Pit box rethink?

[Knowlesy]

Here's a poser from Ron Dennis. (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/54154)

Originally Posted by Ron Dennis

"If Schumacher loses the championship I hope it won't be down to what happened at the first pitstop.

"There are no restrictions in the regulations on the possibility of having two refueling spots, one for each driver. I have long thought about introducing this system in the McLaren pits, but then from this evaluation arose problems regarding costs and the pits organization, which would become much more complex.

"Considering that the problem has hit other teams in the past, perhaps we should think about it again, because the planning of the strategy often suffers from having a single refueling spot and during the race it limits last-minute corrections."

I have to say I am 100% with Ron on this and am surprised nobody has considered this before in F1. To me it has always been an annoying issue how teams are compromised because of having just one pit box.

I have mentioned this before and I only become more maddened watching JPM queueing behind Kimi at Australia earlier this season, as Kimi had his nose replaced! It's surely common sense to have individual refuelling points for each car like in the American series, to avoid losing time for certain drivers?

Having said that, it is undeniably exciting when a top runner is dropped behind a couple of cars through this. But for me, that doesn't really justify it!

Your thoughts?

[Inigo Montoya]

Great thread. Why not have two places? It'd be useful not only for safety car situations, but for sudden showers of rain. Only problem is, these are relatively rare occurances, and may not justify the cost associated with running another full pitstop team. In these cost-cutting times, it won't be popular.

[T0MAT01]

TBH I really can't see it happening due to the extra cost and possible extra risk with cars being closer together, along with the fact that, as you say, it only rarely occurs.

I'll just put it down as another reason against refueling altogether.

[Adam43]

I'm not sure the expense is a factor, although Ron did cite this. It could mean the difference between winning and losing - think about how much they spend on oher aspects for potentially less return.

[Bononi]

Extra costs for who ?

If is for the teams, for a start, there's no problem.

But for the tracks, and FIA planning costs reduction, taht won't happen.

[T0MAT01]

They'd need two pit crews, then they'd all be working too closely together so some namby pamby with a clip board would come along and tell them to extend the pits.

It's really only an option for the top 2 or 3 teams, although I have to admit that there are a lot more safety car deployments than there used to be...

[Marbot]

They shouldn't be stopping for fuel or tyres anyway.But FWIW,leave as is.They could have fuelled Michael first and made their excuses later.Two cars pitting at the same time on the same strategy equals a potential for disaster not yet seen in F1.Keep the racing on the track!

[lookleft]

Originally Posted by martyn bott

....Two cars pitting at the same time on the same strategy equals a potential for disaster not yet seen in F1.Keep the racing on the track!

huh teams do it side by side all the time why should the one team doing both it's cars be any different. Certainly all the "modern" tracks have ample room.

[Chatters]

We see that the only times two cars pit at the same time when a Safety Car is deployed/about to be deployed. So why don't we ban pit stops during SC periods altogether?

[shugruah]

I have mentioned this before and I only become more maddened watching JPM queueing behind Kimi at Australia earlier this season, as Kimi had his nose replaced!

just a question: lets say the safty cars is called and the 2 mclarens enter the pit to refuel in the front positions. couldnt montoya , at the time, have slowed down, delaying is approach (like going 5km/h) to the pit while raikonen made the nose change, and because hes in the pit no one could overtake him?? so he would loose the same time to kimi and no one that had entered the pit behind him would pass him. he wasnt smart enoough to do that but could he have done such a thing? because the rulles (i think) say you cant go faster that 80km (or 60km, whatever)... they dont say you have to go faster than xx km....

I could be wrong, but i bet theres no rulle to prevent that, because normally you want to go back to the track as fast as you can.....

[m14mclaren]

Kimi did that very thing at Spa and everyone got all ****y so I believe there is actually a rule preventing it now.

[BootsOntheSide]

Originally Posted by lookleft

Certainly all the "modern" tracks have ample room.

Anything which moves the onus away from classics and towards Tilke-Rings can't be a good thing.

