Goodbye to… refuelling
Felipe Massa might not be too disappointed refuelling is being banned
It’s the last race of the season so we’ll be saying our farewells this weekend – some of the fondly, others not so much.
One goodbye likely to divide reaction among fans is the long-awaited banning of refuelling.
When we witness our final refuelling pit stop this weekend will we have lost something special from F1? Or, like me, will you be saying good riddance to the tedium of race refuelling strategies?
Refuelling was last banned at the end of the 1983 season. Today fans are likely to argue about whether it makes racing better or worse – but on that occasion it was banned because it was deemed unsafe.
Even 25 years later, safety is still a concern. During the last race at Brazil we saw Kimi Raikkonen’s car set alight when another was sent from the pits with a refuelling hose still attached.
This time refuelling is being banned to save money. Lugging two refuelling rigs per team to every race incurs huge freight costs, especially for flyaway races.
Banning refuelling is going to have a big affect on F1 and that will be the subject of a later article here.
But as F1 approaches its final race with refuelling I wanted to ask a different question – whether refuelling has become irrelevant as part of the F1 ’spectacle’.
F1 coverage, in Britain at least, is much more sophisticated now than it was 15 years ago. We know how much fuel a car has at the start of the race, and when they make a pit stop we can predict quite accurately when they’re going to stop again.
So a change of position due to a refuelling stop becomes more or less inevitable. When Jenson Button beat Rubens Barrichello at Spain because he used a two stop strategy instead of three there was little excitement or surprise at the outcome – other than the fact that two team mates had been put on different strategies.
To my mind it’s been five years since anyone did anything remarkable with a pit stop strategy – when Michael Schumacher won with four pit stops at Magny-Cours.
I’ve got a list as long as my arm of reasons why I’m glad to see the back of refuelling. But the most compelling justification is that it’s always the same and no-one seems to be surprised by it any more.
Are you happy refuelling is going? Was Grand Prix racing better before 1994 or after? Share your reaction in the comments – and do mention whether you watched F1 before refuelling was brought back in 1994, and what you thought of it.
Refuelling
- Why F1 will be better without refuelling
- The cost-cutting plans: refuelling ban
- Refuelling rig fires and failures hit race
- Two good reasons to ban refuelling
Read more on the 2010 F1 season
In today’s era where there is little more than a second seperating all the cars on the grid (granted that maybe a little more next season), refuelling allowed the added uncertainty and element in every race.
Refuelling also emphasised the point of a team effort in this sport. All the teams say they believe each operation (particuarly sucessful ones) is a “team effort”, now they’re losing members of that team and effort
Races could be largely processional next season, with some cars (or perhaps all) making the same number of pit stops.
It will also mean that the racing will most likely be of a slower pace as drivers try to conserve their tyres and what fuel they have on board. People that like/love agressive racing will probably see little of it. People think that the Hamilton/Alonso battle will be the tastiest battle since Schumacher/Hakkinen or Senna/Prost or Senna/Mansell etc. WRONG.
I don’t consider safety much of an issue either with regard to refuelling. The drivers are paid massive amounts of danger money anyway, and the pit crew probably get a relatively handsome amount. It’s part of the job, you accept it. Like a fireman accepts that he will be going into a burning building. I dont think refuelling rigs take up a particuarly massive amount of space in the haulage crates, but then I could be wrong.
YOu may have a list the length of your arm as to why refuelling should be banned, but I can bet I’ll have a list double that as to why it shouldnt and why it will be missed.
Did you watch F1 before 1994?
Funnily enough, 1994 was my first season of watching F1 aged 5 years… I’m 20 years old =P
But I have seen races pre-94 and still believe that the races are far more exciting with refueling than without. Oddly, I think it’s great the drivers crack under pressure and take the fuel hose with them. Sort’s the men from the boys.
I started watching in 1985 (I’m so old!) and can honestly say that banning refuelling will not suddenly produce super racing week in week out.
However, what it will do is
A: Challenge the drivers to master another skill. They are very adept at going fast on fresh tyres in a light car. But lets seem them manage a VERY heavy car. Especialy into the first corner of the race.
and
B: Force faster drivers to overtake on the track. There are few things more depressing then when a faster driver gets on the xhaust of a slower one and you know that they are going to leapfrog in ten laps when they go to the pits. Now, the driver behind will have to do it on the track (Provided tyres are being looked after).
One of the amazing things about Senna was his ability to drive very fast in a heavy car on cold tyres. Let’s see who can do that today!
Shocking- I hope it will not come to pass.
Is the official FOTA website a shameful “journos”?
Huh??
It is refuelling that will be banned – NOT pitstops for tyre changes.
Yes, but on some tracks with short laps i.e. Interlagos and Hungary, the penalty for taking a pit stop will be very high, so drivers will be looking at one stop at best on said tracks, in fact, I reckon most of the races will be one stops.
Exactly- hopefully they aren’t signed up to any kind of contract with the FIA. Same for Cmpos and Manor, for that matter.
I think it will still be two stop because I think the regs still state that both sets of tyres must be worn during the race. So you would not want to complete half the race on the crap tyre!
Which is why the drivers will be trying to conserve their tyres!
Except drivers will have to drive a bit more carefully when they start the races with 150kg of fuel if they don’t want to ruin heir tyres in 5 laps.
but SURELY the teams will still need to transport big fuel rigs around the world. otherwise how do they give their cars a quick splash of fuel in the dying moments of qualifying???!!!
Maybe there’ll be a Shell pump at the end of the pitlane.
They used a messured can with a funnel spout in the old days and the filler cap was mounted on top just behind the big airvent behind the driver. They could put the exact fuel in for one two etc laps.
Great post James !
Says it all. Refuelling adds an ants nest of very busy pit crews doing rapid, potentially dangerous things. Humans can panic, misread signals. Machines can and do mysteriously malfunction.
It all adds to the pressure pot effect and we are about to lose some of that compelling sight of humans under pressure.
Shame.
OMG! Did any of you see the pre race refuelling pits stops?
Tyre changes will happen next year and a good crew can get that done really quick without refuelling. Under pressure mistakes happen and now they have less time to think about it.
I’m with Keith and I’m looking forward to it. Drivers will be forced to try and overtake on the track.
Also drivers will have to be carefull they don’t burn up their tyres under a heavy fuel load.
Ahh yes but the smart lawyer would ensure that if the FIA are unable to provide a decent field that no doubt FI, Williams and co. have signed up to compete again, he would/should a clause to the effect of “If the Federation and governing bodies are unable to provide all the conditions to which the undersigned have committed to, then it is at the discrection of the undersigned as to if they are going to compete in the competition for the duration signed”. Or there abouts! Let’s not forget that Max’s list for who is signed for 2010 included FOTA members. If they’re not going to compete then I would suggest that have breached contract if not some other law.
I think all that makes sense?!?!
So pit crews won’t be changing tyres as fast as possible then? Pit stops will be a leisurely affair, like at the beginning of Talladega Nights?
lol great post!
shake and bake baby!
I’m on fire!
Agreed, good post James!
I also fail to see how banning refueling adds excitement, and from Keith’s report it seems as if the real problem is not the refueling but us (the spectators) knowing how fuel the teams are carrying. Also, although I only started following F1 for real in 1999, I’ve watched various races from other eras and I don’t think the lack of refueling was the reason they were (allegedley) more exciting. This was due more to the drivers and the cars overall shaky reliability, which meant there were more crashes and retirements than today. These two things you can’t have back.
