|
TEAM REPRESENTATIVES - Eric
BOULLIER (Renault), Graeme LOWDON (Marussia Virgin Racing), Jonathan NEALE
(McLaren), Adrian NEWEY (Red Bull), Rob WHITE (Renault Sport F1)
Q: Rob, about the engine rules. Just exactly what does that mean to you, the
new engine rules for 2014.
Rob WHITE: I think the first thing to say is that we are pleased now to have
a fairly clear view of where we are going and the most important thing about
the 2014 rules is that there are enough people who now understand them and
know what we are getting into so that we can go ahead and do the work to
deliver these engines in a sort of timely fashion and get all the cars on
the grid prepared to go racing for the first race The fact that we made a
bit of an adjustment from four cylinders in-line to six cylinders is, on one
hand, a pretty major change. On the other hand it’s a relatively modest
change. The fundamentals of the rules stay as we had in mind with a double
limitation on fuel consumption with a fixed amount of fuel for the race, a
fuel flow limit, a big contribution from energy recovery systems, electric
only traction in the pit lane. We have got many of the same fundamental
building blocks, albeit with a different engine architecture and a programme
timing that I think suits more people better than the original programme
timing.
Q: Can you give us some sort of idea of what happens now from your point of
view. How do you go about building those engines, designing them, what
happens now? Has the programme already started?
RW: The first thing to say perhaps is that we were well underway with the
previous programme, so substantial amounts of work from that go straight in
the bin. Not all of it, thankfully. We try to recover what we can and
re-orientate it to the new programme. As ever we may need to structure the
engineering programme counting backwards from the first race in order to
arrive in the most competitive possible state. Important to recognise that
this is a massive technological change for the engine people in F1. Clean
sheet of paper, new engine, fundamentally very different to its predecessor,
hasn’t happened really since we made a switch in the opposite sense from
turbo to normally aspirated engines way back at the end of the 1980s.
Q: So the strategy from Renault’s point of view: can you give some
indication of that? Presumably you almost welcome this engine change as
well, as you were a little frustrated with the V8?
RW: I think one of the conditions necessary for Renault to remain present in
F1 was that F1 should move on and the family of, I prefer to say power unit,
rather than engine, towards which we are now headed is something that
creates a much clearer resonance with the products and the processes that we
use for the cars that we sell to our customers in, I think it is, 118
markets worldwide.
Q: Graeme, quite a lot of announcements of late, particularly the McLaren
tie-up. How is that coming along? Has it already started?
Graeme LOWDON: Yes, it has already started. We’ve known McLaren for a long
time. We’ve worked with them in the past in Formula Three actually, with the
Young Driver Programme, going right the way back to Lewis (Hamilton), so we
know the people at McLaren really well and it’s not been difficult at all to
engage the project. It is quite a big project and it is one that obviously
we are hoping will move the team forward in a short space of time so that
project has already begun and it is going very well.
Q: What about your own Formula One technology centre? Tell us about building
that up?
GL: Yes, Banbury is a site that we have been using for some time with our
previous technical partner and so we are now building that facility up and
obviously using some experience from both within the team and our partners
to do that. We will still run the race team from Dinnington for the rest of
this season. It is exciting times for the team. A lot of steps moving
forward and these aren’t things you just cannot make up overnight. They have
been well thought through and well planned and there is a real air of
excitement within the team. We have always had a very strong team spirit as
I think most people know, but I think now we have got really a good
technical direction and there was a vote of confidence from Timo Glock. He
has committed to the team now for a long term and he has seen from inside
the steps we are making so that was an important announcement for us as well
that Timo is staying with us.
Q: We have had some interesting news from the UK today about the TV deal
that is going to happen. What is your initial reaction to that, as I know it
is very early stages?