Imagine the complaints if Massa is leading a race and then his hastily-assembled pit crew botch a tyre change for just about long enough for Michael to take the lead....

[Raglanparade]

Melbourne would have enough room for two pit boxes per team, and thats a circuit that was designed in about 1994...

All that would need to happen would be that the cars carry a bit extra steering lock and maybe less traction control, so that they can squeeze out of the grid slots.

[Sodemo]

Ive always thought they should reduce the number of mechanics allowed to work on a car in the pit box anyway, say a maximum of 4 mechanics per car would make it interesting...

[Suze]

Why? Don't agree there, prefer to see current numbers and who can do it quickest!

[Sodemo]

Originally Posted by Suze

Why? Don't agree there, prefer to see current numbers and who can do it quickest!

Well for one, less team members would reduce costs.

Second, I think it would be quite interesting (and amusing) to watch 4 mechanics change 4 tyres (so thats 1 each), and then have to run around and grab the fuel rig, and then fix any broken parts of the car (front wing) etc.

It would make the team more under pressure, the team would make more mistakes etc.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Chatters

So why don't we ban pit stops during SC periods altogether?

That would be good.

One by one we could watch them run out of juice.

[Mr V]

Strange that Ron should pose this. I'll bet Juan Pablo wishes he'd put more thought to it before Canada last year

[Silk Cut Jaguar]

It's always puzzled me how the FIA bang on about safety yet seem happy to let a dozen men stare down a 60mph car a couple of times each race. Surely if safety was paramount then they would be doing their best to limit the amount of people in a live pitlane?

Two jack men, four tyre changers and two on the fuel hose. Eight people could easily be reduced to seven if they got with the times and adopted internal airjacks too.

A reduction in the number of people needed for a pitstop would also increase the possibility of pitting two cars at once.

[Nintendo]

I was always under the impression that it had something to do with the regulations as to why that didn't happen. Now I know that's not the case, i'm wondering exactly as to why no one ever suggested this before. Nice one, Ron.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by Silk Cut Jaguar

It's always puzzled me how the FIA bang on about safety yet seem happy to let a dozen men stare down a 60mph car a couple of times each race.

The FIA would of course, counter your statement by saying that they introduced a pit lane speed limit in the first place, but i have to agree with you, and i for one, wouldn't like to be the poor guy standing there with the front jack, as he is essentially used as a "wall" when the driver has braked a fraction too late.

[BootsOntheSide]

Slower pit stops will mean teams making less pit stops, which will increase the challenge to the drivers of having to cope with heavy-fuel and worn-tyre situations.

You can't completely ban pitstops during the safety car, for the reasons Martyn suggests. Tactical use of the safety car is exciting anyway. And on this occasion, justice was done, as the faster Ferrari driver won and the slower one couldn't manipulate the result.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Silk Cut Jaguar

A reduction in the number of people needed for a pitstop would also increase the possibility of pitting two cars at once.

Two on the gas,two on the wheels.But i'd actually prefer them not to bother at all and cut the the pit stops out altogether.

[Suze]

Originally Posted by The Monster

Well for one, less team members would reduce costs.

Second, I think it would be quite interesting (and amusing) to watch 4 mechanics change 4 tyres (so thats 1 each), and then have to run around and grab the fuel rig, and then fix any broken parts of the car (front wing) etc.

It would make the team more under pressure, the team would make more mistakes etc.

Nah, call me cynical, but they'll find a way to spend it on the hospitality units or something etc etc....

Personally, I'm happy with and don't dislike the way it is now, so not too fussed about changing it. However, can certainly see your point about there being more pressure / mistakes - be interesting to see who could cope the best then!

[chezza]

Originally Posted by Silk Cut Jaguar

Two jack men, four tyre changers and two on the fuel hose. Eight people could easily be reduced to seven if they got with the times and adopted internal airjacks too.

I have to agree on that one. Seeing the hoards of people in the pit lane during pit stops is crazy.

But also think that scrapping pit stops for fuel and tyres altogether would make things interesting.