Refuelling.

[McZiderRed]

Cheerio, so long, auf vedersane, sayonara or, as its last appearance will be in Abu Dabhi, perhaps the phrase
should be: ????? - ??? ?????? - ??? ?????? (???? ??????

So, this weekend’s race will be the last race to feature refuelling (for now). Some will shout thank God, some will cry into their cider mugs, but without a doubt there will be few without an opinion on the subject.

Back in the day, there were races where tyre wear/management was a major feature of the race. The modern complaint against no refuelling is lack of strategy. Will the 2010 take on no fuel stops feature enough tyre shenanigans to make the race more than just a 2 hour snooze fest every other weekend? Will the enforced two tyre usage rule make for some fake excitement/racing?

Apart from the racing aspect, there is the safety thing to take into account as well. In the race in Brazil, there was Heiki & Kimi showing that there’s more flame to the finnish than their cold exterior suggests! Before that, there was Massa’s hosing down the pit lane and who can forget Verstappen’s pit lane inferno!

So, the ultimate purpose of this thread is to find out what the esteemed denizen’s of C_t_A think of the banning of refuelling. Will there be a return to the pre 1994 style racing? Will the enforced two tyre usage per race put a rubber spanner in the works so there’s too much fake racing and will this be deemed a big mistake so we’ll see refuelling back soon!

Vote in the poll at the top of the thread, but vote wisely my friends! After all, the FIA may be watching!

 

[Brogan]

Hmmm, like the Antipodean songstress, I'm torn.

I can see that refuelling has turned most races into a series of sprints.
However, as tyre changes are still mandatory next season (and onwards) then I fail to see how much is going to change.

Apart from some increased tyre wear for the first 1/3rd of the race, it's going to be pretty much the same as this year with all drivers having to do at least 1 stop and most probably opting for 2.

Just seems like a bit of a bodge job to me.
Either make it into a proper race with teams free to choose their own strategy or don't.

Don't make it a bit of both.

 

[cider_and_toast]

I'm with Bro on this issue. If you get rid of re-fuelling then at least give the chance for the teams to choose the strategy.

Once re-fueling has gone the two tyre rule shouldn't be required so get rid of that as well. Hopefully the tyre maker (how I wish that was makers) would then produce a tyre that could last the whole race with careful management or a tyre that was superb over short stints for those who wanted to stop. There has to be some sort of option to allow strategy calls to exist.

 

[McZiderRed]

With the two tyre rule, it does limit the tyre management affect, but it will still be there.

With the car weights being announced pre-race, as they are currently, everyone knows when the top 10 cars are stopping anyway, or there or there abouts. There is very little surprise to any of the pit stop strategies nowadays. At least next year, even though everyone will have to stop at some point, to change from one type of tyre to the other, the exact time of that change will be unknown to everyone apart from the team concerned.

The strategy may play along the lines of "do I put the peddle to the metal, and possibly shred my tyres, in the hope of gaining a march on my rival behind", whilst that rival is playing the steady Eddie and so doesn't come in when the bloke in front thought and therefore gains the place. Then, when the rival does come in for a fresh set of tyres, he will then be on a fresher rubber when the cars are light on fuel and may well challenge for the lead...

Or am I being optimistic?

 

[Speshal]

I'll be glad to see the back of it, the 2 tyre rule is stupid in this day and age of "cost cutting" but I look forward to the 3 second pit stops as it involves the pit crew in the race a bit more as opposed to waiting for the fuel rig to come off, it's now back down to who can change 4 wheels the quickest.

 

[Galahad]

In general I'm in favour because at the moment races are run to a script pre-planned by the teams, in terms of strategy.

In the early days of refuelling there were some adventurous strategies and it was genuinely interesting, but now everyone seems to have the same modelling software (not helped by the fact everyone has the same tyres, of course) and it has all boiled down to everyone doing the same thing (Singapore '08 notwithstanding).

My fear with banning it, though, is the old overtaking issue. I'm sure refuelling hasn't helped with overtaking as drivers prefer to wait for the stops, but I'm equally sure that it isn't the main cause of the problem - as Bro's graphs show, it had been in sharp decline even before the hoses came back.

Much depends on the tyres. If you're stuck behind a slower car next year you don't necessarily know when, or if, he's going to stop for new rubber - PROVIDING that the compounds have got some sort of longevity to them. If the maximum distance is going to be 20-25 laps then everyone will be in and out of the pits at roughly the same time and I don't think there will be a net gain.

