Refueling to return to F1 in 2017?

[Matthew Booth]

An statemtent has been released by the FIA/FOM this afternoon stating their plans for the future and what was talked about in the Strategy Group Meeting.

The Strategy Group members have debated a number of levers aimed at improving the show. An initial series of measures has been voted:
For 2016:
- Free choice of the two dry tyre compounds (out of four) that each team can use during the race weekend

For 2017:
- Faster cars: 5 to 6 seconds drop in laptimes through aerodynamic rules evolution, wider tyres and reduction of car weight
- Reintroduction of refuelling (maintaining a maximum race fuel allowance)
- Higher revving engines and increased noise
- More aggressive looks

A few other measures have also been discussed but require further investigation before they can be implemented:
- A global reflection on race weekend format
- Measures to make starts only activated by the driver without any outside assistance

Furthermore, in light of the various scenarios presented by the independent consulting company mandated by the F1 Strategy Group, at the initiative of the FIA, to work on the reduction of costs and following a constructive exchange, a comprehensive proposal to ensure the sustainability of the sport has emerged. The Strategy Group member Teams have committed to refine it in the next few weeks, in consultation with the other teams involved in the championship.

On the engine side, it has been decided that stability of the rules should prevail in consideration of the investments of the manufacturers involved in the sport and to give visibility to potential new entrants. The allowance for a 5th engine to be used during the 2015 season has been rejected.

This constructive meeting between the FIA, FOM and the Teams has allowed paving the way for the future of the championship. All parties agreed to work together with an intention to firm up these proposals and submit them to the approval of the F1 Commission and the World Motor Sport Council of the FIA as soon as possible for implementation.

Source: http://www.fia.com/news/f1-strategy-group-press-release

 

[Darren Bentley]

I believe this "revolution" in aero is supposed to mean the cheaper alternatives which still produce more downforce that Brundle was talking about earlier in the week, now all this is brilliant and I really do love it but unless the way the money is handed out this will not work for some of the teams not just Manor, it also kind of makes me think Haas will not like this, he would have put all this money into a 2016 car when he could have saved it and put MORE into a 2017 car when the aero regs change

 

[Ben Eastman]

I'm ok for the aero, wider tyres and higher revving engines etc.. That has a genuine possibility to be good for the sport, without much downside.

However refueling? Unless you improve the tyres people will still be driving cautiously, just quicker/slower based on how much fuel they have on board. The tyre compound idea is good but combined with the refueling I feel like there's just going to be an over-complication of strategy which will leave the viewer lost, and WAY too many strategy/tyre/fuel level passes, and less actual wheel-to wheel racing. With 4 compounds to choose from and from 1-100KG(no one will use 1), it will not happen very often that 2 drivers will find themselves with similar fuel/tyre to be able to go to battle ALA Rosberg/Hammy in Bahrain.

 

[Darren Bentley]

I'm ok for the aero, wider tyres and higher revving engines etc.. That has a genuine possibility to be good for the sport, without much downside.

However refueling? Unless you improve the tyres people will still be driving cautiously, just quicker/slower based on how much fuel they have on board. The tyre compound idea is good but combined with the refueling I feel like there's just going to be an over-complication of strategy which will leave the viewer lost, and WAY too many strategy/tyre/fuel level passes, and less actual wheel-to wheel racing. With 4 compounds to choose from and from 1-100KG(no one will use 1), it will not happen very often that 2 drivers will find themselves with similar fuel/tyre to be able to go to battle ALA Rosberg/Hammy in Bahrain.

yeah I agree but lets remember this, Michelin want back into F1, Pirelli don't have a 2017 contract, Michelin only want in if they can create racing tyres not "show" tyres that Pirelli produce meaning it could mean Pirelli out and Michelin in or even Pirelli and Michelin with both companies producing proper tyres

 

[Jezza819]

I wish somehow they would get rid of this maximum fuel usage thing because I want to see cars raced to their fastest potential and not have to worry that they will exceed their fuel percentage. If bringing back refueling would help that then I'm all for it. But I don't think they're willing to drop the fuel percentage nonsense.

