Mandatory chassis sharing

[kalasend]

Just a wild idea...how about the winning team(constructor title) is obligated to open up their design spec(of the winning car, not the next season new model) to the back-roll teams(my ideal is the last three. e.g. RTR, SA, Spyker) for next season. This may or may not be very useful, depending on regulation changes but definitely helpful.

Better, can do it butterfly style. Take this season for example, SA has the right to copy Renault, MF1 has the right to copy Ferrari, etc.....

[schmenke]

Would this idea not contradict the concept of F1 being a "constructors" series?

[Dave B]

I still cling to this apparently outmoded idea that if you're not good enough to compete in F1 you should get out, not whinge and expect handouts.

[kalasend]

Are the weak teams weak because the people who work there are no good at all? We talk about cost-cutting all day. Is cost-cutting not aimed at helping small , weak teams?

The problem with cost-cutting, is that human beings are never short on ideas for spending. So I think the best way to do cost-cutting is to make it such that the more you spend, the more it could come back at you.

Forcing a team to open up its winning design may not be the best idea. But I believe the best cost-cutting idea is along this path.

[Jonesi]

Just a wild idea...how about the winning team(constructor title) is obligated to open up their design spec(of the winning car, not the next season new model) to the back-roll teams(my ideal is the last three. e.g. RTR, SA, Spyker) for next season. This may or may not be very useful, depending on regulation changes but definitely helpful.

Better, can do it butterfly style. Take this season for example, SA has the right to copy Renault, MF1 has the right to copy Ferrari, etc.....

Might not help much/any. Take the best chassis and put in an engine 50hp (or more) off what the car's aero was designed to use, and it may no longer work right.

[schmenke]

Are the weak teams weak because the people who work there are no good at all? We talk about cost-cutting all day. Is cost-cutting not aimed at helping small , weak teams?

The problem with cost-cutting, is that human beings are never short on ideas for spending. So I think the best way to do cost-cutting is to make it such that the more you spend, the more it could come back at you.

Forcing a team to open up its winning design may not be the best idea. But I believe the best cost-cutting idea is along this path.

Assisting the smaller teams financially would be easier achieved by allowing them a larger slice of the F1 revenue pie

[kalasend]

Assisting the smaller teams financially would be easier achieved by allowing them a larger slice of the F1 revenue pie

Does it help to keep asking for something that the givers don't want to give? Last time I check, it worked in a parent-child relationship, not a organizer-participant relationship...

[kalasend]

Might not help much/any. Take the best chassis and put in an engine 50hp (or more) off what the car's aero was designed to use, and it may no longer work right.

It's the learning factor that works behind this. To an engineer, what could be better resource than a best-of-the-field sample?

[jso1985]

Just a wild idea...how about the winning team(constructor title) is obligated to open up their design spec(of the winning car, not the next season new model) to the back-roll teams(my ideal is the last three. e.g. RTR, SA, Spyker) for next season. This may or may not be very useful, depending on regulation changes but definitely helpful.

Better, can do it butterfly style. Take this season for example, SA has the right to copy Renault, MF1 has the right to copy Ferrari, etc.....

But F1 is not supposed to be a democracy...

[TOgoFASTER]

The parity parody one size fits all formula doesn't work. Ask the tailenders in Nascar.
In the coming version 2008 on of F1 lesser teams will be larger teams satellites, the independent movement is lost and with no more a chance to move up as the lapdogs they will become.

Sad indeed