F1 links: Refuelling ban still set for 2010

Once piece of good news at least today – the teams are still planning to ban refuelling next year. This and more below:

Refuelling ban still on for 2010 season

"A FOTA source has confirmed that work is currently underway on what modifications need to be made to the 2010 regulations – with refuelling certain to be one of the issues that is brought up." Fingers crossed…

Michael Salter’s Styrofoam F1 Car

Seventies-style F1 car made of styrofoam.

KERS – another costly mistake by Mosley (reg. req.)

"Costly it has certainly been, with a team like McLaren spending around $20 million on developing it. A curious thing to introduce at a time of obsessive cost-cutting, was it not? Perhaps it went down well with the EU…"

Share Our Vision

Donington Park offer an updates service for fans wanting to know the latest about development efforts at the track

These are links I’ve bookmarked using Delicious. You can see my Delicious profile here.

Advert | Go Ad-free

34 comments on F1 links: Refuelling ban still set for 2010

  1. scunnyman said on 27th June 2009, 3:51

    It is good news about the possibility of the ban on refuelling being kept for 2010. But how do we know that Max Mosley won’t put a spanner in the works and make it hard for everyone to agree on anything.

  2. scunnyman said on 27th June 2009, 3:55

    The styrofoam car is cool. It looks like a giant lego car though.

    I wonder if he could do a more modern F1 car?

  3. wasiF1 said on 27th June 2009, 3:56

    No matter how good Donington be Silverstone is the best.

  4. savage said on 27th June 2009, 10:18

    Still like to see the cars negotiate craner curve ,then back to silverstone

  5. Adam said on 27th June 2009, 11:05

    Refuelling ban good????????? Me think not!!!

    • persempre said on 27th June 2009, 12:03

      Why not, Adam?
      It reduces costs, takes an element of hazard from the pitlane &, from survey results, has been shown to be the one part of a pitstop which most fans would miss least.
      Why do you think it should be kept, Adam?

      • Adam said on 27th June 2009, 21:17

        I enjoy the strategic elements to F1. Banning refuelling is taking one of those elements away. Combining fuel strategy with compound strategy always keeps a race interesting, does it not? I can see why people want a ban but, if all that money can be spent on developing KERS to where we have it now then surely you cant use cost-cutting as one reason to ban refuelling.

        I like F1 as a TEAM sport with ‘on the spot’ calls from the pitwall attempting to calculate how a race will unfold for them and second guessing others.

        I understand about costs and budgets and blah blah blah, but in my opinion 2008 was the most thrilling season ive seen in many years. It brought many new F1 fans to the sport and the cars looked fighter jets with wheels.
        I personally would try to keep it all as close to 2008 as possible. Even if costs do need to be reduced.

        • scunnyman said on 27th June 2009, 21:54

          So Adam when did you start watching F1? was it after 1994 by any chance, and if not then did you not see the strategy with tyre stops?
          Refuelling has only made the race become a race of shorter stints, like having mini races within a bigger race.

          • Adam said on 27th June 2009, 22:24

            Heh heh. A long long time before that young man. As i said- “combined with compound strategy”….Doh!

            Agreed slightly, but i would say shorter with more “ELEMENTS” to a strategy.

        • Tommy J said on 27th June 2009, 22:27

          100% agreed Adam.. Finally, someone who knows what they are talking about!

          • Dougie said on 28th June 2009, 11:37

            Actually I’m well looking forward to a refuelling ban, and a free choice of tyres for the teams, therefore reducing pit stops to just about how long the tyre lasts.

            Therefore, I would hope we will see, some people going for hard tyres that suits their car better and they can run longer with maybe just one quick stop of tyres, whereas others may need 2 stops on a medium compound to get the best speed. Ultimately however they will have to do their overtaking ON THE TRACK!!

            Cars handling come and go based on fuel weight and tyre usage, just like the old days. So someone who has looked after their tyres will be faster at the end over their competitors, and other cars may work better on the larger fuel loads. Back to the days of someones big lead being eaten into in the last half of the race, and the chaser has to OVERTAKE ON THE TRACK if they want to win.

        • persempre said on 27th June 2009, 23:16

          I can see your point, Adam.
          No refuelling has it`s own strategic elements, though.
          Nobody wants to put too much unnecessary fuel in & make the car needlessly heavy. Different cars & even driver-styles can mean differing consumption levels etc.
          Get it wrong & a driver can end up stranded on the track.

          Do you remember before Bernie introduced refuelling?
          I don`t think the racing back then was any less exciting to watch for having no refuelling. It`s not as if pitstops are going there will still be tyre strategy.
          It`s just different types of strategies.

          • Dougie said on 28th June 2009, 11:43

            For me, what’s happened since refuelling returned in 1994 is that for the drivers the race is split into sections where they have to push as fast as they possibly can all the time. Therefore everyone is always on the limit and the variances are small.

            I want to see all the drivers having to manage the car they are given at the start for the whole race. The only thing they can change is tyres. So someone can if they want try to make the tyre last the whole race, and suffer at the end hoping their lead will suffice. However, someone else has nice new fresh tyres and a light load will be chasing them down hard for the eventual, we hope, overtake.

            Probably repeating myself here, but you get the idea.

        • Wesley said on 27th June 2009, 23:19

          I have mixed emotions about this re-fueling ban…..until there is more over taking in the sport,I do beleive re-fueling helps the strategy and “the show”…but on the other hand I would love to see them all battle it out with equal weight and see who really is fastest.A whole new strategy of tire stops only….and hauling the fuel rigs are very costly.Eliminate fuel rigs and KERS and use that money elsewhere.Perhaps that money could go towards helping the new teams.

        • scunnyman said on 28th June 2009, 0:00

          Thankyou for the young man bit Adam, been a while.

          So tell when did you start with F1 and what was your favourite last century?

  6. VXR said on 27th June 2009, 12:26

    The refuelling ban will only come about if the teams agree to it ‘unanimously’.

    • persempre said on 27th June 2009, 12:40

      FOTA themselves suggested it & the WMSC agreed to it in April

      It was confirmed that from 2010, refuelling during a race will be forbidden in order to save the costs of transporting refuelling equipment and increase the incentive for engine builders to improve fuel economy (to save weight).

      So, with both sides agreeing for a change, it seems quite likely to happen.

      • VXR said on 27th June 2009, 17:05

        “There will be a few amendments to the rules that need to be agreed unanimously. This will be about refuelling and a few other items, and should be completed in the next few weeks.”

        This latest FOTA release suggests that nothing is ‘set in stone’ yet.

  7. persempre said on 27th June 2009, 20:30

    Ah, yes. “A FOTA source said” type source.

    • VXR said on 27th June 2009, 20:44

      Ah, yes. “A FOTA source said” type source.

      Yes these ‘sources’ sem to be everywhere at the moment.LOL

      It’s difficult to know who to believe just lately.The various websites have their own agenders and none of them at the moment want to publish anything that will be in the least bit detrimental to FOTA (although I’m sure that time will come).

      I’m all in favour of a refuelling ban,but certainly not in favour of the shorter race distances that FOTA are also proposing!

      • persempre said on 27th June 2009, 21:27

        You normally find that the F1 media in general are terrified of losing their FIA accreditation so tend to back the FIA.
        Just another way that Max has maintained control.
        However, since they`ve seen the possible demise of Mosley they have tended to get a bit more backbone.
        I prefer to go by what the various parties put on paper themselves. Official documents are always there to refer back to.
        “Our sources” who don`t get named always seems dubious. Particularly when it refers to FOTA who are never backward in coming forward to say something. Even if it`s “No comment” :)

        • VXR said on 28th June 2009, 1:51

          However, since they`ve seen the possible demise of Mosley they have tended to get a bit more backbone.

          That is all too clear to see now.They may have got their wish too if they had bothered to tone down their Thursday morning headlines a bit.LOL

          Interestingly,under the 2010 ‘budget cap’ regs,refuelling is definitely banned with no mention of reduced race distance.

          • persempre said on 28th June 2009, 12:18

            The talk was that the weight limit would have to be increased, VXR.
            The present cars can`t get a full race distance of fuel in their tanks.

      • persempre said on 27th June 2009, 21:30

        Given the choice of keeping the lighter (faster) car or 20 minutes off a race, I`d plump for a shorter race. It doesn`t necessarily mean you`d get 20 minutes less entertainment across a GP weekend.

        • manatcna said on 28th June 2009, 0:58

          Why not just have a five minutes “highlights” show

          • Dougie said on 28th June 2009, 11:53

            Why not just have a five minutes “highlights” show

            Because, like the suggesting it, that would be stupid.

            I’m all for shorter races, they could even have 2 shorter races, that would be great.

            MotoGP for me works because its a race, from start to end, tyres are changed for the weather and that’s all. 26 laps still has a period in the middle where nothing much happens (in most races, sometimes it can be wicked all through). So, why would we want a big chunk in the middle where mostly not much happens?

            The other benefit of shorter races means that our whole afternoon is not given over to F1 and, on track, back markers become a non issue.

        • VXR said on 28th June 2009, 13:13

          The talk was that the weight limit would have to be increased, VXR.
          The present cars can`t get a full race distance of fuel in their tanks.

          According to the 2010 budget cap’ regs minimum weight has been raised to 620 kgs.

          Currently FOTA want to stick to the 2009 regs.

          There seems to be some confusion!

          http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/76604

          • Dougie said on 28th June 2009, 14:03

            There is no confusion, its actually quite simple…

            FOTA want the 2009 rules with some small modifications… what those are has not been revealed yet… hence why all Manor was saying is that until they know what the exact rules are they can’t comment.

            Rumour suggests that KERS will be banned/optional and refuelling will be banned… and to facilitate that the races may be shorter. I imagine there will be slightly bigger fuel tanks, but rather than major changes to accomodate the size required for current race length, they will find a balance between the two.

          • persempre said on 28th June 2009, 14:03

            There`s nothing about the regulations, as such, in that article, VXR? It`s more about the Concorde Agreement.

            As far as I know the 2009 rules are to form the basis for next year with any changes being agreed by the teams & FIA (as opposed to being arbitarily imposed as Max was doing with the 2010 regs.)
            Obviously, until agreement is reached on any changes all we have to work from is the current 2009 regs.
            However, FOTA have agreed that KERS will not be used so that seems to be fairly definite if nothing else.

  8. manatcna said on 29th June 2009, 3:25

    Dougie – My attempt at humour

    Wasn’t very good, was it? :)

  9. VXR said on 29th June 2009, 15:20

    So, why would we want a big chunk in the middle where mostly not much happens?

    What they (FOTA,FIA,GOD or whoever) should be working on is ensuring that the “big chunk in the middle” is worth watching.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.