In summary, refueling not only adds excitement to the race but also emphasizes the team effort that is a race. It as a quality of the sport that I admire, how the team works in synch for the result, yet the F1 bosses seem keen on showing only the most flashiest element of the team, the driver.
Agreed as a whole James, but the biggest reason why I think banning refuelling will make little or no difference to the quality of the racing is actually the current engine parity / freeze / regulations.
The last time there was no refuelling, we had a mixture of V8’s, V10’s and V12’s on the grid. The V8’s would go screaming off into the lead, then the more powerful V10’s and V12’s (Ferrari at the time) would catch them up once the initial fuel load had burned off.
With everybody having V8’s on the grid this time, any difference between the cars will still be aerodynamic … the biggest stumbling block to overtaking in F1 – unless the spec Cosworth is anything like they had back in ‘06′ !!
Which is surely the problem? All that seperates the cars now is aerodynamics, which is likely to be homolgised in the future i.e. parts become standard and areas of non-competition. F1 is slowly turning into Formula Renault/BMW/Ford. *yawn*
Really? REALLY really? I’ll believe it when I see it. Shame on the journos (like the one on 5live) who are taking this without a pinch of salt.
The answer to this problem escapes me, as well. Other racing disciplines manage to follow quite closely and overtake. I know most F1 people look down on IRL, but perhaps a look at their aero setup may be in order, as they manage to run nose-to-tail at 200mph. Not saying copy them, but have a look for anything that might apply to F1 and help solve the overtaking problem.
What’s refuelling got to do with on-track overtaking? This issue is being discussed to death elsewhere.
Bye bye…
Bring back real qual.
Great to see less artificial racing with fuel stratagy.
Now if the FIA wanted to ber ‘green’ they should limit the total amount of fuel that can be used over the race length.
The engines would have to be developed to use that amount and still be quick….
But next year could be interesting in regards with engine mapping…do I go flat out and then limp home to make distance or do I go conservative…etc????
I’ll miss it
The races wont be as intresting anymore. No more excitement guessing whos on what strategy and it takes away an element of the spectacle in f1. As for safety, Raikkonens fire looked worse than it was. The fire lasted less than a second and his overalls can withstand 7 seconds of burning. Also he was in a pitlane full of fire marshalls with extingushers ready to pounce on a spark.
It will be sad to see the end of it.
That said he did have vapour in his helmet for the rest of the race. Apparantly he was in tears the whole time because of it. That though, pays tribue to what a great racer he is. Some drivers would have called it day, whereas he carried on and picked up vital points for the team.
Before 1994 the cars raced….. simple.
After 1994 the cars raced, too. It’s only been in the last 4 or 5 years that decent racing has stopped, because of the aerodynamics
Agree on this. Aerodynamics have ruined racing, not refuelling.
Spot on mate !
When will they bite the bullet, get rid of ALL external aero and give the cars skirts again. Radical, yes, but we’ll get proper wheel to wheel stuff again.
correctomundo, neighborino!
Wow FIA really are stupid. I can’t believe this has actually happened
The problem is aero, but it goes back a lot further than the last 4 or 5 years.
The big difference is that no refuelling brings in the element of fresh tyres or no fresh tyres at the end of a race. You don’t need to stop, but if you do, you’ll be a second a lap quicker. Is it worth it? Will your tyres last? Can someone else catch you?
Also it adds the element of skill back into pitstops. Any small mistake is punished, whereas now most are masked by the refuelling still going on.
The lowing of the rev limit to 18000 RPM can’t have helped either. A few times this year drivers have been complaining of bouncing off the limiter before the end of the straight, which negates the advantage of the slipstream…
That’s a problem with how the engineers set up the gear ratios, it has nothing to do with rev limits.
Completely agree with james. End of refueling is going to make the race and qualifying ridiculously boring. No surprises in Q3, as slower cars cannot choose lighter fuel loads and use their chances to jump the ferraris and mclarens. Race strategy is an essential part of racing, and it will not exist after the refueling ban.
Being able only to remember watching F1 when refuelling has been in place this is the opinion I hold. Hope I am wrong though!
I don’t think anybody involved is stupid – stubborn, maybe, but not stupid. This may just be the highest-stake gamble ever.
Hardly. What about KERS, the huge changes to aero regs, having a sole tyre supplier, customer cars (or lack of them)… there are bigger issues in F1. The refuelling ban is just to shake up the racing a bit. Give it ten years and it’ll be reintroduced.
We need powerful fuel pumps in order to increase top speed. This will lead to bigger breaking distance and as a resault a lot more overtaking.
I know a v10 engine would be a lot more expensive, but if they keep the engine rules stable without changing their rev limits every year or their approximately life in grand prixs the cost will be reduced for sure.
Fuel pumps! Of course that is the answer. Do you work in Halfords? Maybe the teams could add some chromed mesh to the sidepods and LED strips along the nose!
The FIA introduces new rules every year or two to limit the speed of the cars and stop them becoming crazy-fast and too dangerous. We must tell them of the potential fuel pump breakthrough immediately. What’s Toad’s number?
lol yep, I did not write that, someone hacked in with my username. check the forums, you will also need to add an avatar with your username ,…do it asap.
WT#$!!!!!!
I didnt write THIS!!
Keith somebody is logging using my name!? WTH my name is written on this message and yet i did not write this nonsense .
I love to see more uncertainties. By allowing refuelling , it gives teams flexibility to play with different strategies. I enjoy watching it as an audience too, like when a driver is physically leading the race, but in actual fact it might not be the case due to different strategy used. I think it makes it much more interesting.
I seriously doubt that by banning in race refuelling would save teams a lot of money. More to the point, I don’t see why we need to go in the direction of cost saving at all! There are sponsors lining up to sponsor F1 teams. I am proud that F1 is the most expensive sport of all !
But it’s not uncertain and hasn’t been for ages. We know what they’re doing and we usually know how it’s going to work out.
How many teams have to quit before you change your mind?
There is a simple solution. The only people that the teams should have to tell about their fuel loads is the Stewards.
I don’t have to know how much fuel is onboard the car, and the other teams don’t need to know either. Making the fuel loads public was a bad move.
I didn’t start watching F1 until after 94 but I will still miss it.
I think that going back to manual shifting, getting rid of all of the aerodynamic goodies, and real-time data telemetry would make for much more exiting racing. The riddance of traction control, refueling, and tire warmers is a good start.
I’m pretty nervous about this news – not quite sure how to feel about it… it will certainly be interesting at abu dhabi this weekend that’s for sure.
Someone had suggested the use of steel fuel pumps instead of carbon fibre ones. That would cause the fuel efficency to double, it is assumed.
“I love to see more uncertainties. By allowing refuelling , it gives teams flexibility to play with different strategies.
But it’s not uncertain and hasn’t been for ages. We know what they’re doing and we usually know how it’s going to work out.”
Keith’s point is spot on. In the last 5 years there have only been two instances where refuelling has added value to a race, or where refuelling has caused uncertainty in a race which has kept fans on the edge of their seats. Refuelling is not the sole cause of dull F1 races, but it certainly is a major factor. 20 cars running around on the “optimum strategy” leads to dull races.
But if there is only one strategy surely this will create the same situation – a dull race
Sure, but if someone in a quick car has mashed up his tyres early and has to fight through the field to try salvage a point it will lead to a great race…
True, but then is creates the emphasis on drivers to drive smoothly and not to run to close to cars in front because of the lack will create greater tyre wear. This will mean drivers will adopt a slow and steady approach to driving at the early part of the race which could turn races in to a snooze-fest as the optimum tyre strategy is to push on soft rubber at the end of the race. I am just imagining Barcelona now….