GL: Yes, it is early stages. Obviously, like most people we found out about
it this morning. I think it is going to be interesting to see how it
unravels. There are different sides to this. I have read that Sky has said
it is good news for fans and they have said there will be an unparalleled
experience for them and that sounds very exciting. To be perfectly honest I
think it is up to the fans whether they think it is good news or not and
that is something that remains to be seen. Obviously, we hope that it is. I
think that will unravel over time. For a team like us, we actually get very
little of our revenue from TV rights and it is very, very important for our
entire commercial strategy that we maximise the global fan base and the
number of people who watch our team in action, so obviously there are
concerns there but equally we are entering a new era potentially for a
commercial model for Formula One as well.
Q: Adrian, interesting performance in the last few races and here as well.
Was Nürburgring a blip for you? Maybe a downward blip slightly, but you have
been so dominant so far this year.
Adrian NEWEY: Difficult to tell. Obviously the competition is extremely
tough. As we all know, what marks Formula One out over the last 10 years or
so is just the pace of development through the year, so exactly where
everyone is is difficult to know. There are bound to be variations from
circuit to circuit.
Q: Yesterday, Mark Webber said there would be no knee-jerk reaction from Red
Bull Racing and he explained a little bit about how you basically have a
programme. But is that the case, do you just run through a programme of
development or is that fairly flexible?
AN: We try to keep the development programme flexible, but equally what
drives our development programme is exactly that. It is not reacting to
what’s going on around us. I think as soon as you start doing that you get
yourself in a muddle.
Q: And what about today? We saw this morning both drivers having slight
incidents on the circuit. Mark hitting the barrier. How’s the car been
performing today?
AN: Yeah, normal Friday.
Q: No it’s not! We saw Sebastian Vettel make two mistakes. He never makes
two mistakes!
AN: I think if memory serves me well then in Turkey he made a fairly
spectacular mistake early on, so it happens. He had, I cannot remember, he
had one spin. I cannot remember what the other mistake was but if you say
there was another one.
Q: He went over a chicane as well.
AN: Ok, but that’s hardly a mistake is it.
Q: So you are feeling fairly confident then here?
AN: Who knows. It’s a normal Friday, we don’t know what fuel load people
were on et cetera, et cetera, so we are just trying to get on with our
programme.
Q: Jonathan, was it a blip upwards for you do you feel at the Nürburgring or
can you maintain that? It certainly looks as though you were good enough
today.
Jonathan NEALE: I would echo what Adrian says about Fridays. When you are at
the top of the pile it feels very good and you convince yourself that it is
a good omen for the weekend and when you are not you remind yourself that
Fridays don’t really matter. Certainly we were pleased with the race at the
Nürburgring. The two previous races were quite painful for us. It was nice
to return to form there and we have been successful at the German Grand Prix
on multiple occasions so that was good. Fantastic drive for Lewis on that
particular occasion and, I think, well deserved, and a good tonic for him
and the team. We look forward to this weekend. I think we have got our work
cut out. These guys are pushing very hard and so are Ferrari so we don’t
expect anybody to take this one easily, but we will see what happens
tomorrow morning.
Q: How’s it working with Virgin? That side of things.
JN: Well, for us you have to remember the deal is with McLaren Applied
Technologies, not with McLaren Racing that I am Managing Director for, so I
am not deeply involved with it. But we are very excited about having the
guys come and work with us. It’s small steps at the moment. We have got some
trackside software running with them this weekend but later on in the year
we will see them starting to use the McLaren wind tunnel, so exciting times
but as I say early days.
Q: Also a question to you about the TV deal in the UK. You were nodding your
head just now about the fans to decide.
JN: Well, I think the views and needs of the fans are of prime importance to
Formula One. It has been very pleasing during the course of this year that
the exciting racing that we have had has been matched by a growth in the
audiences throughout the UK and across the globe. Some of that certainly is
that the BBC has done a fantastic job in promoting that. I think we would
welcome interest from other forms of media. The devil, of course, is in the
detail. Mindful that there is a lot of heat in the air about that at the
moment but we just don’t know the detail so it would be improper to comment
beyond that. But what the fans need and want and a mass audience is
something we need to pay attention to.
