Refuelling in F1 to be banned from next year
Refuelling in F1 to be banned from next year
Author
Discussion

FourWheelDrift

Original Poster:

92,287 posts

313 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
bounce

Autosport said:
The FIA has confirmed a ban on refuelling from the 2010 season, the governing body citing cost-saving reasons for its introductions

"It was confirmed that from 2010, refuelling during a race will be forbidden in order to save the costs of transporting refuelling equipment and increase the incentive for engine builders to improve fuel economy (to save weight)," said the FIA in a statement following a meeting of the World Motor Sport Council.

The governing body also confirmed that tyre blankets will be banned from 2010 and that the ban on other tyre-heating devices will be maintained.
All racing and passing on the track now, fastest car will be on pole, not the lightest. smile

Fire99

9,865 posts

258 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Now that is something I like. I would of thought a rule like this would have the greatest effect on track racing rather than strategy out of any of the rules.

sstw

1,211 posts

216 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
They'll still be in for tyres though won't they, so will it make that much of a difference

jellison

12,803 posts

306 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
ABOUT F'in TIME.

Mike400

1,026 posts

260 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
sstw said:
They'll still be in for tyres though won't they, so will it make that much of a difference
It will in quali - everyone will be running similar fuel loads so as has been mentioned we will see the fastest and not teh lightest car on pole.

It will make a difference during the race as strategy will be simplified, none of this two stop / three stop nonsense for fuel

FourWheelDrift

Original Poster:

92,287 posts

313 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
sstw said:
They'll still be in for tyres though won't they, so will it make that much of a difference
They always could pit for tyres when they had no refuelling rules before. No idea about what the 2010 tyre rules will be, wouldn't make sense to have 2 different types they have to use in the race now since they can run the whole race without pitting if they didn't need to. Plus Bridgestone could make a harder, longer lasting tyre which could reduce lap times and they wouldn't need to supply the teams with as many as they do now either. More savings, I wonder if they have thought of that?

HereBeMonsters

14,180 posts

211 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
No, you'll get Mansell running out of fuel on the last corner again...

Fire99

9,865 posts

258 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Mike400 said:
sstw said:
They'll still be in for tyres though won't they, so will it make that much of a difference
It will in quali - everyone will be running similar fuel loads so as has been mentioned we will see the fastest and not teh lightest car on pole.

It will make a difference during the race as strategy will be simplified, none of this two stop / three stop nonsense for fuel
yes

Altrezia

8,741 posts

240 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Sounds awesome, until you remember they're going for fking medals next year.

Mr_Yogi

3,288 posts

284 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Great news ...but won't this mean the cars will have to be radically re-designed (expensive?) as opposed to refined to accomadate HUGE fuel tanks?

skinny

5,269 posts

264 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
anyone wary that this won't improve the racing at all?

barring mistakes, the fastest car will qualify on pole and proceed to f off into the distance and the slowest car will get left behind - the field will just spread.

better i think would have been to make the refuelling rigs much slower so there was more of a penalty to take on fuel - so you get some starting with race fuel, some doing a 1 stop. (and everyone qualifying on fumes)

paulmurr

4,203 posts

241 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
All it'll mean is that the cars will also be fat as well as ugly.

Altrezia

8,741 posts

240 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
skinny said:
anyone wary that this won't improve the racing at all?

barring mistakes, the fastest car will qualify on pole and proceed to f off into the distance and the slowest car will get left behind - the field will just spread.
that never used to be the case

The Black Flash

13,735 posts

227 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Blimey, only seems to be yesterday that they brought refuling back in again.
On the plus side, it will mean the return of pitstops being determined by how fast the pit crew can work, rather than by the amount of fuel required, which makes them more entertaining IMO.

Eric Mc

125,609 posts

294 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
On the whole I would approve. Too much racing has been spoiled over the past 15 years due to the importance of "fuel strategies" over actual track racing. However, it brings about its own problems so automatically won't give us better racing overall.

I have ALL of the F1 races on tape covering the last "non-refuelling" era (1984 to 1993 inclusive) and it did make for some nail biting races - and some tedious ones too.

_Batty_

12,268 posts

279 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
On the whole I would approve. Too much racing has been spoiled over the past 15 years due to the importance of "fuel strategies" over actual track racing. However, it brings about its own problems so automatically won't give us better racing overall.

I have ALL of the F1 races on tape covering the last "non-refuelling" era (1984 to 1993 inclusive) and it did make for some nail biting races - and some tedious ones too.
indeed, but as mentioned before, does this mean yet another re-design for the cars?
yet more cost?
(glad to see you back Eric)

DeadMeat_UK

3,058 posts

311 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
At flipping last !

PS Hope is aligned to allowing some engine development as it's a massive incentive to improving fuel economy.
PPS Set of a chain of thoughts in my head that ended up wondering if we'll perhaps see a diesel F1 car ....

Justayellowbadge

37,057 posts

271 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
skinny said:
anyone wary that this won't improve the racing at all?

barring mistakes, the fastest car will qualify on pole and proceed to f off into the distance and the slowest car will get left behind - the field will just spread.

better i think would have been to make the refuelling rigs much slower so there was more of a penalty to take on fuel - so you get some starting with race fuel, some doing a 1 stop. (and everyone qualifying on fumes)
As I recall, it was brought in precisely because races were becoming processions.

DeadMeat_UK

3,058 posts

311 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Justayellowbadge said:
skinny said:
anyone wary that this won't improve the racing at all?

barring mistakes, the fastest car will qualify on pole and proceed to f off into the distance and the slowest car will get left behind - the field will just spread.

better i think would have been to make the refuelling rigs much slower so there was more of a penalty to take on fuel - so you get some starting with race fuel, some doing a 1 stop. (and everyone qualifying on fumes)
As I recall, it was brought in precisely because races were becoming processions.
Not in the days where some people had saved enough fuel to have boost higher than others.
Made for some epic last 10 laps.

plg101

4,106 posts

239 months

Thursday 30th April 2009
quotequote all
Unless my maths is wrong...

Cars need ~200l to get through a race (3.4ltres per lap, in the FW27 )
Currently tanks are ~80 litres?

At 0.737kg/litre (which is vague, I know), the extra 120 litres can be fitted in a space 50cm*50cm*60cm; so not small, but not massive either.

Incremental mass will be about 88kg, some will be offset by removing ballast (cars carry 50-70kg?)

So the net increment is a suitcase sized tank, weighing an increment of 20-40kg on current spec.

Does this sound right?