Agree entirely.
What I worry about is that, since all cars are using the same tyres, same fuel load. If they did the calculation correctly, they should all pit at the same time, more or less the same lap. With the extra teams, the pit lane will be crowded.
In strategy wise, don’t you think its boring? Like everything is expected.
Like last week, when Kov spun his car, they pited him and fueled him up for a longer stint to make up for the mistake, if the strategy work out, it might not be so bad afterall. I am just trying to say that, I love to see the way team use their strategy to recover or optimize their resources in those short period of time.
Don’t want to moan here but to say that Massa will be happy as a result is a bit lame. He left the pits due to a failure of Ferrari’s new lollypop system. Kovi did it all on his own last week!
Kovi had the same problem than Massa. And was not with an automated lollypop system Ferrari was using it manually. For the case of Kova, was a lollypop mechanic’s fault.
I can see todt on his knees begging for the ‘refueling to come back when he realises there’s only gonna be three teams capable of designing cars for large fuel tank. The sheet has officially hit the fan!
Big fuel tanks are certainly the biggest technical challenge you can ask of a world-class motorsports team. I mean, high downforce aero packaging and seamless-shift gearboxes are a cinch by comparison!
When I first heard about refueling ban I thought it was destined to be a great equalizer when it came to passing. Also, refueling ban would not only create more parity on the track, but also serve as an example of a conservation technology that would, at least in intent, address the real world issue of alternate-energy conservation.
As the season progressed it became obvious that this was to become an optional technology with teams picking and choosing whether to use refueling or not. In my opinion if refueling ban were mandated on all cars and for all races the overtaking problem would be less of an issue than it is now.
For me, this relates to the bigger issue of overtaking in F1. If banning refuelling means that it enourages more on-track action I will love it, otherwise I won’t. As overtaking is already so difficult, you have to assume the worst. Alot of other agruments are fairly trivial. Drivers often drive to conserve their tyres and fuel already, so that wont change. There will be less risk of fires at pit stops, but they will continue to be dangerous for the mechanics under more pressure with faster stops. I didn’t watch F1 before 1994 so it will be interesting to see how drivers cope with heavy cars sloshing around the track in the early laps. We do already see that cars can handle very differently with different fuel loads, so maybe it will spice up the racing if some are better at different times in the race!?
OMG!!!!!!!!!!!
This is probably what we all wished would happen, but really thought it never would. Yes, no more refueling. Maybe no more tyre warmers?
To be honest, I think refueling has improved and to an extent, the new rules have worked. Its only improved from the midfield down the the lower end of the grid.
I think these double decker fuel pumps are to blame because we saw Alonso and Heidfeld have their battle and Alonso was able to get fuel spray the BMW (Non DDFP). Then we saw Button struggling to even follow Rosberg. He should have been sprayinf fuel over him
(DDFP).
Keith, I think you mean “1993″ and not “1983″ early in the article
I have become convinced that banning refulling is the way to go, but as with all changes, I suppose we will need to see how it plays out in realtime situations. If it improves the action-and, most of all, makes it safer- no complaints from me.
Nope, that’s right
Good on them. If a deal had been reached, refueling would still be in there, so that would be like treating the symptoms of a disease, not the cause.
On paper, banning refuelling should make F1 more interesting. It should mean that more overtaking will be done on the track than in the pits. But the problem is, F1 isn’t raced on paper, it’s raced on the track bla bla bla…
The point is I don’t actually think modern F1 cars can overtake each other often enough to make no refuelling work. In the last 15 years, even the most dreary races have been livened up by short fuel dashes and pit stop fires, but now what will there be to break up the monotony? Manadatory tyre changes?
I think the refuelling ban is a decent idea, but it won’t work until the cars are (successfully) designed to allow overtaking, and I can’t see that happening for years.
True – but these are two different problems. Refuelling doesn’t help cars overtake, it helps cars look like they can overtake, to the untrained eye. Banning refuelling isn’t a cure-all.
maybe the designers will have to make the cars less sensitive. They wont have the luxury of waiting until pitstops. We’ll see next year.
I am so glad to see Brawn on that list. This is great the champ leader saying they will leave too if refueling is banned. Awesome just awesome f*&k todt and bernie and those FIA a-holes they can all just go and rot in hell where they belong. All the fans will follow refueling well at least 90% of them will, F1 will be no more well at least governed by the FIA it will be no more. NF1 (New f1) will be much better without stupid regs and crazy rule changes every year. Way to say take your refueling and your budgets and shove them where the sun don’t shine.
Umm what list may I ask?
An F1 car with a fresh set of rubber just out of the pits used to be 1 to 2 sec per lap faster than a car just about to go in so overtaking did go on and still will. Remember any places made up now on the track should be perminent. Two or three stops in some tracks will be the norm, not only for fresh rubber but because an average stop will be 5 or 6 seconds shorter than previous years.
I think the excitement will come when we see cars with varying tyre wear. I’ve only been watching F1 since 1994, but I remember that Silverstone race (85, 86?) where Mansell blitzed Piquet after stopping for fresh tyres. We know how much a difference tyres can make from Melbourne this year. Strategy will live on.
Your right, the strategists will have to work out the time gained on fresh rubber against the time lost in pitting. Pitting is going to be soo much faster. I think the FIA will have to allow the teams to choose what ever tyres the want to impove the strategy.
My view is that this will increase even more technical competition, which is what I love the most about F1.
Now even single drop of fuel that the engine uses will count, because cars will have to carry more fuel during the entire race. So, while we see today mercedes engines being more powerful than the others, it might very well be that the new Cosworths use less gas over the entire race.
Can it be that by the end of the next year we’ll be talking about how many fewer gallons newer teams will need to carry, and how faster they’ll be because of that?
It’s real but I don’t think you’ve seen the last of refueling yet.
Xtrac will provide the fuel hoses.
parmalat used to supply most of the teams at one time. In those days the teams used as many fuel pumps as they wanted to.
It won’t be too hard for honda to get the infrastructure up and going most of it already exists and does not belong to the bmw or brabham.
If I remember correctly, before 1994, you also had exciting race strategies focused only on tires. Am I missing something, or will that still be relevant?
Also, forbidding refueling might be a first step towards making fuel efficiency a key factor in the race, ensuring that F1 will lead research in fuel efficiency that will be useful to the car industry, and silence the criticism that motor racing is an environmental waste. Or am I missing smthing here too?
That already happens – a lot. We’re always hearing radio from the cars where the drivers are being told to put their engines on its leanest settings while stuck behind another car, in the hope of eking out another lap and passing them by pitting later. Yawn…
I think I read somewhere that when the current Formula is redundent and updated for the 2012 season there will be a focus on cars only getting a set amount of fuel per race, and the team that gets the most from the fuel is obviously going to reap the rewards. I think this is Mercedes territory and most definitely not Ferrari’s.
Well let see what happens now. The FIA will take mclaren and brawn to court, but that cannot prevent them competing in another series where re-fueling exists. Presendence has already been set, todt said f1 doesn’t need re-fueling and further to that, FIA did not force tyre warmers to stay.
mclaren f1 will go broke then come back .Cant sue a company that is bankrupt.
