In David Coulthard's most recent column on itv-f1.com, he proposes the idea of banning refueling in order to improve the on-track action. I don't necessarily agree or disagree with this because I honestly don't know enough about the exact details to form a coherent opinion. He's obviously a quite experienced driver though, so his thoughts carry considerable weight.

What do you think?

Quote :

The spate of fuel fires in Hungary were all extinguished quickly and no one was hurt, but they did serve to remind us how potentially volatile pit stops are.

From my point of view a bigger drawback of refuelling is that it detracts from the racing by turning the grand prix into a series of low-fuel sprints between pit stops.

In the days (pre-1994) when you carried your entire race fuel load on board the car, there was a much bigger role for the driver in managing the tyres and brakes.
You could even opt to run non-stop if you could make the tyres go the distance, while someone else might pit twice. And because the car’s weight changed so much more in the course of the race, there were more fluctuations in performance and handling characteristics, which in turn created more overtaking opportunities.

These days, in dry conditions, you very rarely see anyone win from further back than the second row of the grid, because race pace largely mirrors qualifying pace – which is not surprising when the conditions are so similar.

So if we need to spice up the racing, in my view one of the best ways of doing that would be to ban refuelling. It could also chime in nicely with the desire for F1 to pursue a ‘green’ agenda, in that the FIA could give every team a fixed and publicly known amount of fuel for the race distance and they would have a clear incentive to be as fuel-efficient as possible.

I dont think if we had full cars in F1, will make people overtake anymore then now. I think the pitstops are good in a way. At least we see some kind of action.

At the same time, im not an F1 driver and most likely, no one in this forum is, so DC would have a much much much more feeling for the sport, and what needs to be done, then me.

Totally agree, although I would like to see endurance tyres that will last a race distance and remove pitstops completely so drivers are forced to pass each other on the track.

i can go along with that. Cant really say more than that.

Although in 1994 i bet those engines were nowhere near as thirsty as the ones these days. so some adjustments would need to be made to the fuel tank. or just make them drive at 70mph constantly. should make it fairly efficient.

i honestly cant remember when i have seen DC using "sprint fuel load" lately (let it be this and the previous session altogether) so this is no suprise for me I like the idea and perhaps with the slicks comming up next session this could be seriously considered. But im not sure about how well those tires are going to behave over the long run though. Lets see...

I dunno, if you watch a race from the earlier 80s before brabham introduced mid race pitstop, they are pretty boring from a racing point of view.

well no pitstops at all would be boring, i agree on that. Right now, as DC has mentioned, people with sprint fuel load are going to be up front and most likely end up in the top ten under "normal conditions". But if conditions are radically changing or are not as good as predicted then people like DC are going to have better chances for good positions. That means that its a classed field and although the cars are rather equally, the strategy is more important and more determining for a success or failure then the ability to look after your car and use it as best as possible no matter how good or bad its going to behave under given or changing conditions. Or in other words: you dont really need endurance related skills for an endurance type of race, like getting a feel for your car and its constantly changing performance over the long run. As long as you manage to do the sprints you dont really have to worry that much about such things as tire wear and this is kind of boring actually. Funny thing is, like the last race has shown that some drivers sometimes cant even manage to complete their sprints without getting a flat tire while DC with a much more heavier car managed to finish at ease

We just need to stop the situation where drivers don't bother overtaking, they just sit behind a car waiting for them to pit, then gap them before they also have to stop.

They should definately get rid of refuelling though, because it costs a lot of money to ship the fuel rigs to each GP, and of course its more air mileage, which means more pollution. Although I expect the safety issue is not a concern to the FIA, after all they seem to be happy enough for people to be electrocuted by KERS.

+1

Quote from 510N3D :

+1

I have never in my life seen racing this close. Ever. That was simply amazing. Villeneuve is such a hero O_O. He just kinda like dove into the inside hoping he makes it and did!

As for banning refuelling it would be cool indeed but then again would 1 full tank last the full race? Do the drivers we have today have the guts to put up a fight like the one Villeneuve and Arnoux put up? I doupt it. I doupt that it would change the situation of the lack of close racing.

We won't see a fight like that until the gaps between points are increased, so that the potential gain for passing a car is much greater. Also increase the number of positions that can score points to the top 12, so that the action further down the grid has more meaning.

Personally I would like to see pressurised refueling banned and only gravity fed dry break containers being allowed, along with more typical refueling rules, engine off whilst refueling and no other work on the car whilst refueling, not for grounds of safety or cost saving but to make refueling a less attractive prospect. I would also like to see something to make tyre changes less appealing.

I personally feel that F1 should take much shorter races, maybe 45-60 minutes, it is not endurance racing and would make much better viewing in a shorter race.

Quote from evilpimp :

Do the drivers we have today have the guts to put up a fight like the one Villeneuve and Arnoux put up? I doupt it. I doupt that it would change the situation of the lack of close racing.

The drivers today certainly have the guts to do that kind of thing, far too much in fact, feeling too safe they take silly chances and any attempt to race like that would end up with taking each other out. The older battles like that work better partly because the cars were shorter more maneuverable and had better visibility and manly because both drivers new the risks attached to proper contact were far more than just ending their race.

+juan

http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=eq_dtNL8iw8
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=nAP7AUcMJ-I

Quote from franky500 :

i can go along with that. Cant really say more than that.

Although in 1994 i bet those engines were nowhere near as thirsty as the ones these days. so some adjustments would need to be made to the fuel tank. or just make them drive at 70mph constantly. should make it fairly efficient.

I'm not so sure, in these days the cars where Turbo Charged, so on boost they are going to be pretty thirsty...

Quote from evilpimp :

I have never in my life seen racing this close. Ever. That was simply amazing. Villeneuve is such a hero O_O. He just kinda like dove into the inside hoping he makes it and did!

As for banning refuelling it would be cool indeed but then again would 1 full tank last the full race? Do the drivers we have today have the guts to put up a fight like the one Villeneuve and Arnoux put up? I doupt it. I doupt that it would change the situation of the lack of close racing.

Do you have a bad brain?

This was less than a year ago.

prost suggested this years ago. let them change tyres but not fuel, then you've got a few differing options about how to race, flat out using the maximum fuel, changing tyres 2 or 3 times and with brakes that may not be at their best by 3/4 distance or pace yourself at start, change the tyres once or twice and have brakes that are still good at the end.

plus with kers coming in it would give you the option of using it for an outright speed gain or for maintaining your performance with a lighter fuel load.

i remember before fuel stops and before the fuel limited years and by the closing laps you could have some cars catching the ones in front at over 3 secs a lap just beacuse of wear on the brakes and tyres.



alternativly lets go for the gilles villeneuve idea of unlimited fuel and engine size but no rear wings, completly flat bottoms and 6 inch wide rear tyres

Quote from 510N3D :

+1

to be fair to renault, they had a fuel pick up problem on the up hill section towards the end of the race, other wise villeneuve would never have had a chance to challenge after he was passed. it does show how good the racing can be though as both drivers said their brakes and tyres were shot for the last 2 laps.

i remember peter windsor in autocar commenting on how the two of them were spotted carrying on the race after leaving the circuit in fiat and renault hire cars, apparently at one point they came across a hold up and gilles drove down the central reservation and rene used the side embankment to carry on


can you imagine the row if they did that today ?

Quote from evilpimp :

Iwould 1 full tank last the full race?

if they only had the 1 tank of fuel, you can be sure the teams would make sure they had a chance of finishing, either the rules would be alktered to allow more fuel, increasing weight or the cars would use less.


anyone else remember the 78 south affrican GP?

chapman removed fuel from andretti's car on the grid to save weight and he had to pit with 3 laps to go to add more as he had almost run out ! classic chapman worrying about weight as his ambition was to build an f1 car that won a race but every component failed as it crossed the line as it would mean there was no excess weight anywhere .

probably a good solution to avoiding people running out would be to penalise teams if they had to refuel, say a mandatory 30 sec pit stop and 4 points deducted from their total.

Quote from zeugnimod :

Do you have a bad brain?

This was less than a year ago.

although its close stuff, this is just one hotlapper defending his line against another one. I mean come one, forcing eachother off the track several times...you dont need a brain for this. They where lucky not to end up in a wall thats all.

Quote from tinvek :

can you imagine the row if they did that today ?

Haha, if they'd fight eachother outside like they do on track then they wouldn't get far anyway Thanks for the additional informations though

Quote from 510N3D :

although its close stuff, this is just one hotlapper defending his line against another one. I mean come one, forcing eachother off the track several times...you dont need a brain for this. They where lucky not to end up in a wall thats all.

The same applies to Arnoux/Villeneuve, doesn't it?

not really as far as i can see it. They where fighting eachother fair and square, giving eachother room up to a point where it was obvious that line defending is in no more use and that point was mostly before the opponent run out of tarmac. Have a look at that one touch beginning at approximately 2:50 min, gilles most likely only hit René slighty there because of this odd formed turn exit and change to the next turn entry there. Also, look at the long straight where both where not going to the inside before the next turn or waving around like mad to confuse the car behind. Thats the best hint you can get in my opinion.

nah,they touched wheels and sent each other off track as well, and if not for some serious cutting from the run off the dual wouldn't have continued.

Quote from zeugnimod :

Do you have a bad brain?

This was less than a year ago.

Perfect example why tarmac run-off areas are lame.

Imho F1 should start using much harder compounds so the drivers could push a lot more throughout the whole race without fearing the tires letting go so easily and being so tender as they seem to be. Then disallow refueling. Tire changes should be allowed but in this scenario you'd probably only want to change broken tires. Quali done with as little fuel as you dare to drive with. Race must be started with same tires you used in quali.

The racing would be challenging and would look great to the spectators as well when the drivers could be pushing 110% with little grip and lots of power. Towards the end of the race those who have less fuel need to save up by going slower and those with more can attack. I'd really like to see manual gearboxes in F1 but F1 wouldn't really be the number in tech in racing after that. But at least the sequental gearshifts could be done by a stick that you pull or push instad of boring flappy paddles. No clutch, even if it would add a lot simply because it would be imho again against the high-tech theme of F1.

I don't care if slicks or grooved ones are used, it's mostly about aesthetics anyways to the spectator. But most of all F1 needs less aero dependant cars.

Sorry but 2005 wasn't that spectacular apart from a few races like suzuka.