>> Thursday 8 January 2009
   >>
   >> The FOTA Executive Committee met today in Heathrow to further
   progress the cost reducing initiatives already developed. All the
    Members
   unanimously agreed a number of important principles and   supported the process
   now established within FOTA.
   >>
   >> The teams detailed and signed a comprehensive Aerodynamic Test
   Restrictions Agreement, effective in 2009.
   >>
   >> Furthermore, the Teams agreed that they would develop and  freeze  low
   cost transmissions for the 2010/12 seasons which would have a   six race life,
   priced at 1.5 million per season per team.
   >>
   >> FOTA also reaffirmed its commitment to a 5 million engine  supply  from
   2010 for independent teams, who have expressed their agreement   with and support
   for this arrangement.
   >>
   >> The FOTA Technical Regulations Working Group will now conclude  the
   elimination of expensive materials and identify further   opportunities to reduce
   the cost of components and systems which do  not deliver  performance
   differentiation. All of the
    Teams present  wished to express their support for
   the entrant currently known as  Honda and they will agree to any  name change
   registered.
   >>
   >> All of the Teams are committed to working together in a  rational  and
   systematic manner, within the framework of FOTA to effectively   reduce the costs
   inherent to Formula One. The same approach will  now be used to  improve the
   spectacle of the sport, following the  outcome of the FOTA  commissioned market
   research.
   >>
   >>
   >>
   >> For further information or to unsubscribe from this service  please
   visit our website:
   >> www.toyota-f1-world.com <http://www.toyota-f1-world.com>
   >
   >
   > Terrific.  They just "fixed" F1.  Spading and neutering is next
   > John Dinkel

   ------------------------------------------------------

   > Screw the cost. Keep it what it is. Intense automotive R &
    D.
   > Don't turn it into a mere circus.
   >
   > Paul Lamar

   Paul,
   Unfortunately, the intensive R&D isn't filtering into the real  world.
   The Lotuses, Terrells, etc. we grew up with, the innovators of  F1, can't
   afford to compete any more.  Honda has left.  Toyota could be next.
   Expect smaller grids.  Maybe we need claiming races.

   Our space race of the 60s and 70s did a far better job of taking
   horriffically expensive and unobtainable technology and making it  mass
   market.  Sadly, most of those in gov't today look only at the  cost of
   a new space program and not the enormous long-term economic value  and
   technical leadership it would provide again to the US.
   jd

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

   I think it IS filtering into the real world. What we don't see is  the
   material R&D that had been going on in the back ground for engine  parts.
   It is
    not for nothing that Formula 1 engines rev to 19,000 RPM. The KERS
   certainly will as will turbo compound when they implement it.  Aerodynamics
   could with a rule change here and there to allow wider movable  wings that
   are suspension mounted. If you want to limit the down force limit  just
   the wing area and wing span equal to the width of the car.

   If they keep going this way they will wind up with just another
   boring spec class. It killed Indy and it will kill Formula 1. The  way to
   get passing is allow innovation. Redirect the R&D towards  efficiency both
   aero drag, vehicle weight and engine fuel burn. Competition among  engineers
   is the key motivation.


   We got nothing of any significance out of going to the moon or  any other
   NASA program for that matter. The only technical innovation and  useful R&D
   we ever got out of government money expenditures was during a war.

   Paul Lamar

This might be an appropriate time to push for an annual fuel budget
reduction and a cutting back of other restrictions.  As you suggested
some time back, this could lead to innovation and development in
directions relevant to the real world.

Philip

Paul,
Re your coments:
"We got nothing of any significance out of going to the moon or any other
  NASA program for that matter. The only technical innovation and
useful R&D
  we ever got out of government money expenditures was during a war."

Are you telling me you've never heard of Tang?
jd


I have heard of it but I don't drink it.

Paul Lamar