Do you want Refueling back?

[raymondu999]

So does DTM; and at times the cars even leave with the gas canisters still attach, before suddenly falling off and sometimes fumes even flaming from the spout.

However F1 is probably going to generate a lot more heat, and the risk of explosion is a lot greater.

[Fil]

I voted no.

Purely for two reasons:

1. FIM (MotoGP, Moto2, Moto3) shows how it should be done. Limit the fuel tank capacity*, and let the teams figure out how to use the allocated fuel to finish the race.


2. Refueling in its previous guise** was terrible.



*Or allow refueling, but limit fuel for the race to 'x' litres. Again, forcing the teams to strategically figure out how to finish the race on too little fuel.

**If teams were allowed to start on whatever fuel levels they wanted, rather than the falsified quali that we had, I'd be interested.

[bhall]

*Or allow refueling, but limit fuel for the race to 'x' litres. Again, forcing the teams to strategically figure out how to finish the race on too little fuel.

I like that. I've always thought F1 would put itself to the forefront of "the green race" if it simply said something to the effect of, "You get X amount of fuel to use during a grand prix weekend. Have at it."

But calling into question the safety of refueling to me is just as absurd as banning it for cost reasons. When was the last time anyone was hurt by fueling error? (No, Massa's championship-robbing stop in Singapore in 2008 does not count.)

[andartop]

No, because I strongly believe F1 would become more competitive if they stop fiddling with the rules every single bloody year.

No, because I like the idea of a set amount of fuel.

No, because even my car can do 300km without having to stop for fuel!!!

[CHT]

If FIA intention is to make F1 more relevant to road car, I honestly dont see a need to bring back refueling because in the real world, we dont practice refueling strategy to make our car more efficient. (at least for me)

Perhaps the step forward is for FIA to disclose the fuel consumption of the F1 cars at the moment. However i dont think that will happen anytime soon because I have reasons to believe that will make engine supplier like Merc and Ferrari look pretty bad.

[Tufty]

When was the last time anyone was hurt by fueling error? (No, Massa's championship-robbing stop in Singapore in 2008 does not count.)

Raikkonen at Brazil a couple of years back when the flames from Kovalainen's car hit him in the face as he opened his helmet for a bit of air. Kimi got lucky that day, it could have been a lot worse. He was driving blind for some of his outlap.

[raymondu999]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmiX29Z_SsY[/youtube]

[bhall]

Ok, I'll ask again. When was the last time anyone was hurt by a fueling error?

I generally don't care about things that could have, would have, or should have happened. The hypotheticals for any situation are rarely in short supply. Because of that, I care much more about what actually happens.

Robert Kubica's crash at the Canadian Grand Prix in 2007 could have been a whole lot worse. But, it wasn't.

[beelsebob]

Ok, I'll ask again. When was the last time anyone was hurt by a fueling error?

I generally don't care about things that could have, would have, or should have happened. The hypotheticals for any situation are rarely in short supply. Because of that, I care much more about what actually happens.

Robert Kubica's crash at the Canadian Grand Prix in 2007 could have been a whole lot worse. But, it wasn't.

When Verstappen's car went up it injured 6 of the pit crew and verstappen himself.

[bhall]

And that happened in 1994, 17 years ago, during which time there were 15 seasons without a refueling ban. Anything more recent? Because if not, I'd have no problem at all hanging my hat on F1's record of fuel safety in subsequent years.

[raymondu999]

I know Kimi didn't really get injured; but does Kimi getting engulfed in a fireball not count as a serious enough accident?

[bhall]

I think it's better to ask if that incident was enough to justify a ban on refueling for safety reasons. I don't think it was. In fact, I don't think it even came close.

This discussion is all well and good, but refueling was banned to save the cost of lugging 24 refueling rigs all over the world. If added safety was ever mentioned, it was peripheral to the goal of cutting costs.

I wonder if it's really saved the teams any money at all. I'm sure they've incurred considerable costs for the R&D involved to implement the change. And how much of that can be carried over from year to year when we've seen changes in tire type, size and manufacturer; free reign on weight distribution and mandated weight distribution and, next year, back to free reign; KERS, no KERS, KERS again; and so on and so forth? I just see the refueling ban as needlessly changing one more variable on top of a laundry list of other changes, not to mention the step backwards caused by the inherent inefficiency of carrying such a large fuel load for most of the race distance.

[beelsebob]

I think it's better to ask if that incident was enough to justify a ban on refueling for safety reasons. I don't think it was. In fact, I don't think it even came close.

This discussion is all well and good, but refueling was banned to save the cost of lugging 24 refueling rigs all over the world. If added safety was ever mentioned, it was peripheral to the goal of cutting costs.

I wonder if it's really saved the teams any money at all. I'm sure they've incurred considerable costs for the R&D involved to implement the change. And how much of that can be carried over from year to year when we've seen changes in tire type, size and manufacturer; free reign on weight distribution and mandated weight distribution and, next year, back to free reign; KERS, no KERS, KERS again; and so on and so forth? I just see the refueling ban as needlessly changing one more variable on top of a laundry list of other changes.

And your suggested solution to this is to... needlessly change it again?

[bhall]

No, I suggest nothing. I just think it was a boneheaded move is all. However, I do think it would be easier from an engineering standpoint to go back to allowing teams to refuel than it has been to eliminate it simply because teams, engineers, etc., still have more recent experience with refueling than without it.

(You really don't have to quote everything I say right underneath where I said it.)

[ESPImperium]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmiX29Z_SsY[/youtube]

Simple system for prevention of this, have a sensor in the refueling connection in the car that puts the car in neutral and puts the brakes on and only releases the car 1 second after the nozzle is pulled clear.

As for those nozzles and old refueling rigs, id replace them with something like this, simmilar to the DTM refueling system:




[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qta_LrVf6a8[/youtube]

Its either that or we put a normal petrol pump and a petrol nozzle into the tank at 33 Litres a minuite into the cars.