Mclaren refueling hose will no longer be part of the sport. So no re-fueling, and the best one for me. Only manufacture teams have been developing the refueling techniques etc etc. Cosworth dont have a refueling rig. Were on earth are these new teams going to get a fuel pump from that can be as realiable.
Refueling will be looked upon fondly by this time next year.
The problem is that the cars just can’t pass each other given the current state of the rules and the tracks. 2009 rules were a step in the right direction, but the infamous double-diffuser put paid to most of the progress that would have been made. Everyone’s refusal to run KERS next year will also equalize things negatively.
Consider Valencia this year, without refueling. Hamilton would have sailed off serenely into the distance, while his teammate would have held everyone else back.
A great result if you are a McLaren fan, but still frightfully dull stuff to watch.
Now I’m all for getting rid of refueling on safety grounds, but the cars need to be able to pass each other in order for interesting racing to happen.
The best time to push home your fuel advantage is when your opponent is already in retreat & running out of gas.
You mean to say that Valencia [i]wasn’t[/i] frightfully dull this year?
Is anyone else thinking “Mansell, 1992″ here?
Chris, I don’t think fuel efficiency will be a big selling point. These guys are pretty good at figuring out how much fuel they need.
A tire war, on the other hand is what I think this sport needs.
Yeah BRM use to manufacture fuel hoses, but dont now. They have gone from supplying 120 fuel rigss. (3 teams with a couple of mess ups) close to 500 fuel hoses accross the entire grid.
It takes merc 5 days to build an fuel pump. and i dare say they would have it down pat. I dont think BRM would have it down pat considering they have to revive an fuel pump 3 years old.
Not only this, I would think some teams like Alfa romeo (merc second team), prodrive,(ferrari second team) would now sign up with FOCA.
Won’t there be refuelling during qualifying next year?
I was expecting cars to refuel between hotlaps under the new format in 2010.
Or are they expected to start Q1 with a heavy tank and burn it off through the sessions? If so that would mean fuel strategies become crucial in qualifying (rather than the race).
Good question Tom
I would guess that they are allowed to top up between sessions. Anyone know any better?
benetton can step in a supply the fuel pumps. Standard ECU of Brabham can still be used as its supplied by a different company. But who cares anyway, I’ll be watching the FOCA side of the wall. By the way how many hundreds of millions did the ITV pay for rights to F1 coverage?
“This time refuelling is being banned to save money. Lugging two refuelling rigs per team to every race incurs huge freight costs, especially for flyaway races.”
How much exactly do those things weigh? I can’t believe it’s a huge cost in comparison to all the other stuff they haul around the world – not to mention the multimillion dollar motor homes/buildings they cart around Europe, etc.
Yes, and how else are they going to fuel the cars during practice, qualifying and before the race?
With teacups?
LOL! HounslowBusGarage!
Some one please tell me this is a joke. i always thaught this idea of a refueling ban was indeed a Leverage plan. why does todt have to bve so dam stubborn? this is exactly what happened to Indyacars and champcars and back in the day that series used to be the alternative to f1 until they destoyed thmselves by introducing refueling. i really trully pray that common sense prevails and these people stick to the normal F1 championship where refueling exists.
I really worry that not refuelling is going to make for seriously boring races. More so than now.
At least now we have the suspense wether a driver can make his strategy work or not. Like how Barrichello failed to work his (supposedly) faster strategy in Spain by blowing his third stint (losing about 17 seconds in that stint by the looks of that chart). While Button beat him by swapping to another strategy AND making it work.
This shows exactly how a strategy is not set to be faster. Barrichello was supposed to win with that 3 stop strategy. That’s how they calculated it upfront. In the end he didn’t.
The only hope I have is that cars will be able to overtake each other better when on a full load and because the qualifying is changed.
Qualifying is one of the biggest problems with overtaking (after aerodynamics). The cars start in order of race pace. How can you expect them to overtake if the fast car is in front of the slower car? With low fuel qualifying we get a difference in cars that deal well on low fuel but not so good on high fuel. So the grid will be sorted more randomly when considering race pace. I know it’s artificial, but it might just work.
Hungary showed that the quickest guys can change from day to day and qualifying pace isn’t the same as race pace!
They start the race with the same car and fuel load as they qualified.
If there is any difference in pace on race day then that’s an exception. A driver that made a mistake for instance.
And what is wrong with faster cars/drivers starting in the front. What do you suggest, pull grid slots out of a hat.
Maybe you should read the first bit too.
Not necessarily so Patrickl, you will always get drivers like Trulli and Webber who really shine in Qually less so in races and the Coulthard/Button racers who struggle in Qually and are better racers.
But on the whole, I see what you mean.
I hope they see it through though. It’s time to have a proper racing . And I hope the court cases against Dallara and Fondmetal, the ones definitely going to happen, don’t detract from this.
I fear the same also.
There are still going to be mandatory tyre changes in a race, so overtaking will still be focussed on when competitors go into the pits to change tyres. Instead of a one fuel stop versus two fuel stop, we will have a choice of one or two tyre stops instead.
Pointless.
Next of course, the cars will be about 100 kg heavier at the start of the race than they were this year. 100kg extra of fuel. Which means that they are all going to have to start on the harder grade of tyre. Which means they will all be on the same strategy, plus or minus a lap or two.
Pointless.
There is no safety benefit either. The incidence of fire in the pits has been very low over the years (count the fires versus the number of pit stops), and it’s the best place to have a fire anyway as there are lots of people around with lots of extinguishers. Instead we are going to have twenty something cars all contesting the first laps with vast amounts of heavy fuel on board on granite-grade tyres, and that’s just dangerous.
Pointless.
It’s looking extremely likely Button will be the last real F1 World Drivers Champion.
2007 and 2008 were two of the most entertaining seasons I have witnessed. Not capitalising on this just highlights how much the OWG and FOM have blundered IMHO.
lets repeat that
@HounslowBusGarage
And on top of that, the teams will also be able to make calculated predictions based on tyre type and tyre ware and “listen to the radio” to predict when another team are most likely to enter their cars into the pits. Hence, we could get the same saga, if not worse because there will be a train of slow gutless cars just following each other and waiting …
Anyway I hope that does not happen but I fear it.
Looking forward to seeing it go. I agree with Keith — there’s no drama created by it any more. Far more exciting to see something like Mansell at Silverstone in 87 — turn up the mixture, damn the fuel gauge, and go like hell.
If the fuel volumes are set low enough, there will be a very interesting calculus between conserving fuel at certain points in a race and opening up the mix at others to storm away or catch a rival.
But maybe it’s just what you came into the sport watching — I started watching during the mid-1980s and got used to seeing mechanics in shirtsleeves rather than Nomex — and even now a firesuited pit crew looks sort of alien and unfamiliar to me. Someone who started watching in 1995 likely thinks refuelling is the one true form of the sport.
Well I’ll be, if this doesnt bring todt, owg and the bernie to its knees nothing will. I will certainly follow the it if it starts, but I do believe this is the last ace in the pack and are calling the refueling bluff. Either way the refueling ban would finally allow some awesome engineering and racing machines. I for one will be watching. F1 next year without the refueling will wither away and never recover. The FIA have to collapse now, but more likely Bernie will be proverbially sh****ng himself!
what people have seem to have forgotten is that without refuelling we will know who the fastest driver is in qualifying as, before the amount of fuel you had affected your qualifying pace, now everyone will be on equal fuel and pole position will be earned by the fastest driver. senna earned his pole positions not by the amount of fuel but by his sheer speed.
