There has been a lot of noise about refueling in Formula One. Mainly this noise has been about the dangers associated with refueling during races. So let's have a rambling look at the situation.

Refueling was virtually made mandatory by the requirement that fuel tanks in F1 cars be of a certain specific maximum capacity. I say "virtually", because there was no rule that stated that cars must stop to take on more fuel: it was just that with that size of tank, they HAD to stop to take on more fuel.

Basically, this was done in the name of "entertainment" and "competition". It certainly posed some very interesting engineering and design problems for the F1 teams. Should they use a very small tank, with its subsequent savings in space and weight but losses in frequent pit stops, or should they go with a larger tank and fewer stops?

Of course, nothing is that simple in F1. Given that the fuel would flow at a certain rate, it was then possible to compute roughly how long each pit stop would take for a certain amount of fuel. From that, they could then work out if they would have time to change the tyres as well as re-fuel - after all, why not?

The only problem with all this has been that it has turned a single F1 race into two or three F1 sprints. Although this does have advantages in that the drivers are able to use their tyres fairly heavily, because they know that they will be getting a new set soon, it has destroyed the art of conservation of tyres ... and it has generated a new reliance on team-work, whereby there is no longer a clear definition between the team, who prepare the car, and the driver, who races the car.

Pit stops have become an art form. The car arrives in the pit, a crowd of people descend upon it for a few seconds, spring back and the car blasts off down the pit road, all in a mere 15 seconds (for a long stop).

Pit stops have a double interest, don't they? There's the sheer ballet of watching those 15-20 people in a confined space performing at their best. Of course, each of them has a specific job to do in a specific way, but I still find pit stops marvellous to watch.

The other interest is in the length of time they take to do their jobs. In everyday life, it doesn't really matter to me if it takes 5 or 10 seconds to load a particular document into Word. After all, what's 5 seconds here or there over the length of a day? That doesn't work in pit stops.

But while we do have this excitement, pit stops do put the race at one remove from the idea that "drivers win races". Nowadays, races seem to be won in the pits and with pit strategy rather than on the race track. And with pit stop problems.

Some people may say that with only two serious public pit fires in two years - Verstappen 1994, Irvine 1995 (to be cynical, who will it be in 1996?) - this goes to show just how safe the safety systems and equipment are. On the other hand, other people say that this statistic goes to show exactly the opposite. (On the third hand, both statements go to show just how true is that you can prove anything you want with statistics.)

Go to any GP, and you'll probably see a big sign at the entrance gates that says words to the effect of "Motor racing is dangerous. If anything nasty happens to you - tough." Basically, it's one of those insidious "conditions of entry".

This doesn't only apply to the spectators. The drivers certainly know about this. After all, that seems to be a prime justification as to why they get paid so much money to take a sleek, shiny, glossy car out for a couple of hour's drive on a Sunday every now and then, have gorgeous women hanging off their arms, and thousands of people hanging off every word that drops from their lips, as though these drivers are actually important people.

And then there are the mechanics who slave day and night, frequently in atrocious conditions, for little money and certainly none of the glory, to prepare and keep running the cars for these "super-human" drivers. They are also put into a very precarious position with refueling and pit stops in general.

In the aftermath of the Ratzenberger/Senna weekend, a large number of changes were made to the regulations governing F1 so that the cars would be safer in the event of a crash. However, there has been little change in the regulations to protect the mechanics in the pits.

More importantly, perhaps, is that there has been virtually nothing done to protect the spectators. Hmmm, perhaps therein lies the key to getting refueling banned in F1.

Look above the pits at most F1 races, and you'll see that there are actually spectator areas right above the pit garages. These areas are reserved for the high-and-mighties, those that wouldn't be able to tell a Michael Schumacher from a Frank Zappa, but who, nevertheless, have some of the best (and, often, free) seats in the house.

Supposing, just supposing, there was a nasty pit fire and some of the beautiful people in those pit pavilions got a little burned - not that I would wish that on anyone - how soon after that do you think refueling would be banned?

All in the name of protecting the drivers and the mechanics, of course. And, in the meantime, the folks who love their F1 racing, have to pay out their precious funds to stand in some abysmal conditions just to catch the ocassional glimpse of their heroes as they blast past at full speed.

But that's just me.