It's a brave decision and I think will eventually prove to be a good one, but in my view should have been combined with more radical changes to the cars; or at the very least closing the diffuser loophole.

 

[bogaTYR]

In general I'm in favour because at the moment races are run to a script pre-planned by the teams, in terms of strategy.

In the early days of refuelling there were some adventurous strategies and it was genuinely interesting, but now everyone seems to have the same modelling software (not helped by the fact everyone has the same tyres, of course) and it has all boiled down to everyone doing the same thing (Singapore '08 notwithstanding).

thats why i moved from a staunch advocate towards being cynical about this. its pretty much pointless if all teams after a while will use the same strategy again and we are back to merrily going round in circles. maybe it will be fun for a few races, say one season but after that it will be pretty much business as usual.

so from a racing point of view, i see no real advantage. maybe the characteristics of a car with no refuelling are more extreme between very heavy at the start and very light at the finish so this might lead to issues with the car setup. but i am not technical enough to have a view on that.

i do see the advantage from a safety point of view though. we seen too many blips with fuel rigs and fuel hoses for the situation to remain the way it is now.

from that point of view, i agree with this change.

 

[RickD]

It will be fun to see who runs out of fuel first Mansell style (should be fun watching soemone trying to push the car over the line). other than that, with being forced to change tyres, it is going to be a borefest..

A couple of questions though:

If you are a driver that tends to useless fuel due to your driving style, does this mean you are allowed to start lighter than those around you or does everyone get thesame amount regardless?

During the pit stops, are the teams allowed to adjust the ride height of the cars?

 

[Brogan]

Teams will be free to choose the amount of fuel they want.

Put too much in and the car will be heavy and not competitive.
Cut it too fine though and there could be problems towards the end of the race.

 

[RickD]

Hmmm, maybe it will be more interesting than I thought then. Someone like Massa will be heavier than the other cars at the beginning as his driving style ensures he uses more fuel, possibly Hamilton will be as well, whereas someone like Button will be ableto go lighter..

 

[teabagyokel]

But we've got low fuel qualifying, so Hamilton/Massa are likely to be at the front of the grid and hence slowing down your smooth Buttons. Remember Hamilton is a significantly better qualifier than racer at the moment.

All the top drivers are car "hustlers" though, in general. If you're not a hustler you tend to need your car tuned on a sixpence (Brawn AUS-TUR), whereas the top drivers can take cars into places they don't deserve to go (Alonso, Singapore; Hamilton, Hungary; Massa, Germany; Raikkonen, since Hungary!)

Who knows, I doubt that they'll find a formula that would seriously make Massa and Hamilton backmarkers in good cars!

 

[fat jez]

Depends also on the fuel efficiency of the engine. The Ferrari engine was a bit of a gas guzzler compared to some engines.

 

[RickD]

But we've got low fuel qualifying, so Hamilton/Massa are likely to be at the front of the grid and hence slowing down your smooth Buttons. Remember Hamilton is a significantly better qualifier than racer at the moment.

All the top drivers are car "hustlers" though, in general. If you're not a hustler you tend to need your car tuned on a sixpence (Brawn AUS-TUR), whereas the top drivers can take cars into places they don't deserve to go (Alonso, Singapore; Hamilton, Hungary; Massa, Germany; Raikkonen, since Hungary!)

Who knows, I doubt that they'll find a formula that would seriously make Massa and Hamilton backmarkers in good cars!

Qualifying still depends on the car, but if Brawn get it right again, I can see Jense doing well again, simply because he won't have the pressure he had this year to win the title.

We should perhaps go back a couple of years, when Massa got a drive in a Ferrari, would you have said he was a good driver then and deserved the drive?

Where was Raikonnen earlier in the year when the Ferrari was even more of a handfull? The only 2 i'll give you are Hamilton and 80% Alonso (having a team producing one decent car means that it is easier to make large leaps forward).

Guess we'll see next Feb/March when they start testing..

 

[FB]

Depends also on the fuel efficiency of the engine. The Ferrari engine was a bit of a gas guzzler compared to some engines.

Is there a limit on the size of the fuel tanks next season?

 

[fat jez]

Is there a limit on the size of the fuel tanks next season?

Not that I'm aware of, but then the more fuel you carry, the heavier the car, etc