I am very surprised at how quiet Bernie has been lately.I wonder what he’s doing behind the scenes?
My worry is that re-fuelling will make races processional. But largely, they already have been this year.
I wonder if it will all become about saving fuel and tyres – but to a large extent it already is.
I was concerned about losing the ability for the little guys to jump ahead in Q3 and go for gold – but Force India showed us you don’t need fuel loads to move up the grid, and what’s the fun of a lighter car inevitably being passed in the pit-stops or, as we’ve seen on many occasions, their strategy ruined by an early safety car (far more times than a timely safety car appearing after the first stopper’s stop preserving his lead)?
Strategy won’t disappear, guys. Some people will gamble on one-stops, using the harder tyre for a long first stint, others will go for 2-stops using 2 sets of softs (and if they fall away quicker than expected, at least the driver won’t have to stop “too early” to get rid of them). Hopefully Bridgestone will have a dose of common sense and make both viable options on paper. Not to mention drivers using more fuel in the first part of the race to create a big gap and nursing it home, only to be caught out by a safety car and someone who saved more fuel at the beginning. The cars will also be fastest at the end, making for a mad dash for the finish. And at least we won’t have the silly “splash and dash” situations that compromise drivers’ races.
F1’s fundamental problems do not lie in re-fuelling, and for that fact alone its removal is unlikely to weaken the sport, and banning it has the prospect of making things a little better, at worse making no overall difference except for not having people set on fire in the pitlane. With re-fuelling gone, some elements of F1 will go with it, but it’s a small price to pay for moving the action more to the track.
Yes, it’s a team sport, but out on the track I want to see the drivers decide things, and the teams decide the things that aren’t part of the on-track action. I for one would rather dull races where everyone is managing their fuel and tyres than one where position changes are created artificially, largely beyond the drivers’ control.
Hopefully this also means an end to Sepang, Singapore, Shanghai, Valencia and Barcelona.
Hopefully todt sees sense and includes Magny Cours, Montreal, Jerez, Portimao and A1 Ring.
i cant wait! car will actually be force to make passes on the track because that will be the only way. i think that overtaking has suffered this year because driver have just thought ” hey if i stay close to this guy, he will pit first and then i can pass him”
No. They won’t.
The cars will still have to pit for tyre changes. They still have to use both grades of tyre.
yes, but stopping for tyres is different – you don’t stay out a lap or two longer than the other guy to gain time on him so then you can come out ahead – that’s gone now. This will bring enormous changes to how teams and drivers approach races and ’strategies’.
I hope it’s only a bluff. Anyway if it¿s true than it’s a very very sad thing. I’ll never watch F1 again and I hate to admit that refueling f1 or however it will be called will not be the same it will take many years to develp a mystique around it.
F1 R.I.P.
—> TODT should resign now!!!
hehe nice name change
I’m quite surprised at the overwhelmingly negative reaction to the ban. Among many, many other points, maybes and what ifs, two things: the cars will be more evenly matched (no big differences in fuel loads, no stretching out big leads on fuel strategy) and we will see their relative performance more clearly. The second thing is that the cars are going to be quicker and quicker as the race progresses, unfailingly, in every race, which in itself brings along a host of variables that at this stage no one can predict.
For those of you who only began watching F1 with refuelling – you can’t know that it’s better if it’s all you’ve ever known.
Good for todt to make a stand and the willingness to take a risk and start something that adhere to his values instead of someone elses. I am sure the new refueling ban have alot of hicups but I for one will be looking forward to its growth and races!
For me it adds a new dimension. Button may do very well again next year as he is very easy on his tyres which will play a big roll. Lewis for example is much harder on his tyres so it will be interesting to see what effect this maes next year. With no refuelling it will add more excitment as no one will really know if a driver has to pit again or not. Im looking forward to it myself.
Urgh!!!! When will this hell end! refueling ban will never work.
Todt needs de-throning – end of, then we can have a proper debate.
As Martin Brundle puts it “Come on guys, lets take a sensible pill”
What a way to overshadow the last Grand Prix of the season Shame!
Make a tire that can last half the race, then make the other one that’s two seconds faster but lasts 5-10 laps. Then watch them go!
I agree, and perhaps the best part is about hundreds of gallons of petrol being saved. Todt and Bernie were too big to think about that kind of stuff……
You people are mad, refuelling doesn’t create racing, it creates strategy. Sorting the men from the boys in the pit lane is a sad way to race, I say sort the men from the boys on who can go race distance being fast with the petrol in the tank.
Bring it on.
It’s too bloody late in the night for me to wrap my head around this and all its implications now. I just know that it sounds fantastic, sounds very idealistic…if the ‘new refueling ban’ isn’t a massive bluff.
Whatever happens now, I still support refueling and trust that this is the best course of action.
The title of this article worries me, is the next one “Goodbye to… the British Grand Prix”?
No
Lets hope that the refueling hold firm – a as exists now is not good for any sport
One question – what tracks will be avaliable for the new series? Silverstone may get a GP next year after all and please bring back Nurburg, Montreal and maybe Adelaide!!!!!!
I’m expecting a lot with the ban, maybe too much as there is always the problem that the cars will end pretty much the same as they still can’t or won’t overtake. This may not be that radical until the cars are tweaked or the tracks or both to aid overtaking but it will give the drivers a kick up the backside and show them they have to do the work on track.
For all F1 is the very pinnacle of what is possible, or maths, engineering and pure racing. The fans of racing will want it gone and some will just love the element it brings to strategy (though drivers still have to put in the times to make strategy work).
Having said all that there is still the issue of tyre strategy.
Bye Bye Todt and Bernie… Hello refueling ban!
I’m all for the the ban, if even after this call Todt and co refuse to give in. I’ll watch. Hopefully Sky TV here in New Zealand take up coverage of this ! (and keep F1 coverage, if Hesketh, Maserati,Shadow,AGS etc end up on the grid next year).
I love the strategy aspect of Formula 1. No other sport I follow, crikcet, tennis has this intelligence aspect.
But again, I haven’t seen any races without re-fueling. So, would love to see something new.
Keith, could you tell us what happens in other open-wheel racing series, is re-fueling banned there as well? and has it caused improved racing.
I ask this, since all reasons in favor of the ban on re-fueling state instances from the 80s or before. And the field then used to be over 4-5 seconds apart. So, the plenty of overtaking which happened then was due to lack of re-fueling or huge difference between car capabilites? We don’t know this for sure.
Now, you see 1 second covering the 20 cars. Surely, overtaking is going to be million times difficult. Re-fueling made it easier. Without re-fueling, my guess is it will be even harder.
But lets see, by May 2010, we should be able to conclude if this ban was good or bad. My hunch is, it is going to be bad.
There’s quite a bit of variety. I don’t think there’s any other single seater series like F1 which has refuelling and yet does not have large enough pit lanes for all the cars to be serviced at the same time.
Indy Car racing (in its various forms through the years) has refuelling, but they have large enough pits for all the cars to be serviced at the same times. Generally they also have more safety car periods (’cautions’), so drivers are more inclined to take a gamble on strategy.
GP2 (which, for my money, offers the best pure racing of high-level single seater cometition) does not have refuelling.
I’m happy with refuelling banning.
It is because I remembre pre 1994 races, and they were really somehow different from now: you didn’t need to deal with strategy (it is something that to me is not spectacular at all) and the driver needed to “manage” the car all the race long. So it happened that a car that was slowest at the beginning went increasing through and through, and you say great recovery races.
