Refuelling back for 2017
Discussion
"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32839992
"The father of Jules Bianchi says he is still hoping for a miracle but admits the situation is "stagnant" and that the family is preparing for the worst.. "
Have you no understanding what went before? or do you actually not care.
On topic, perhaps NOT.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32857685
ash73 said:
I hope the FIA listens and understands fans want to see cars on the limit; and drivers taking risks.
What an idiotic and insensitive [but I can understand your ignorance] post..http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32839992
"The father of Jules Bianchi says he is still hoping for a miracle but admits the situation is "stagnant" and that the family is preparing for the worst.. "
Have you no understanding what went before? or do you actually not care.
On topic, perhaps NOT.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32857685
I really hope they do not bring back refuelling. All that will do is to encourage the pit-wall to play chess and avoid drivers having to make on-track-passes.
I think this graph: http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e381/loofer/Capt...
And this article: http://motorsportstalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/15/f1...
Demonstrates what will happen to on-track overtaking – F*** all will happen on-track!
I think they should keep engine regs as they are. I’m not a fan of them, but surely more changes to them is going to mean more expense and they’re far too expensive at the moment. At least if the engine regs were relatively stable, I’d hope the cost of manufacturing/development would go down…
I think a wider choice of tyre compounds would work, perhaps if they had to choose the 2 compounds they’d use (out of the 4) before the race weekend started. I’d wish they’d ban tyre warmers. They do sod all as the tyres have lost all their heat from them by the time they get to the grid or the end of the pit-lane. Pointless.
Perhaps they should ban wind tunnels, go CFD but have restrictions on its usage and the computing/processing power involved. I’m sure they could save a bit of money doing that and designers might have to be more inventive/risk taking if they’re fumbling around in the dark more.
The changes that I’d like to see (and I think are also needed) will never happen, unfortunately:-
The FIA – we need to get rid of Jean Todt and Charlie Whiting. Todt has been pretty hopeless as the man in charge and Whiting doesn’t know his head from his a*** when it comes to technical regulations; he doesn’t have an engineering background, so he’s on the back-foot to begin with and I think they need to bring in some ex-designers. I’m sure if the likes of Gordon Murray and Ross Brawn were commissioned to write the regs, we’d have something interesting.
Get rid of Bernie and CVC. Bloody parasites! If F1 was free-to-air, TV figures wouldn’t have plummeted as much. Race tickets are simply ridiculous in terms of cost. Weekend Grandstand Ticket (at Becketts) for one at Silverstone - £375!! F****ing crazy.
Aerodynamics – perhaps they need to ban front wings, maybe wings entirely. They keep rabbiting on about engines/F1 being ‘road car relevant’, so why not ban wings as the majority of road cars don’t have ‘em and road car aero is usually more focused on reducing drag than generating downforce. They need to do something about aero, to get away from this nonsense of noting being able to follow a car ahead closely because it means you lose all aero grip. It would also mean we could get rid of DRS…
Apologies, I have rambled on a bit!
It's just annoying that there's an opportunity for change in F1 but they'll just p*** it into the wind and probably make things worse!
I think this graph: http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e381/loofer/Capt...
And this article: http://motorsportstalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/15/f1...
Demonstrates what will happen to on-track overtaking – F*** all will happen on-track!
I think they should keep engine regs as they are. I’m not a fan of them, but surely more changes to them is going to mean more expense and they’re far too expensive at the moment. At least if the engine regs were relatively stable, I’d hope the cost of manufacturing/development would go down…
I think a wider choice of tyre compounds would work, perhaps if they had to choose the 2 compounds they’d use (out of the 4) before the race weekend started. I’d wish they’d ban tyre warmers. They do sod all as the tyres have lost all their heat from them by the time they get to the grid or the end of the pit-lane. Pointless.
Perhaps they should ban wind tunnels, go CFD but have restrictions on its usage and the computing/processing power involved. I’m sure they could save a bit of money doing that and designers might have to be more inventive/risk taking if they’re fumbling around in the dark more.
