Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Formula 1

Old 5th Nov 2017, 21:13
  #6241 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 72
Posts: 1,561
Anorak - ON

PRD-1, you seem to have a lot of inside information about Formula 1, but when it comes to aviation ....

It's a small world, and I had hands-on experience of an airplane with the only mass-production turbo-compound engine ever made. That was a Douglas DC7-C fitted with the Wright R-3350 Duplex-Cyclone, when I did a check ride on one to become a Flight Engineer.

The P&W R-4360 Wasp Major did not use turbo-compound technology, nor was it called the "Twin Wasp Major." (I guess you got mixed up there with the Twin Wasp.)

It's true that there were several engines under development that used this turbo-compound concept, but the only one that made it into mass production was the Wright R-3350 Duplex-Cyclone. Even there, most versions of the R-3350 were not turbo-compound engines.
chuks is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 21:26
  #6242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Martian
Posts: 35
[QUOTE=DANbudgieman;9946993]They may have something of a point.


Much as I hate to admit it, F1 would suffer greatly (terminally?) if there was no Ferrari participation.

Might just pause for a moment there to consider....That's exactly the kind of horse manure Ferrari would like you to propagate.



Ferrari say that F1 is in their DNA.

It may be but if they want to cut off their nose etc etc, then I say let them.

In fact when they leave I hope the door gives then a resounding whack on their ares as they pass thru.
packapoo is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 21:45
  #6243 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by packapoo View Post
Ferrari say that F1 is in their DNA.

It may be but if they want to cut off their nose etc etc, then I say let them.
Don't Ferrari rely on F1 for publicity for their roadcar range?

I accept that sales wouldn't stop immediately, but given a few years . . . ?
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 5th Nov 2017, 23:01
  #6244 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,213
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
PRD-1, you seem to have a lot of inside information about Formula 1, but when it comes to aviation ....
You're right, of course. I was trying to remember the 3350 reference but couldn't, and I was sure that the turbocompounded version of the 4360 was a production engine but when I checked my books I found it was just a proposal with limited development. Apols for the mistake!

There is also some confusion of terminology - I tend to the traditional view that "turbocompounding" means returning energy to the crankshaft, but there are some sources that also call the variable discharge turbine nozzle concept turbocompounding, because it adds energy to the propulsion system in the form of diorect thrust. For me this is a misuse of the term - YMMV.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 10:56
  #6245 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 56
Posts: 592
There's plenty of other formulas that manage quite well without Ferrari. F1 will survive if they go.
Super VC-10 is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 11:14
  #6246 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,213
This is one of my responses to those who bleat on about "F1 should have standard, identical cars and engines with no tech" - there are plenty of classes that do exactly that, but they don't get televised much because they're as boring as watching paint dry. People who don't like F1's competitive tech have the absolute right to go and watch one of those other classes...

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 14:34
  #6247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post
This is one of my responses to those who bleat on about "F1 should have standard, identical cars and engines with no tech" - there are plenty of classes that do exactly that, but they don't get televised much because they're as boring as watching paint dry. People who don't like F1's competitive tech have the absolute right to go and watch one of those other classes...

PDR
And this is my version of the same thing which is that the current rules are too many and too restrictive, so we have the unedifying situation where the performance spread is only couple of seconds in a two+ minute lap time.
Apart from the construction rules that keep the driver alive in the crashes, let them do what they like to win a 300 mile race using no more than (say) 200 litres of fuel.
Allan Lupton is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 17:28
  #6248 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Edinburgh
Age: 81
Posts: 45
AL
Agree completely, except that it would unleash a catastrophically expensive technology race, with the (transient) best solution leaving all the others trailing. Then all the others ditch their inferior solutions and re-design, etc., etc., to catch up, by which time the leader has unveiled an even better solution, and so on ..
Now if you could combine such a free formula with an effective cost cap, then bingo!
DType is offline  
Old 6th Nov 2017, 19:14
  #6249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: inv
Posts: 278
Lewis has been caught up in tax avoidance scandal

Paradise Papers: F1 champion Lewis Hamilton 'dodged' VAT on 16.5m private jet - BBC News
scr1 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 08:44
  #6250 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 67
Posts: 60
These VAT rules are quite specific. A few years ago I tried to reclaim the VAT on a new car because I did 50,000 miles a year in it for business. HMRC's answer was if I so much as went home for my tea in it one day then it did not comply to the rules. The sum in question was around 5,000.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 09:26
  #6251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: RPVI
Posts: 70
Originally Posted by scr1 View Post
No story here!