You may say that after all the drivers will need to change tyres, ans so they will need to pit again. But pitting for refuelling is very different from pitting for tyres: refuel is something that you can forecast, tyres wearing is much more unpredictable, and the driver has a lot to do with it with his driving style.
And last but not least, the drivers will not be allowed to wait for pitting, to overtake somebody ahead. They will not be allowed to perform an overtake just by fueling for a shorter time…the will need to overtake on track!
Wait and see…26 cars in one second and a half lap time and no refuelling should allow for exciting races.
Good.
refueling ban was always about racing & innovation.
refueling was about politics and ego for too long.
I wish the ban every sucess and look forward to the racing.
I am old enough to remember when there were no pitstops, not even for tyres and the only way to overtake was on the track. I would love to see that situation brought back as I have always felt overtaking in the pits to be cheating. However, I have to agree that with todays cars and a lot of todays circuits it would be boring – for the first year or so. Hopefully, if people were to stick with it, designers would be forced into producing cars that could overtake on the track. If they did not, they would not win races. It might be the best thing that could happen to F1 design in years.
THIS IS THE KEY POINT TO IT ALL! THE WHOLE ARGUEMENT RESTS IN THIS COMMENT!!!
As David Says, This should force designers to build cars that can maintain their speed in dirty air so they can overtake on the track.
Yeah, and that’s going to be cheap.
we know it, explain that to FIA.
Back in the mid-80’s when the turbo cars were around, there was limit on the amount of fuel that could be used during the race.
This was intended to be socially responsible and to promote the efficiency of racing cars.
However, the watching audience were treated to the pathetic sights of Formula 1 cars running out of fuel as they tried to finish the race.
There were many other ocassions when lesser teams grabbed a moment of glory for their sponsors by allowing their drivers to turn up the boost and increase their fuel consumption. This extra performance would allow them to move towards the lead of the race and grab some TV time, before running out of fuel ten or so laps before the end.
This was not good racing, and I fear that a prohibition on refuelling will allow this to happen again.
Running out of fuel was caused by not taking on board enough fuel at the start. It had nothing to do with a fuel limit.
I’d assume these days they know exactly how much fuel is still left in the car. They could tell the driver upfront to change to a different mix and save fuel.
Although Massa had a fuel problem in Spain when he supposedly ran out of fuel, but Ferrari later claimed that he did have enough fuel after all. So maybe they don’t know and they just guestimate it?
Not sure I agree with that. Cars were limited to 240 litres for the entire race in 84 and 85. I’m sure they loaded on the max, but it was the rate of burn that caused them to run out of fuel before the end of the race.
Ah ok, I was thinking about the McLarens in 90 something.
Several teams have pulled out their application to enter F1, Lola and N technologies, who is to say the others on the waiting list will not do likewise. They all are against refueling ban! can you believe that?
The ban should shake things up a bit in that it brings out the best in some different drivers. Schumacher only won regularly after refuelling came in. I’ve read how Prost lost the 83 championship to a fuel-stopping Piquet, and he retired just before the return of refuelling (did he see it coming?) I’ll be interested to hear what Martin Brundle has to say: he raced both with and without refuelling.
How many drivers had their race ruined by an FIA-supplied fuel rig that didn’t work? And how many times did James Allen tell us how excited we all were about cars 30 seconds apart on the track? The ban’s long overdue for me.
I’m a bit concerned about the field spreading out and the fastest cars disappearing off, but now there’s always the threat of the safety car to close the field up. Particularly with drivers told to stay in their cars if they crash, and even more so if Piquet gets a drive…
If Todt goes ahead with refueling ban (a possibility) then Alfa Romeo have a contract with FOCA, not bernie.
Bernie also has the rights to the “Aston Martin” name
In a way, ironically, the fans might actually need Bernie in order to keep the refueling.
I can’t see the ban being a good thing. We do see overtaking now but this is usually a fast car overtaking a slow car, or a light fast car overtaking a heavy fast car. Once they were on the same strategy this year, we haven’t seen lots of overtaking, first lap aside.
Next year, we’ll see the fast cars at the front. No doubt about it unless someone makes a mistake in qualifying due to all the cars making fast runs. That means fast cars at the front, slow ones at the back and around they’ll go. At least this year, if a driver in an average car put it in the Q3 they could have a chance of mixing it with the big boys with strategy.
Do we think we’ll see a driver come through from the back of the grid and make it on the podium next year with no refuelling? It’d be magic if it happened but extremely unlikely.
I think this years rules have been fantastic. Button dominated the opening events but after that there was a real sense that you wouldn’t know who would win a race, even if there was a fast car on pole, and that kept me watching till the wee hours (I’m in NZ).
Aside from that I love watching F1 cause its awesomely fast, and yes I like the transfer of technology to road cars and all that but not at the expense of the driver having to take his foot of the gas to make it to the end. Is that racing? I can’t race with him because I won’t make the finish so I’ll let him past.
Disappointing
I think the FIA have p****d off shell and mobil 1. The advanced nature of shell’s project showed their commitment but this was thrown aside more than likely due to previous actions on the part of both companies. Additionally, colin chapman has already commented on the adverse impact this war is having on signing title sponsors. How could any major business get involved with an FIA F1 WC with a potentially low quality fuel suppliers ? How could shell and mobil 1 now rustle up the finances to run in 2010?
This IMHO is greatest example of brinkmanship I have seen in a while. Bernie has put the ball firmly in fuel suppliers court. Either they get rid of Todt and his cronies to keep the shell & mobil 1 or they suffer the massive negative publicity and associated financial loss in losing the big names in F1.
Personally, I’m now at the point where I am so turned off by Max and Bernie, that I would rather watch FOTA’s championship than anything these two old, greedy fools have to offer. They’ve got to go. Now!
I won’t miss refueling during the stops. Having cars on different fuel stops was an additional strategy factor, but I don’t consider it necessary for interesting racing.
A couple of points need to be addressed in this debate:
1.) pit-stops will matter even more.
Drivers will have to make pit stops and how fast his crew can change tires will actually matter. Nowdays it is the same do they change them in 4 or 6 seconds, they allways have to wait for fuel hose to come out, a well trained crew could bring valuable seconds to the team.
2.) faster cars in qualifying doesn’t mean that car will be faster in race.
Setup is still fixed before the end of qualifying, teams shall face a choice – better qualifying position or better race-pace depending on will their car be tuned to work better with empty tank or heavy fuel load.
3.) different cars will reach peak at different parts of the race.
Some cars will work better with heavy fuel load so they would definitely put the faster tires in their early stint trying to take the most advantage of the period when their cars are fastest. They would want to make the big gap at the start of the race. Then there should be some good finishers who would be faster in lighter car so they would charge in the second part of the race (think Kubica at Australia this year).
Maybe we are not even seeing some things teams will look to exploit, we all hope this will increase on-track battles and overtaking, honestly – I don’t find it very exciting to see will somebody make a stop on lap 13 or 14, especially as we know when will drivers stop and every team knows it too.
The only concern I’ve got is that we’ll get back to the days of drivers backing off in the last half dozen laps to make sure they get to the end of the race. The days where the prospect of running out of fuel rather than finishing 7th were dreadful.
actually……does this mean teams will start work on a new car? im sure for most teams work on the the 2010 F1 challangers are underway but with a refueling ban in place what are the cars going to look like and whren does the work on them start? its quite late as it is to make another racing car th this stage especially for next year. any thoughts?
Also, I just remembered why banning the refueling is cost-saving. Teams need to change the fuel rigs and it is a considerable investment for a piece of equipment that makes no increase or decrease of performance.
Much as I think this showdown had to happen, for the good of the fans and the sport, it is terrible news for formula one isn’t it?
I began following motorsport seriously in 1984 (@ age 12-13). As a US fan who watched Indycars, NASCAR, and F1 (it was great back in the 80s, as it was all on ESPN), the fact that Formula One didn’t have refueling seemed weird to me. The more I read, I understood about the pre-1984 safety concerns…but refueling isn’t inherently unsafe, so I thought it was a good thing when it was brought back in 1994.
Was the racing any better or worse due to refueling? I’d have to say not really.
I thought the racing was really good in the mid to late 80s when you had a solid group of good drivers (Prost, Senna, Piquet Sr., Rosberg Sr., Lauda, Berger, Mansell) who were threats to win every race and multiple makes who were competitive (McLaren, Brabham, Ferrari, Williams, Lotus).
The racing got boring when one make got a competitive advantage over another, and that team dominated, as McLaren and Williams took turns doing from 1989, and Benetton and Ferarri did in the mid to late 90s. Adding refueling was an attempt to change that, but it really didn’t change much.
Two keys for competitive races, IMHO. The first key is having competitive balance among the manufacturers, which we’ve had this year.
The second key is tire variation. Bridgestone has to be made to bring tires with substantial differences between them next year, like a super soft vs. a hard tire. That will make for real differences in strategy (run fast on supersofts or longer on hards – do the long stint early or late? Do two stints of equal length? Do three?).
Suggestion: a change that could make for better racing would be to have Bridgestone bring three compounds, and have the teams required to only use two of them (but maybe they could use all three). The surprise/strategy would be that we (and the other competitors) wouldn’t know if a driver was using hards/softs or mediums/softs or mediums/hards, or softs/softs/mediums, etc. That would add an element of drama. And teams could change strategy on the fly based on weather/changing conditions/safety cars/etc.
Or, as someone said above, have a tire war. That would create drama, too.
This is how I see it…
1) The teams can’t afford to run two fuel pumps, will want to go with the refueling, but will need to get out of their contracts with Bernie
2) Until they can get out of their contracts, the fuel suppliers will not commit to races with the teams.
3) There is no rival fuel pump manufacturer until there is the budget cap is lifted.
4) The sponsors will not want to spend any money until they are sure there is fixed fuel supplier.
So we will have a stalemate. Meanwhile, the motorsport authorities will be putting pressure on Todt to resign. This means both sides will be groveling to each other to reconsider.
The most likely scenario is that someone caves in.
The second most likely, considering the stalemate outlined above, would be no fueling at all. Most of the teams wouldn’t mind this, considering the recession. They would all like a year off to save money and come back stronger next year.
Even if the rival manufacturer can get the pumps together, the FIA will be moving to get rid of todt. Maybe then the teams would be invited back into the fold, on their terms. Because it would be embarrassing to run a failed fuel pump where the second manufacturer is EuroBrun. This is the third most likely situation.
A distant, distant fourth option is allowing two fuel pump manufacturers, but I see one of the above happening first.
All the teams would start with hard tyres with the heavy fuel load and then switch to super soft when the fuel load went down enough. So they would be forced into the same stategy.
I would like to see the return of Q-cars. I know it is expensive, but even qualy-only enginces would be nice (with or without rev limits…). Even relaxed parc fermme requirements would make it more interesting. The qualy:race performance relationship will govern the early season race strategy more than we give credit. E.g. Jarno and Mark – quick on one lap, but poor over a race distance.
Also – why are we maintaining the 3 qualy sessions when there is no longer a fuel correction in the third? I’m not suggesting single hot laps, but 45 minutes of track time and the grid is set in order of finishing.
As for refuelling – car design/engineering will be much more important. I fear for the new teams. They will each run out of fuel once before the season is finished.
/speculation.
Shell is out of contract after this year. They’ve got to supply for Moto GP in 2010. mobil 1 is out of contract after 2010 and castrol cannot afford the franchise fee on its own so they might pull off. petrobras is off at the moment, but ELF is still owned by a renault or someone, I think. Montreal, Indy, Suzaka or Fuji. Imola, Brno.
The thing is , the contracts are already drawn up and I seriously doubt they exclude other fuel suppliers from the circuit (pesky EU laws on competition as well as goods services and trade). The promoters can sign deals with other oil companies as they see fit. I think they are all up for grabs as they can see more of a share of the real profits from the races. The only ones that won’t are those owned by Bernie.
James, I have to disagree with you. I agree with most of Kieth’s article.
I started watching F1 in 1987 when I was 12. I wouldn’t say that I like one era better than the other. Both scenarios create exiting moments. but overall, I’m tired of the pit passing just like Kieth.
The reason I disagree with James is this;
1) you say that the ‘team’ aspect will be lost, but there are what, 3 refueling guys. they still need tires and like Kieth says, this can be very dramatic.
2) aggressive driving will be lost….we’ve seen the opposite in the past when there has been no refueling. Drivers can’t rely on the pit leap to gain advantage and they push past. Also, you get tire masters like Prost that come to life when everyone else struggles.
ALSO, re-fueling combined with the 3 qualifying sessions leads to every car that is 11th and up going with these huge fuel load strategies….boring and processional (Trulli train!!). Now you’ll have 26(?) cars that are starting a bit more ‘fairly’ and you will see a lot more early action that hands a little more advantage to great drivers in mediocre cars (example, Sutil in the Force India at the beginning of the year starts in 19th with a ton of fuel….meanwhile, Button is 1st with very little fuel and pulls away to gain 30 seconds on Sutil….this factor will be reduced when they are all on the same fuel loads) that example assumes that Sutil is ‘great’.
Also, James, I don’t see how you can have lists of reasons why refueling is so great that are twice as long as my arms when you didn’t start watching F1 until they had started refueling again….
Sorry James, didn’t mean for that to sound like an attack…you just seem adamant about it, but haven’t really gone through a season without fueling…..cheers
F1 As we know & Love it will never survive without the refueling.Lets hope it becomes
I am new to F1 and this is my first time voicing an opinion on the subject, so be kind…
But…
I think I agree with Anthony in that one of the unintended consequences of allowing refuelling is that you end up with cars with very different fuel loads on the track at the same time, which in turn allows more overtaking.
Even a slower car with way less fuel can pass a faster competitor who has just topped up. This does add to the spectacle in my opinion. Overtaking on the track is still exciting, even if it is a result of different fuel loads.
PLEASE PEOPLE NOW MORE THEN EVER I ASK YOU ALL WHO ARE TO ATTEND THE ABU DHABI GP TO PROTEST AND SHOW YOUR DIS CONTEMPT AGAINST FIA AND TODT. MAKE SOME HUGE FLAGS AND BANNERS SAYING WHAT YOU THINK!!! THE CAMS WON’T BE ABLE TO IGNORE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF ANGRY FANS!!!
pleasE!!!!!!!!!!!11
I think tyre management is being overlooked here, that will be the key. As we know, Bridgestone don’t exactly bring two great tyres to a race, one will always be inferior to the other, hence there would still be strategy in tyre choice.
Driver who can manage their cars better over the course of the race will benefit. Knowing when to push and when to back off. The ban will also force drivers to pass each other on track, which would be good fun to watch. We had so fantastic battles before 93, so I expect more of the same.