Q: Is it true that your drivers have been banned from talking to Niki Lauda?
JN: No, not at all.
Q: Eric, your thoughts on the 2014 regulations?
Eric BOULLIER: I think Rob described very well the Renault position. As a
team we are happy that now we found a consensus which pleases everybody.
Q: We have read a certain amount about your thoughts on the electric engine
as well.
EB: I just made a comment. There is clearly in the published rule on the FIA
website, there was a statement saying the car should not be moved by an
electric mode in the pit-lane and, obviously, I just made a comment that I
could raise a safety concern about the lack of noise in the pit-lane which
could be dangerous.
Q: Today you used Bruno Senna as the third driver. And I think you have
mentioned that you might use Romain Grosjean, is that the case?
EB: No, I didn’t.
Q: You said he was ready for F1?
EB: Yes, but I didn’t say when.
Q: So is he under consideration for later on in the season.
EB: No, it is too early to say this, obviously. We wanted to give a little
bit of track time to Bruno as the reserve driver and we are happy so far to
keep Nick (Heidfeld) in the car. Yes, I think Romain is on our radar maybe
for next year but there is absolutely no consideration to give him some
track time now.
Q: Are there any plans for other third drivers later in the year?
EB: Maybe.
QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Q: (Ian Parkes - Press Association) Question to Eric, Jonathan and Graeme.
You have talked about the Sky/BBC deal. Jonathan, you specifically mentioned
about the wants and needs of the fans. Point number one is that it really
doesn’t matter what the fans want does it, as the deal is already done.
Bernie (Ecclestone) has got the deal all signed and sealed. And, secondly,
going on the reaction this morning on Twitter, on fans forums, the
overwhelming majority of those fans are wholly against this deal. Can I just
get your reaction to those comments.
EB: With the latest I have been told actually about this deal, I think it is
rather good news. It should be positively welcomed by the fans, even if they
have not been maybe calling into a forum to discuss the idea. My
understanding is there will be more TV viewers, there will be more access to
F1 and F1 will broadcast much more through two different channels that are
BBC, on free-to-air, and Sky, so with the latest info I have got it is a
good deal, as it is good for Formula One and it is definitely much better
for fans.
JN: I am not sufficiently aware of the detail of quite how that is going to
operate. What I can say is that if you look at the last two or three years
then Formula One, whether through the teams’ association, or whether through
the FIA, has taken a number of steps to try and keep the racing exciting and
grow that audience. I think everything from the fans’ forum to the amount of
digital content that we are now pushing out into the networks says that we
are extremely interested in what the fans are doing. They are the backbone
of the global reach that we have and we do listen to them, so I disagree
with your first assertion that it is just riding roughshod over that, but I
can understand some of the concerns when the detail isn’t there.
GL: I agree completely with Jonathan that the fans are the most important
aspect as ultimately it’s a very, very important part of the cycle of the
commercial side of the sport that we are in. I am a great believer that the
fans will tell us what they think and I think it is very difficult for us to
speak on behalf of fans, that’s for sure, and I think that’s the same for
any commentator. Time will tell whether it is good for the fans or not and I
am absolutely certain, especially in this day and age, that the fans will
make their view pretty clear.
Q (Mark Meadows - Reuters) Just a quick follow up to that. There is a bit of
talk around that it is in fact in breach of the Concorde Agreement. What
would be the situation with that, if indeed that is the case.
GL: I would be pretty surprised if it was. I think Bernie knows the Concorde
Agreement pretty well.
JN: I think that is a fair comment. I am sure it has been closely
scrutinised and will be the subject of much debate.
Q: (Dieter Rencken – The Citizen) Rob, as the only engine company executive
here and also the representative of engines on the Formula One commission, I
wonder if you could give us your comments regarding the move of Gilles Simon
from the FIA to a competitor from 2014 onwards, considering that he was the
man who drove the engine regulations through the FIA?
