F1 teams to dicuss refuelling ban and more.
Discussion
Autosport said:
A ban on refuelling, shorter races, wide-scale testing restrictions, and a competitive element to Fridays are some of the ideas that will be discussed by Formula One teams in China this week.
The Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA) is holding a series of meetings in Shanghai this week to decide on ways to make the sport better.
Sources suggest that FOTA's Sporting Working Group is to focus on revisions to the format of a race weekend - with the 'blue sky' discussions to include such wide sweeping changes as a refuelling ban.
It is understood that teams are keen to make the most of the opportunity provided to them by the FOTA talks. The idea of a refuelling ban surfaced following the host of pit stop problems this year - and plans to talk about it have been given a new urgency in the wake of Felipe Massa's bungled stop in Singapore.
And although a refuelling ban would mean an overhaul of car design because of the size of current fuel tanks, one way to minimize the impact could be to have shorter races.
McLaren F1 CEO Martin Whitmarsh, who chairs the SWG discussions, confirmed that discussions in China would be about the race weekend format and a possible widespread testing ban.
"Yes, we're looking at the race format and testing," he said. "I think there are quite a few good ideas on the agenda which would change the format of racing and change the format of the weekend.
"Hopefully, together we'll come up with some agreement on how we can change the weekend in a positive way. But we've got to be careful in making changes that we retain some of the purity that is important in Formula One.
"We've got to look at our agenda on Friday and decide whether that's a worthwhile agenda where we can make more spectacle and have a bit of competition on that day, and we're going to review what we do on Saturday and Sunday to see if we can make it a little bit less predictable.
"But you'd have to say, based on today's showing and in recent races, it's fairly unpredictable at the moment."
Removing the need to refuel in light of the only problems for one team this year, flawed logic again.The Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA) is holding a series of meetings in Shanghai this week to decide on ways to make the sport better.
Sources suggest that FOTA's Sporting Working Group is to focus on revisions to the format of a race weekend - with the 'blue sky' discussions to include such wide sweeping changes as a refuelling ban.
It is understood that teams are keen to make the most of the opportunity provided to them by the FOTA talks. The idea of a refuelling ban surfaced following the host of pit stop problems this year - and plans to talk about it have been given a new urgency in the wake of Felipe Massa's bungled stop in Singapore.
And although a refuelling ban would mean an overhaul of car design because of the size of current fuel tanks, one way to minimize the impact could be to have shorter races.
McLaren F1 CEO Martin Whitmarsh, who chairs the SWG discussions, confirmed that discussions in China would be about the race weekend format and a possible widespread testing ban.
"Yes, we're looking at the race format and testing," he said. "I think there are quite a few good ideas on the agenda which would change the format of racing and change the format of the weekend.
"Hopefully, together we'll come up with some agreement on how we can change the weekend in a positive way. But we've got to be careful in making changes that we retain some of the purity that is important in Formula One.
"We've got to look at our agenda on Friday and decide whether that's a worthwhile agenda where we can make more spectacle and have a bit of competition on that day, and we're going to review what we do on Saturday and Sunday to see if we can make it a little bit less predictable.
"But you'd have to say, based on today's showing and in recent races, it's fairly unpredictable at the moment."
Yes it should go but not for that reason alone.
You mean they might actually do the racing on the track rather than waiting for the other guy to stop first, but that would ruin the purity of the racing 
, refuelling is obviously more dangerous than not refuelling, you have a racing car parked amongst a group of 20 people with 12 litres of fuel per second being forced into the car and a driver anxious to get away as sharply as possible, its obviously dangerous, but when was the last time you saw a car on track have a massive firey crash?
, refuelling is obviously more dangerous than not refuelling, you have a racing car parked amongst a group of 20 people with 12 litres of fuel per second being forced into the car and a driver anxious to get away as sharply as possible, its obviously dangerous, but when was the last time you saw a car on track have a massive firey crash?
If the driver's had to do their own refuelling they couldn't leave the pits with the hose still attached.
If they had 'proper' mirrors they could see what was coming up the pit lane behind them and not rely on a lollipop man.
However, refuelling is an unnecessary additional safety risk caused by combining a rushed procedure with flammable liquid with an ignition source with hot-headed drivers. It's a matter of time before somebody gets really hurt.
If they had 'proper' mirrors they could see what was coming up the pit lane behind them and not rely on a lollipop man.
However, refuelling is an unnecessary additional safety risk caused by combining a rushed procedure with flammable liquid with an ignition source with hot-headed drivers. It's a matter of time before somebody gets really hurt.
This was another of those stupid ideas brought into the sport by that Nazi spanking idiot!!!
More drivers and mechanics have been injured since refueling has been introduced than before it came into the sport. To say it was done on safety grounds is an insult to our intelligence.
Bring the ban in for 2010, as the cars have already been designed with small tanks for 2009.
The alternative is to run 2 races on a sunday, with a reverse grid based on race 1 results. I know the purists will hate that idea, but I think it could provide some great racing, no hanging back. 110% from start to finish...
More drivers and mechanics have been injured since refueling has been introduced than before it came into the sport. To say it was done on safety grounds is an insult to our intelligence.
Bring the ban in for 2010, as the cars have already been designed with small tanks for 2009.
The alternative is to run 2 races on a sunday, with a reverse grid based on race 1 results. I know the purists will hate that idea, but I think it could provide some great racing, no hanging back. 110% from start to finish...
I have no issue with the refuelling ban.. The Turbo era never suffered IMO.
