Tell me it ain't so Joe.Jersey Tom wrote:By the time you graduate you may have no interest in working in racing, believe it or not!
Not sure I agree with that. What about stock car racing then? Engineering is an immense differentiation in performance.JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:The way F1 is going now with rules, you can bet in 10 years pretty much 95% of designs will be nigh on identical.
For that 5% to make a difference will depend on which area is the prevalent performance differentiator, as in aero, tyres or engines.
And that 5% will be quickly copied too if it makes much of a difference. The big money earners in F1 now are people outside of the technical domain. Just the other day I had a chat with an unspecified member of a UK based team, and the sentiment was echoed.
The PR people are the movers and shakers of F1 now...love it or hate. Come to think of it, they have been for sometime now. But if your aiming for big dollars in F1 being an engineer....forget it. Sadly.
I, too, know squat about stock cars, because, frankly, it just doesn't excite me. However, it absolutely makes sense that engineering in a spec-series would carry far more weight than it does in F1, where even a shoddily-engineered concept can win if it's a good one.JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:My knowledge of stock cars is limited to say the least.
I'd say there's validity to that. No different than anything else. More resources and talent = higher chance of success.bhallg2k wrote:There's a reason why the same teams fight at the front of NASCAR year in and year out. It's because they do it "right" every time.
(I'm sure JT will correct me if I've gotten this wrong.)