fierce competition and gasoline are involved!

Or a more simple way would be to enforce a efficiency level in the new turbo V6's and then say have to run X amount of litres per efficiency level of the engine, so you could have it scaled so the more efficient the engine the less fuel they have to carry, that was they are rewarded for having efficient engines, whilst stamping out this fuel saving thing

[beelsebob]

I voted no.
I think that Giblet's earliest post hit the nail on the head - it just doesn't bring enough excitement to justify the risks.
Although I'm sure it can be made safer, there's always going to be a risk when fierce competition and gasoline are involved!

Or a more simple way would be to enforce a efficiency level in the new turbo V6's and then say have to run X amount of litres per efficiency level of the engine, so you could have it scaled so the more efficient the engine the less fuel they have to carry, that was they are rewarded for having efficient engines, whilst stamping out this fuel saving thing

Which gives the teams an incentive to design engines that pass the engine efficiency tests with flying colours, but not necessarily be efficient; and stops teams running interesting and valid strategies.

[ringo]

I voted no.
I think that Giblet's earliest post hit the nail on the head - it just doesn't bring enough excitement to justify the risks.
Although I'm sure it can be made safer, there's always going to be a risk when fierce competition and gasoline are involved!

What risks?

There is just as much risk as me going to a gas station with my cell phone on.
I've never seen a fatality with refueling.

A tyre change is 100 times more dangerous than refueling a car. Why not ban tyre changes?

[ringo]

I voted no.
I think that Giblet's earliest post hit the nail on the head - it just doesn't bring enough excitement to justify the risks.
Although I'm sure it can be made safer, there's always going to be a risk when fierce competition and gasoline are involved!

Or a more simple way would be to enforce a efficiency level in the new turbo V6's and then say have to run X amount of litres per efficiency level of the engine, so you could have it scaled so the more efficient the engine the less fuel they have to carry, that was they are rewarded for having efficient engines, whilst stamping out this fuel saving thing

How about we just allow refueling? And save the headache of calculating fuel weights.

[bhall]

I voted no.
I think that Giblet's earliest post hit the nail on the head - it just doesn't bring enough excitement to justify the risks.
Although I'm sure it can be made safer, there's always going to be a risk when fierce competition and gasoline are involved!

Yeah, I wouldn't go there. If NASCAR can safely refuel its cars by using giant gas cans, I think F1 should be OK.