But im totally against shorter races or 2 sprint races etc. Its a Grand Prix and this IMO historically is part of the appeal and history.
It would be like making LEMANS 24hour race into a number of sprint races. Just wrong IMO.
But im totally against shorter races or 2 sprint races etc. Its a Grand Prix and this IMO historically is part of the appeal and history.
It would be like making LEMANS 24hour race into a number of sprint races. Just wrong IMO.
I am against a ban on re-fuelling.
I think that it adds to the show, visually and also in terms of the strategies with heavy and light cars, etc.
All that needs to be done to make it safer is to require that if a car is to take fuel onboard when visiting the pits all 4 wheels must be on the ground at the time, only 3 team members can be touching the car, either with their own extremities or equipment, and the refuelling hose must have been disconnected from the car before any further work of any kind can be undertaken (such as changing tyres).
I think that it adds to the show, visually and also in terms of the strategies with heavy and light cars, etc.
All that needs to be done to make it safer is to require that if a car is to take fuel onboard when visiting the pits all 4 wheels must be on the ground at the time, only 3 team members can be touching the car, either with their own extremities or equipment, and the refuelling hose must have been disconnected from the car before any further work of any kind can be undertaken (such as changing tyres).
motormania said:
How many drivers on track have been injured or burnt due to fires? 0
Actually quite a few over the years but in recent times you're right. Is that due to safer fuel systems or carrying less fuel?I agree with other posters about the negth of the Grand Prix, they're too short as it is, Monza you can go out an make a cup of tea during an ad break, come back and the race is over!
If they want to spice up the weekend, I would like to see a shorter "qualification" race on Saturday to decide grid positions for the main race.
Oh, yes and get rid of re-fuelling. A stupid idea brought in to make the event supposedly more interesting.
I must admit I did think after Singapore that it was good to see the Ferrari pit crews return to the old pre-Ross Brawn days where a Ferrari pit stop was usually mayhem but fun to watch, a bit like Jeux Sans Frontieres.
Edited by profstoff on Tuesday 14th October 13:32
Maybe what they ought to do is not ban refuelling per-se, but instead allow the cars to run big enough tanks so that they can run full distance if they want to.
To increase the safety for those cars that continue to refuel (and to reduce the advantage) F1 could adopt the system of completing the refuelling before ANY other work can be carried out on the car. This works very well in many other forms of motorsport.
What is certain is that F1 needs to drag itself away from a ruleset where mostly the only overtaking that happens is during the pit-stops. One can only hope the 2009 cars live up to the promises made for them.
To increase the safety for those cars that continue to refuel (and to reduce the advantage) F1 could adopt the system of completing the refuelling before ANY other work can be carried out on the car. This works very well in many other forms of motorsport.
What is certain is that F1 needs to drag itself away from a ruleset where mostly the only overtaking that happens is during the pit-stops. One can only hope the 2009 cars live up to the promises made for them.
corozin said:
Maybe what they ought to do is not ban refuelling per-se, but instead allow the cars to run big enough tanks so that they can run full distance if they want to.
I don't think there's anything stopping them from doing that now? The only way to allow that would probably be to increase the minimum weight significantly so that carrying fuel is less of a penalty and perhaps increase the durability of the tyres (seeing as that is controlled too now) so that they may last one whole race distance. Maybe open some other rules too.
stew-S160 said:
i said this already in another thread, banning refueling isn't really an option unless they improve fuel economy so much, or they have shorter races. neither of which is a really viable option.
Can't they just make the fuel tanks bigger? Obviously it would be difficult for next years cars but it should be a problem for 2010 onwards.motormania said:
Yes.
How many drivers on track have been injured or burnt due to fires? 0
How many drivers and mechanics have been injured or burnt during refueling? Too many to remember.
Fuel is the safest option - Period.
I assume you mean quite recently in Formula One? I'm sure that 100s or even thousands of racing drivers have been injured by fire outside of the pits.How many drivers on track have been injured or burnt due to fires? 0
How many drivers and mechanics have been injured or burnt during refueling? Too many to remember.
Fuel is the safest option - Period.
SamHH said:
stew-S160 said:
i said this already in another thread, banning refueling isn't really an option unless they improve fuel economy so much, or they have shorter races. neither of which is a really viable option.
Can't they just make the fuel tanks bigger? Obviously it would be difficult for next years cars but it should be a problem for 2010 onwards.i really don't think refuelling needs to be stopped at all.
tyre changes were a good idea a couple of years ago. although it needed to be refined. in the event of puncture/flat spots.
have a look at a litre bottle or two litre bottle of drink, now imagine carrying 130+ litres of that.
most passenger cars carry about 50-60 litre tanks.
i think current F1 cars run about 2-3mpg.
motormania said:
zac510 said:
Carrying 2-3 times the amount of fuel would be safer?
Yes.How many drivers on track have been injured or burnt due to fires? 0
How many drivers and mechanics have been injured or burnt during refueling? Too many to remember.
Fuel is the safest option - Period.
stew-S160 said:
so basically make them at least twice as big.
No. The cars can already do a race and only stop once, therefore the tank would need to be, at the very most, twice as big not, as you state, at least twice as big.stew-S160 said:
do you have any idea how much space that would take? ALOT. double. so the cars would need to be larger, and much heavier.
Yes, the cars would need to be bigger and heavier, although some of the weight could be offset by reducing the minimum weight. What is the problem with this?Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff