|
|
|
|
|
by metalman
457 days ago
|
|
UMmmmm, actualy there are no details, it's more like bait, layed out in front of the rabbit hole.
What it does outline/hint at is the methodology of there thinking about engine development, within the arbitrary rules of F1. And what they, and everybody else leaves out, is that limitations in material sciences is the reason for the engineering heroics, and that access to say, the single crystal materials used for jet turbine hot section blades, would allow higher combustion temps and pressures, and greater efficiency, in NA engine, that would outperform anything built yet. The reason that F1 cant do that is money, and
compared to true airospace development,F1 has lint
in there pockets, and have falken back onto 1940's
turbocompound aircraft engine technology. |
|
You can get more power out of NA with better materials you've stated but not efficiency.
F1 wanted more road relevancy and hence ended up with turbo-charging and Fuel limits