The idea has
some merit. The reasoning and intent seems good (money doesn't grow on trees anymore), the implementation possibly needs more explaining.
It would be a pretty amazing engineering excersise to design an engine for three different formulas. Especially when 2 would use it as a stressed member and one doesn't. That to me is true engineering - doing for for $10 and 10 parts what anyone could do with $1000 and 1000 parts.
Yes its true that many parts change from an NA installation to turbo - but the captial intensive stuff (from a manufacturing viewpoint) like blocks, crankshafts,rods, pistons (anything requiring expensive forging dies) being standardised will result in massive cost savings.
I guess as a manufacturing engineer myself I can see the benefits of such an excersise - from an economic point of view anyway. Tooling is f***** expensive compared to the cost of the materials which actually go into a part.
You have to remember - Max comes up with wild ideas like this all the time - most get shot down. Its not his job to be an engineer or to think through all the detail - that is for the engineering community to feedback. Like I said - the intent and reasoning are good, thats what he is there for.
People would have to agree (to a small extent at least) that all of the interest in this season is down to all the 'innovation' in the management of the sport. I have enjoyed the season so far.
Back to the World Engine call though - I can't see it happening to be honest. What happened to the standard engine, was that completely put to bed?
Hey I like this idea...
However, a single set of engine rules for LMP1, F1 and a new Formula Two could work with different power limits/levels of tuning, as could one for the WRC and WTCC.
Tim