The changes that I’d like to see (and I think are also needed) will never happen, unfortunately:-
The FIA – we need to get rid of Jean Todt and Charlie Whiting. Todt has been pretty hopeless as the man in charge and Whiting doesn’t know his head from his a*** when it comes to technical regulations; he doesn’t have an engineering background, so he’s on the back-foot to begin with and I think they need to bring in some ex-designers. I’m sure if the likes of Gordon Murray and Ross Brawn were commissioned to write the regs, we’d have something interesting.
Get rid of Bernie and CVC. Bloody parasites! If F1 was free-to-air, TV figures wouldn’t have plummeted as much. Race tickets are simply ridiculous in terms of cost. Weekend Grandstand Ticket (at Becketts) for one at Silverstone - £375!! F****ing crazy.
Aerodynamics – perhaps they need to ban front wings, maybe wings entirely. They keep rabbiting on about engines/F1 being ‘road car relevant’, so why not ban wings as the majority of road cars don’t have ‘em and road car aero is usually more focused on reducing drag than generating downforce. They need to do something about aero, to get away from this nonsense of noting being able to follow a car ahead closely because it means you lose all aero grip. It would also mean we could get rid of DRS…
Apologies, I have rambled on a bit!
It's just annoying that there's an opportunity for change in F1 but they'll just p*** it into the wind and probably make things worse!ash73 said:
Nobody wants to see drivers getting hurt, but we do want to see them taking risks with the car on the limit. That is not the same as someone flying backwards into a tractor when they should have been cruising round behind a safety car. Anyone can see that, and anyone can see you are exploiting Bianchi's tragic misfortune to score points on the internet. Pathetic.
Edited by ash73 on Saturday 23 May 20:52
Whatever pencildick. I'm sure if you actually made an attempt to understand where F1 is safety wise, now, from the butchers bill before, you "might" realise that RISK is actually NOT what you should be DOING to get THAT lap time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCLntVH3iIw
Edited by Mojocvh on Saturday 23 May 22:01
The thing is so much has changed since we last had refuelling and if it does come back they will change further still. It might be completely different to the last time we had it, could be better, worse or exactly the same.. we don't know.
As I said before there is a long way to go before we still it at a track.
As I said before there is a long way to go before we still it at a track.
Crafty_ said:
The thing is so much has changed since we last had refuelling and if it does come back they will change further still. It might be completely different to the last time we had it, could be better, worse or exactly the same.. we don't know.
That's true. They may be pulling up to plug in and squirt some juice into the batteries. Or maybe that's Formula E, I get confused 
Mojocvh said:
ash73 said:
Nobody wants to see drivers getting hurt, but we do want to see them taking risks with the car on the limit. That is not the same as someone flying backwards into a tractor when they should have been cruising round behind a safety car. Anyone can see that, and anyone can see you are exploiting Bianchi's tragic misfortune to score points on the internet. Pathetic.
Edited by ash73 on Saturday 23 May 20:52
Whatever pencildick. I'm sure if you actually made an attempt to understand where F1 is safety wise, now, from the butchers bill before, you "might" realise that RISK is actually NOT what you should be DOING to get THAT lap time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCLntVH3iIw
Edited by Mojocvh on Saturday 23 May 22:01
You should consider communicating with people the same way you would in person in a pub - and I'd suggest you'd never talk to people like that in real life unless you have severe social problems.
Mojocvh said:
"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32839992
"The father of Jules Bianchi says he is still hoping for a miracle but admits the situation is "stagnant" and that the family is preparing for the worst.. "
Have you no understanding what went before? or do you actually not care.
On topic, perhaps NOT.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32857685
Is that you Jackie? ash73 said:
I hope the FIA listens and understands fans want to see cars on the limit; and drivers taking risks.
What an idiotic and insensitive [but I can understand your ignorance] post..http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32839992
"The father of Jules Bianchi says he is still hoping for a miracle but admits the situation is "stagnant" and that the family is preparing for the worst.. "
Have you no understanding what went before? or do you actually not care.
On topic, perhaps NOT.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/32857685
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff