Refuelling to return in 2017

[The Artist.....]

So, the F1 team bosses have voted to bring back refuelling in 2017, to add more excitement.

Well, there we go... Won't add to the excitement for me!

 

[Brogan]

Not only refuelling, also faster, lighter, noisier cars.

Thereby reversing all of the recent changes.

You know something's dying a slow death when it's being constantly fiddled with in an attempt to keep it alive.

 

[sobriety]

Yay! Back to the good old days of thrilling tactical battles based around short/long fuelling!

Oh, wait, they were seriously, properly dull, weren't they?

 

[FB]

Hey, how about skirts and wings cars Bernie could get the old BT49 out of retirement.

 

[Greenlantern101]

Hooray

 

[The Artist.....]

And of course, hooray...

 

[Greenlantern101]

To be fair seeing Eddie on fire is one of my favourite moments in F1.

 

[FB]

And...

and...

and...

 

[Brogan]

How exactly does all of this fit in with the cost cutting which is constantly used as an excuse not to allow teams to use more than x engines, gearboxes, etc?

 

[Dash Racing]

Bad move on safety grounds, let alone the dull truth that free-choice tires and refueling means we're back to all the changes in position happening in the pit stops. Thank goodness I have Formula E to watch instead.

 

[cider_and_toast]

What is supposed to happen is that one team will gamble on a long fuel run on a hard tyre while another team gambles on short sprints on a softer tyre and we get to watch a thrilling tactical battle unfold.

What actually happens is that all the various options are fed into a super computer using an app called "What's the fastest method". Every team will then do the same thing but the team with the most expensive super computer will be a few tenths quicker than the team at the back of the grid still using an Amiga 500.

 

[Boyle]

Wasn't one of the reasons they got rid of refueling in the first place, was to make F1 more exciting?

 

[The Artist.....]

Boyle
The stated reason for getting rid of refuelling was to lower the cost, as it was so costly transporting two fuel rigs around the world.....

 

[cider_and_toast]

If they bring back fuelling and free up the tyre regs they need to include an option not to pit for either. To pit shouldn't be mandated. In that way we could get a true strategy battle developing. As it is, it's always going to be when not if they pit and they end up covering each other.

 

[Boyle]

Yes but one of the arguments was that drivers would have to pass on track, rather than relying on their pit crews to do the work for them.

 

[ATL11]

Wasn't one of the reasons they got rid of refueling in the first place, was to make F1 more exciting?

That's what I thought, I thought they got rid of refueling as it meant races were being won in the pit lane.

 

[rufus_mcdufus]

Why don't we just race the cars in the pit lane? That'd save a shed load of money. They don't even have to move anywhere - just do repeated pitstops, one after the other. It'll be a bit like the Generation Game. Get guests in to help. Famous people. It'll make loads of money!

 

[Bill Boddy]

I wonder if Jos Verstappen is delighted to learn that his son may have a fire just as he did. It would be a new record, the first father and son to be BBQed whilst in an F1 race.

 

[Mephistopheles]

At least it will do away with the ridiculous fuel saving mode the drivers have to do now

 

[The Artist.....]

cider_and_toast

Unfortunately, to not pit when refuelling exists is not an option - as in order to be competitive, you end up building a car that doesn't have enough space in the tank to go more than about half distance! Furthermore, you are just so slow in the first period of the race, when your car is full of fuel that you fall very quickly to the back - remember that an extra 50kgs of fuel would mean that for a given engine power, the car would accelerate about 7% less quickly.