I wonder which of the current drivers can adapt to this change quickly. I expect the like Jenson and Alonso to quickly pick up the pieces, the jury is out on the likes of Vettel, Rosberg and Hamilton
I think I’m happy about this. refueling is an enormous drag on the sport.
F1 won’t survive as we know it without the shell, mobil 1, elf, etc. It will instantly become the “B-League”. This is especially true since the oil companies are going to be have the support of obama(as they’ll be allowed to invest in technology liberally).
In the short-run, the sport will face tremendous uncertaintly. However, in the long-run, I truly think the sport of racing will be better off for ridding itself of the cumbersome management/regulatory framework that burdens the sport so heavily today.
Hey… now that I think of it… I was hoping that one of the long-time F1 Fanatics out there could help a newcomer understand the sport better by providing some background info (I have only watched this season and last but am now obsessed with F1)
My question is this: Most people seem to agree that aerodynamics are hampering overtaking in F1. But why? Is it simply that it is hard to follow another car in dirty air?
Sorry if this question is way too basic for this forum. Let me know if these kind of questions are unwelcome.
Not too basic at all. Yes, you are right though. The cars are set up to have the maximum corner speed by cutting through clean air. Any deviation from clean air reduces the effect of the aerodynamic pieces. Last year’s cars were addorned with flickup to straighten the air flow on to the rear wing to maximise it’s efficiency. Removing the flickups for the 09 season was intended to increase the relative performance of trailing cars. It didn’t work because aero guys managed to claw back the performance difference (in large part due to the double defusers). Only by taking a step back in design will we return to ‘on track overtaking’. Simple wings with no floor/defuser effects.
Thanks Dave!
The track layout also has a lot to do with passing. Some tracks (like Monaco) are just not great for passing. If there is no where to cleanly pass on a track then its not going to matter what aero tricks you have.
Refuelling was part of the show,its disappointing that it will be the last time we will see it.
Secondly next year we may see some situation where cars on the closing stage have to back off to save fuel or may even run out of fuel.
Will surely miss it.
But as the tyres will grain more on the opening sequences of the race will we see 3-4 pit stops instead of regular two.
I remember watching F1 before refuelling and the thing that really bugged me was that within a quarter of the race the leader(s) were lapping the backmarkers. That, especially for me, makes the race rubbish. It’s great to see the cars at the back able to change their fuel strategy to help them to the front with help from refuelling.
But now I fear we’ll go back to the ‘lapped car’ syndrome that I thought was eradicated. It’s going to become regular in every race.
What!? Very early lapping was due to the state of some of the teams in f1 at the time. Nothing to do with refuelling. In Q2 15 cars are often less the 1 second apart all running on fumes. If their race pace is similar then maybe 5 cars will get lapped in race.
Im 100% with Keith on this one. My brother sat in on mission control in MTC and he could not belive how much they focus on economy to eek out the extra lap to jump the car in front at the next pit stop. Now its time for them to try and pass the guy on track….if thats impossible with aero issues then at least he may see more little errors forced due to people behind pushing harder to overtake.
If you think there will be no strategy and boring races, Paddy Lowe doesnt agree with you http://www.formula1.com/news/interviews/2009/10/10083.html
Keith I think that pinnacle of refuelling racing is the 4 stop strategy at Magny Cours in 2004. So was the hungaroring of 1998. That was schuey-brawn-ferrari and tactics at the best. Those were two wonderful races. I will never forget.
Yeh I am happy to see refuelling going away because of 1 reason and that is the strategy less qualifying. I always feel those qualifying brings the best out of the machines and the drivers. No Strategy, just pure racing. Bring the best setup for the track and get the best out of it if you have the best driver around.
One thing I feel sad about refuelling going is the fact that it takes one variable out of the game. one less variable one less complexity. Due to the technological development in the recent days the racing was becoming more predictable. Now if there are more variables atleast there is some amount of unpredictable stuff out there.
Second reason I hate to see refulleing going is because master strategist like Ross brawn would have less role to play. I always loved the way Ross took the rabbit out of the hat albeit he needs a good driver to drive for him to do so. i loved him doing that with schumey. Also another fact is that now if a driver is trailing another in tracks like valencia, sgp and Monaco we alteast have the hope of overtaking through pit strategies. Now that element would be lost. Yeh it is not end of pit stops there are tyre changes but still.
I have been following racing even before 1994 era. I dont have complaints towards both the versions of the race. THe real people who make the difference is the people. A ross Brawn can make a refuelling stop interesting. Similarly great drivers can make the other style intresting.
Keith One question. If this is just done to save cost and not in the interest of the sporting spectacle. Are we going to see this come back when the economy booms agains and when auto industry is back with loads of cash at disposal ?
My only concern is that if it is done just to save cost and not to make sport more interesting. It will lose out soon.
Regards,
TMAX
It will be terrible. I remember racing with no refuelling All the cars were heavy and there was very little overtaking if memory serves.
You will know the result of the race after around 10 laps.
OK, maybe 20
What a shame
Good! No more Max and Bernie!! wooohoooo!!!
Ban on refuelling is good. It will discourage teams from staging crashes giving unfair advantage to the other driver qualifying on low fuel and benefiting on deployment of safety car.
I sincerly hope that this is an eleventh-hour attempt to scare cosworth into … something. I remain convinced that refueling ban is doomed to failure for several reasons, including a lack of fuel pumps; coswarth can build sixteen fuel pumps where the mercedes can run with twenty-six. cosworth cannot get new pumps from anywhere: given the economy, no-one is going to be willing to build a pump from the ground up, and the mercedes already has all the pumps in their pocket. Likewise, you can bet Bernie Ecclestone will be signing contracts with circuits to say they’ll work with him and none other (unless he hasn’t done so already). Everything needs to be negotiated with corprorate sponsors, broadcast partners, circuits owners and event organisers, all of which will take time that cosworth does not have.
This isn’t an eleventh-hour anything. The refuelling ban was announced months ago — wasn’t it actually before the first race, in that first flurry of FIA-FOTA conflict? All the cars are already being designed with longer wheelbases and larger fuel tanks to accommodate the increased fuel load.
I think you will find refuling ban will be more popular, Bernie cannot stop teams designing their own fuel tanks. This is commerical suicide for the bernie and not only this against the law. As for new fuel pumps. A fota series unlike the f1 series will more then likely gurantee 80% – 90% of tv revenue goes to the teams. Unlike current. It has already been worked out a new fuel rigs will give the teams the same fuel efficency they are currently getting. Difference is they own the fuel, The have a vested interest in it therefore they will all work together. As for engines, ford will sign up tommorrow morning. Existing engine suppliers that bernie does not own can do what ever they like. Think about it you can host the current f1 grid bar 4 engines at 1/2 if not 1/3 of the cost. Not only that the deal is sweetened further with the bernie owning everything. Paddock club etc etc. Currently different companies own advertising boards, paddock club etc etc. engine suppliers will make profit.
You also need to think that there would be several contract relating to f1 and bernie that will fall over. People signed contract with the current grid. I have no doubt if 80% of that engine suppliers will walk away, there will be breaches.
Bernie, FIA and f1 is dead all because of power, cash and ego’s.
The winner here todt
FOTA championship isn’t going to happen any time soon. Despite fans getting really excited about it (and assigning unrealistic expectations to it) it was never more then a bargaining chip for FOTA to get a bigger share of tv money. If they are serious about trying to improve the sport FOTA should invite circuit owners in their organization so they can together put pressure on FOM…