Tax avoidance is using the taxation rules to your advantage and is lawful, therefore a non story.

Tax evasion refers to contravening the law. Only then does the is action of the individual deserve public attention and hopefully conviction before a criminal court.
DANbudgieman is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 09:56
  #6252 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Liverpool
Age: 44
Posts: 474
Odd. In business or personal life, we're told by the government and media that we should always obtain professional financial advice. Then, when that advice is followed, the same governments and media start hounding those who have done so.
As far as this 'scandal' is concerned, as long as the recipients aren't in public service, good luck to them...they haven't done anything illegal.
clareprop is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 10:06
  #6253 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,213
The Isle of Mann leader/minister/sommink (didn't catch that detail) was on the Today programme this morning stating that:

1. Exactly the same VAT "rebate" (not sure if it's a physical rebate or a non-payment) is available wherever this aeroplane initially landed in the UK - the VAT exemption has to do with its use, not its registry.

2. He said (and I really know nothing about this so I'm open to being corrected by someone who actually does) that the reason for first-landing in the IoM was to enable it to get an IoM registration, and it's the cost/benefit of that registration compared to a CAA one which is the issue - nothing at all to do with VAT.

Can anyone fill me in on the details of (2) above?

TIA,

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 10:19
  #6254 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,213
I've seen one claim that has more detail - it is said that Lewis declared the aeroplane as a business asset, and has set up a separate company that owns/operates it and on that basis its purchase was VAT-exempt.

It is said that about 40% of its use is "personal" rather than "business", and for these trips he is personally invoiced (at the same operating costs as are declared fo the business use). On these invoices he pays VAT.

To me that sounds like a fairly normal arrangement for this kind of thing - is it common?

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 10:25
  #6255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 51.50N 1W (ish)
Posts: 1,012
On his salary, I think he can afford some good lawyers and tax accountants.
Fitter2 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 12:56
  #6256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 173
I thought Lewis Hamilton was a tax exile in Monaco.
Mike6567 is offline  
Old 7th Nov 2017, 13:00
  #6257 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Farnham, Surrey
Posts: 1,213
Monaco has many features and facilities, but a runways suitable for a Challenger 605 isn't among them.

PDR
PDR1 is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2017, 09:12
  #6258 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: avro country
Age: 68
Posts: 174
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post
Monaco has many features and facilities, but a runways suitable for a Challenger 605 isn't among them.

PDR
There are perfectly good facilities at Nice which is only six miles away.
Linedog is offline  
Old 8th Nov 2017, 21:10
  #6259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Stockport MAN/EGCC
Age: 66
Posts: 826
[quote=packapoo;9947667]
Originally Posted by DANbudgieman View Post
They may have something of a point.


Much as I hate to admit it, F1 would suffer greatly (terminally?) if there was no Ferrari participation.

Might just pause for a moment there to consider....That's exactly the kind of horse manure Ferrari would like you to propagate.



Ferrari say that F1 is in their DNA.

It may be but if they want to cut off their nose etc etc, then I say let them.

In fact when they leave I hope the door gives then a resounding whack on their ares as they pass thru.
I wonder which team will inherit the 5*+ cover afforded by F.I.A. if Ferrari do throw their toys out of the toy box and follow them into the wilderness?
Porsche or Aston Martin or one of the existing teams ? Or somebody new to farce one ?
Be lucky
David
The AvgasDinosaur is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2017, 13:05
  #6260 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Torro Rosso and Renault fall out over 'engine part supplies' over allegations of shenanigans aimed at influencing the standings in the Constructors' championship.
G-CPTN is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.