The 2013 Season

tooncheese

Hans Heyer
Contributor
I think refuelling needs to be allowed again, as the drivers have to drive within themselves because the tyres are the new limiting factor, and the fastest way is to crawl around and stop less. When we had refuelling, you could have a tyre change for free whenever you needed fuel and were flat out much more often. However back then everyone just waited until the pitstops to jump the car in front.

The FIA have the devils own job, but I think with ERS and DRS, a return to refuelling might just work.
 

Blog Zbod

Podium Finisher
If the engine thinks it is about to suffer catastrophic damage it usually shuts itself down. There is no need for it to report back to base (which can be a chancy thing to do anyway).
An atmo engine is one thing. A forced induction engine under 3.5 bar boost tends to be a smidge less graceful when it lets go. And Professor Newton assumes control of where the car comes to rest, not the driver.
 
Last edited:

Hamberg

FOTA VIP, I've got the avatar to prove it :)
Contributor
However back then everyone just waited until the pitstops to jump the car in front.
This was the precise problem with refuelling and quali results were not really known for two or three hours after it had finished.
 

Bill Boddy

Professional layabout
Contributor
You are quite right Blog Zbod but that also applies to the pit wall. The monitoring is just the same in both the car and the pit wall except there is always the chance of data being lost the more channels it has to go through.
 

sushifiesta

Champion Elect
Contributor
Hamberg Not really knowing who was the fastest in qualifying was just because they had to qualify in Q3 with the fuel they would start the race with, kind of like having to start with the tyres you qualify with now. There's nothing stopping you from having refuelling without that rule.

I have mixed views on the refuelling/no refuelling debate though.
 

rufus_mcdufus

Champion Elect
i quite miss refuelling as a spectacle and skill of the pit crew. I do think the way a team is represented by a pit crew in addition to the driver & pit wall is still relevant.
 

Bill Boddy

Professional layabout
Contributor
One of the troubles with refuelling was that it was a process dependant on the speed of the fuel going in which was a constant. There is much more skill required by the pit crew when there are only the wheels to change.
 

F1Yorkshire

Avatar for sale to the highest bidder
Contributor
Refuelling was getting too dangerous. Wasn't it Massa who took the rig with him down the Singapore pit lane?

Why do we need a mandatory pitstop? The tyres should be designed so that they can last for 75% of a race when driven flat out or a whole race if looked after and driven cautiously. Drivers could then race at their own pace and hopefully the mixed strategies should mix things up.
 

no-FIAt-please

Champion Elect
Premium Contributor
I wouldn't have said refuelling was inherently dangerous, I think Christian Albers (Magny-Cours 2007?) and Massa (Singapore 2008) are the only people that took the hose with them since I've been watching. There was also a minor incident in 2009 at the Brazlian GP where Raikkonen had a small amount of fuel spayed at him.

Those are the fuel incidents I can remember, no more dangerous than loose wheels, but you don't have people saying we should use hover cars because wheels are a liability (a bit of an exaggeration :whistle:).
 
Verstappen's fire was because Benetton bent the rules on fuel flow speed, though, wasn't it? And I would argue that 4 punctures in one race with tyre tread flying about the circuit are more dangerous than refuelling was in the last few years.
 

RasputinLives

So Goodbye Yellow Brick Road
Contributor
Wasn't their an identical fire the same year with a different team?

Drivers were fine. Just a few mechanics scarred for life.
 

no-FIAt-please

Champion Elect
Premium Contributor
I'm not surprised you brought up Verstappen F1Yorkshire, it's very well recognised graphically.

However that happend 20 years ago now, drivers would still lose their lives in crashes (that is still possible today I know) but safety advancements mean that this almost never happens, and yet drivers still do laps. Refuelling in 2009 was so much further ahead than it was during the mid-nineties.

Fundamentally there will always be danger present when racing, it's just a case of gauging the risk involved with specific decisions (e.g. refuelling or no refuelling), in this case I don't think refuelling poses threat enough to ban it purely on the grounds that it is dangerous.
 

F1Yorkshire

Avatar for sale to the highest bidder
Contributor
This subject actually came up during Sky's coverage of FP2. The safety aspects wasn't the sole reason for ending refuelling in F1. The additional equipment needed plus additional safety gear not just for the pit crews but for every marshall, cameraman, reporter etc present in the pit lane during a race meant the cost of refuelling mid-race wasn't feasible in this new lower budget F1.
 

RasputinLives

So Goodbye Yellow Brick Road
Contributor
Even at its end point refueling still had its dangers. Anyone remember Kimi being blinded by fuel in the eyes? Very last race for refueling wasn't it?
 

Hamberg

FOTA VIP, I've got the avatar to prove it :)
Contributor
Changed my mind. Allow private in season testing but ban Free Practice! Should make race weekend tickets a bit cheaper too.
 
Top Bottom