new details of the budget cap to be announced today(thursday)

The Lopper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Banning refueling could go either way. It could be
> processional, but the competitiveness of cars and
> drivers can vary a lot from qualifying to the race
> anyway, without the interference of fuel strategy.
> If it is to work, the FIA will have to be softer
> on failed overtaking manouevres. If they keep
> penalising drivers for racing incidents then it
> won't work.

It depends on the incident. The Bourdais vs Massa and Vettel vs Kubica ones are the only ones in 2008 and 2009 which spring immediately to mind which were punished that should haven't been.

Unless there are a whole host that I've forgotten about (which isn't unlikely), that's a pretty low rate, given some of the races in that time. It's a shame that results are changed after races, but if you recklessly cock something up, and another driver suffers as a result, or just plain cheat (one certain incident springs to mind, which won't take many guesses), then you deserve every penalty you get.

Sport wouldn't around if there weren't referees.

Next year we probably are going to see huge cars with massive fuel tanks.

Wasn't re-fueling invented by bernie anyway in 1982 or there abouts?

---

"Arguing on the internet is like taking part in the Special Olympics...Even if you win you're still retarded"

@ gav: Good point there, for instance in Bahrain we had a lot of overtaking without any tears, so perhaps it's just people latching onto something. In fact if Vettel hadn't apologised in Australia we might not be even having this discussion.

Personally I'd prefer penalties to be issued for subsequent races, in the form of a grid-drop or suspended race bans, which become race bans if the driver offends again. Adding time onto the results is neither here nor there. Of course if an unfair advantage is gained over another driver, or a team has achieved a result illegally, then that is another matter. On the subject of collisions then a lot of it is down to how the stewards perceive an accident; a racing incident, a mistake by one driver or a deliberate/dangerous collision by a driver, and I guess it'll be hard to satisfy everybody with that system. But I guess F1 wouldn't be F1 without a bit of controversy, eh?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2009 08:17PM by The Lopper.

Naboo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Next year we probably are going to see huge cars
> with massive fuel tanks.
>
> Wasn't re-fueling invented by bernie anyway in
> 1982 or there abouts?

Hardly invented. Cars were refuelling long before then (the first tactical refuelling in a GP would be Fangio at the 'Ring in 1957 I guess, and it by far and away is the best example). The Brabham team realised that mid-race refuelling and tyre changes would give them a theoretical advantage (if not necessarily over the opposition, over what their car would have otherwise done).

The cars won't be huge. As they are, the cars are tiny at the back (the Renault excluded). There is just about no back to the RB5 at all. Doubling the size of the fuel-tank won't be a big job - the problem will working out how to lay out the rear of the car for the optimum weight distribution.

Kids these days. You'd think 1993 was in the last millennium or something...

I didn't know Fangio refuelled at the Ring too! I thought he only changed tyres.

Kids these days. You'd think 1993 was in the last millennium or something...

LOL!

...Hmm, I was 5 in 1993...

*goes and sits quietly in corner*

gav Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Naboo Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Next year we probably are going to see huge
> cars
> > with massive fuel tanks.
> >
> > Wasn't re-fueling invented by bernie anyway in
> > 1982 or there abouts?
>
> Hardly invented. Cars were refuelling long before
> then (the first tactical refuelling in a GP would
> be Fangio at the 'Ring in 1957 I guess, and it by
> far and away is the best example). The Brabham
> team realised that mid-race refuelling and tyre
> changes would give them a theoretical advantage
> (if not necessarily over the opposition, over what
> their car would have otherwise done).
>
> The cars won't be huge. As they are, the cars are
> tiny at the back (the Renault excluded). There is
> just about no back to the RB5 at all. Doubling the
> size of the fuel-tank won't be a big job - the
> problem will working out how to lay out the rear
> of the car for the optimum weight distribution.
>
> Kids these days. You'd think 1993 was in the last
> millennium or something...

I don't think there was a definite point when refuelling was first introduced; I think it was part of racing to some extent from F1's inception up till the end of 1983, when it was banned the first time round. And Naboo, they won't be bigger at all, just like they stayed the same size in '94 after refuelling was reintroduced and cars had smaller fuel tanks.

---

On the removal of refuelling, I think it'll be a mixed bag. There'll be less danger in the pitlane, which will be great, but I hope overtaking on the track will continue to get easier as well, otherwise we could be in for some lights-to-flag processions. The one good thing about refuelling is that it reshuffles the field a number of times each race and guarantees the order won't always be the same, even if the changing of positions isn't representative of the true order of the race.

The Lopper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Kids these days. You'd think 1993 was in the last
> millennium or something...
>
> LOL!
>
> ...Hmm, I was 5 in 1993...
>
> *goes and sits quietly in corner*

That's the same age I was when I started watching F1 in 1989, as it happens

---

Its ok for me without those pit stops,refuelling & changing tires, but i will really miss them, it was one of the most exciting scenarios in f1.

Without refueling, what if a team can see from their sensors that they will run out of fuel in a a few laps even though there are still, say, 15 laps left and its too late now to use fuel save counter measures? Do they bring the car to retire or just leave on track to run out of fuel or will they be allowed a sneaky top up?

They'll just run out of fuel I guess, just like it used to be.

Um. They'll fill the car up properly.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
theRacingLine.net
SportsCarArchives.com

Running out of fuel will be a very unlikley scenario today.

On the BBC Bahrain forum, was it Horner that said Vettel saved something like 5 laps of fuel??

---

"Trulli was slowing down like he wanted to have a picnic" LOL

Bernie's medal scheme has made it through for next year.

Also car's who drop out in Q3 will be allowed to fuel up in parc ferme. These were announced along with the rest of the changes but seemingly snuck in without much fuss.

[en.f1-live.com]

---

not good that the medal system has made it in, but i wouldn't be surprised if it still doesn't happen.

---

X (@ed24f1)

Also car's who drop out in Q3 will be allowed to fuel up in parc ferme. These were announced along with the rest of the changes but seemingly snuck in without much fuss.

I presume you mean cars who take part in Q3.

I really don't like the medal system, but I suppose we expected to see it included. Dunno if it'll actually happen. The one thing is I suppose it will improve overtaking at the front somewhat.

It's not the introduction of medals per se that bugs me, it's the utterly daft idea of scrapping the points system which is integral to F1. Give the drivers medals on the podium if you want, but keep the points system the same!

---

EC83 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's not the introduction of medals per se that
> bugs me, it's the utterly daft idea of scrapping
> the points system which is integral to F1. Give
> the drivers medals on the podium if you want, but
> keep the points system the same!


maybe they will have points but only medals (podium places) will decide the championship? although yes, a stupid idea. With more teams joining I would rather see current point system but which covers top 10 places and possibly points for pole and fastest lap as well.

It would also be nice of there were end of season prizes for fastest pit crew, for example, as they do in nascar. Although without refueling its probably useless now. Just want other things to keep track of to make the season more interesting basically.

Actually it makes more sense now that there's no refueling. They're just changing tyres now, we don't have to take into account variable fuel loads.

I like the idea of a point for fastest lap and pole position.

also you will find the pit stop times drop since there are no refueling from next year

trying to remember the fastest time recorded b4 refueling was introduced in 1994 i think just under 4 seconds was the fastest ever to change all 4 tires

heh they should also introduce a point for the fastest pitstop as well