 

[Darth]

I wonder how they will the drop in weight, considering that the engine now is a
much heavier that what it used to be.
Furthermore, will they really allow the cars to be around 5 secs faster per lap?
Wouldn't that be dangerous according to the FIA, and if not, why were all those bans
on cool inventions that would make cars faster in the past?

 

[Omer Said]

For 2016:
- Free choice of the two dry tyre compounds (out of four) that each team can use during the race weekend

I think that is the best part of these changes.

 

[P*Funk]

I just want to see the aero fixed so that they don't need DRS to pass.

 

[Alberto Casado]

Lighter cars... pilots in 2020 are going to look all like Tyrion.

 

[Philip Heck]

I just want to see the aero fixed so that they don't need DRS to pass.

If we'd get rid of diffusors that could do the trick... although the lap times would probably be really bad then...

 

[Jimlaad43]

As long as drivers don't have to carry fuel over from quali, that's fine. In qualifying, drivers should be allowed to drive flat out with the lightest car possible, not hampered down because of a strategy choice.

 

[paracletus]

should be a good thing, cars will be faster for sure.
they also may be able to make it much safer to refuel than it was previously with the technology now - such as a system that makes it impossible for the driver to pull away when the hose is still attached.

tyres are still the biggest problem with the current cars.
imo, it's not acceptable that lap times are up to ~5 seconds slower than they were a decade ago.

 

[Qazdar Karim]

should be a good thing, cars will be faster for sure.
they also may be able to make it much safer to refuel than it was previously with the technology now - such as a system that makes it impossible for the driver to pull away when the hose is still attached.

tyres are still the biggest problem with the current cars.
imo, it's not acceptable that lap times are up to ~5 seconds slower than they were a decade ago.

Yeah! MSC set China's world record during race in 2004

 

[Darren Bentley]

 

[Philip Heck]

exactly

 

[Darth]

Quite well put. Why push for an overtake when you can simply pass
the other guy with a better fuel strategy.

 

[Andrew Holmes]

F1 would be so much better off in my opinion, if it went back to the days of 2007/8 in which we saw an epic season of racing. What was the formula for that racing? Refuelling, Naturally Aspirated V8 engines and longer duration tyres. No DRS, ERS or KERS.

Refuelling:
Refuelling always used to throw up a surprise or two back in that era, with some drivers taking a bold risk and fuelling light to put the car on pole and attempt to stay in the lead for as long as possible. In 2017, we could have Toro Rossos, Saubers, Force Indias or possible even Williams taking the gamble to take pole while the Mercedes and Ferrari cars lined up three or four rows back. However refuelling would diminish all the hard work that the tyre mechanics have put in to decrease pit stop time.

Longer Duration Tyres:
Longer duration tyres would mean that the drivers were not put in a position of doubt whether they were going to have grip into the next turn or not due to an immediate drop in grip. Tyres that last longer promote more equal racing which is the most fun, because when a car catches another, if the tyres are so much different, the faster guy will simply blast by and pull away, making us miss out on a possible few laps of battles.

Naturally Aspirated V8:
The introduction of the Turbo V6 engines we hear and see now was brought about for two reasons:

• To reduce costs
• To become greener

Both of these reasons have failed with the new power units. The costs for power these days has gone up insanely compared to the costs in 2006-2013; this is why we have seen the decline of the back-marker teams in recent years. Back in 2006-2008, I believe the grid had Super Aguri, Midland/Spyker, in 2010 we had Virgin Racing, Lotus F1 Team and Hispania Racing at the back. Now none of these outfits are operational under the original owners. F1 needs the slower cars, and the N/A V8 delivered flat out racing for two hours, now the V6s no longer give me goosebumps. Also, Bernie worked out that if each team dropped two of their trucks, by the end of one season, the amount of petrol used would be less than the V10s used per season!

Overall:
Overall I believe that if F1 dropped the ERS, DRS, KERS, low duration tyres and brought back the V8s, refuelling and tyre rivalry, F1 might just get back on its feet again.

 

[paracletus]

I don't follow this idea that hundreds of overtakes during a race makes better racing - on the contrary. They don't need to work to overtake a car now, they just wizz past artificially at the end of a straight. Poor.
There are no tough battles for position, which is what overtaking should be all about.