My concern with Electric power plants is that they require an electrical charge. Available electricity is already at a critical phase now with countries like the U.S.A. having to import electricity and it is not alone. If E-engines are to have a future they must drastically improve efficiency by regenerating their own power once initially charged and diminishing battery size and usage. I think there are other options but any will be expensive to develop.
F1: Brawn Plans to Reduce Advantage of Richer Teams
- Thread starter Bethonie Waring
- Start date
V12 Hydrogingasoline you mean. I want to hear a scream instead of a fart
D
Deleted member 130869
-
Deleted member 130869
Forcefully standardizing parts is not what F1 is or actually was about. Allow for that to happen and have customer options, but offer varying options not just one type of engine or a 2-5cm range on certain measurements. And banning multiple aero devices should entice some clever new smooth body designs. The wider cars were also more aesthetically pleasing than the squeezed sausages of the past two decades.
As is always the case when we talk about F1 we speak about how the richer teams need to be kept down from leading the smaller ones in he the chase to bankruptcy.
Not sure how to achieve it but surely the real answer is to find a way that the lesser (financially at least) can be brought up to a higher level or the higher investing teams given some kind of handicap for their extra resources.
Also maybe points should be awarded to all drivers give a more interesting field since the odd 4 and 5 points here and there could make those lesser teams a bit closer to rivals over a race season and also give more idea as to where they actually stand overall.
The socialist ideal of everyone is equal (when has that ever worked or even been the case anyway?) won't work in F1 or in fact any sport the rich always can compete at a higher level it's just the law of the jungle.
May be the answer is quite a high cap and subsidies for those teams which have far smaller budgets funded by the wealthier teams and F1 itself from sponsors of the sport so say a company spends X millions then they put in to a fund for every X(millions spent) a Y (subsidy payment at tiered levels of investment) .
So if a company wants to invest more they give more to the subsidy for other teams who can't afford it so much now the idea sounds complicated but in principle could work so smaller teams have a fighting chance of at least keeping in the hunt.
Its an idea which is totally left field but could it work?
Not sure how to achieve it but surely the real answer is to find a way that the lesser (financially at least) can be brought up to a higher level or the higher investing teams given some kind of handicap for their extra resources.
Also maybe points should be awarded to all drivers give a more interesting field since the odd 4 and 5 points here and there could make those lesser teams a bit closer to rivals over a race season and also give more idea as to where they actually stand overall.
The socialist ideal of everyone is equal (when has that ever worked or even been the case anyway?) won't work in F1 or in fact any sport the rich always can compete at a higher level it's just the law of the jungle.
May be the answer is quite a high cap and subsidies for those teams which have far smaller budgets funded by the wealthier teams and F1 itself from sponsors of the sport so say a company spends X millions then they put in to a fund for every X(millions spent) a Y (subsidy payment at tiered levels of investment) .
So if a company wants to invest more they give more to the subsidy for other teams who can't afford it so much now the idea sounds complicated but in principle could work so smaller teams have a fighting chance of at least keeping in the hunt.
Its an idea which is totally left field but could it work?