RW: I guess the first remark is that it is very fresh news. We haven’t had
much of a chance to reflect on it. First reactions are fairly predictable
and understandable from my part. On a personal and professional level, we’ve
had good relations with Gilles for a long time in his present – for a couple
more days – job, and in his previous job at Ferrari. Of course, it’s of
concern to all of us that in this close relationship with Gilles and the FIA
over the past year, 18 months, that we’ve given unprecedented access to
Gilles – we certainly have at Renault and I believe all of the engine
companies have done so, particularly in respect of the state of progress in
our respective engine development programmes alongside the rules package.
And so, of course, we would be most concerned to be reassured that
information to which Gilles has had access to in those very privileged
circumstances as a representative of the FIA is not used in his new capacity
as an employee of a competitor.
Q: (Dieter Rencken – The Citizen) So to all five of you, about ten years ago
Charlie Whiting considered a move from the FIA to one of the teams and that
was ultimately blocked. Should a similar situation be blocked, and should
safeguards be put in place for the future?
RW: I think that is the kind of question that is the immediate extrapolation
of my previous remarks, Dieter, I think Formula One as a whole needs to be
conscious of. It’s a very complicated sport. In order that the technical and
sporting regulations can be administered successfully, then we require the
governing body to have good people and they probably require to have access
to the teams, and therefore there’s an obvious risk that needs to be
managed, if the same people can crop up in a different shirt very shortly
afterwards.
Q: (Miguel Sanz– Marca) Mr Newey and Mr Neale, I want to know if it’s
possible for a person like you, with your responsibilities, to stop working,
or even thinking, in the forthcoming summer break?
AN: Yeah, definitely. I think you have to be able to, otherwise it would be
completely all-consuming and probably not healthy because I think for most
people creativity and so forth is part of the job and if you do nothing but
think about the job, you probably lose that ability.
JN: Yeah, I think that’s a good point. When we first agreed to do the
shut-down, there were a number of us who thought that was going to be
problematic. Now most of us think that it’s a blessing, when you look at the
length of the season and the hard work, not just for the teams, or even
Adrian or myself, but also the FIA and the number of people who keep the
show on the road. I think everybody looks pretty tired and they could do
with a break.
Q: (Tony Dodgins – Tony Dodgins Associates) I take on board what Graeme has
said about potential new platforms and also Eric’s comments, but at the
moment we have all races live on free-to-air in the UK and presumably we
will have half of them in the future. If that’s replicated in other markets,
other countries, are there concerns about the impact of that on sponsorship?
GL: Yes, obviously. The model has to reflect the commercial model of the
sport, there can’t be a disconnect in the commercial model, it’s really
quite clear. I doubt whether the commercial model in Formula One… everything
in Formula One changes, everything moves forward and so I will imagine that
the commercial model will as well. It’s vitally important that the
requirements of the fans are reflected in that and I would anticipate that
if there were this kind of move on a global scale instead of one specific
market, then the overall model would have to change for the teams, not just
to be profitable but to be sustainable and obviously the sustainability of
Formula One is very important. It’s a sport with great tradition and it has
a fabulous future and it’s important that that future plays out.
EB: I don’t have much to add, Graeme just told us what he thinks and I also
believe the same. Based on this business model today, which is only
free-to-air, we can obviously sell to the sponsors the great access to fans
and TV viewers. If you start to reduce the free-to-air broadcasting you
obviously have to change the business model and it will affect the
sustainability of the sponsorship. In the case of this deal, I think we need
to wait to have more details because my understanding is that it will still
be free to air and that there will be better access to Formula One for the
fans which will, in the end, be much better.
Q: (Rainer Melch – Rhinegger Tageblat) Eric, can you tell us how pleased you
were with Bruno’s performance this morning?
EB: Considering he didn’t do any races so far this year, and he just did a
couple of demos, he did quite well and adapted quite well to the car. He had
a safe approach this morning and was building up his speed through the
session. I’m quite pleased with what he has been doing and what he was
expected to do.
Q: (Yelda Canci - TRT) We heard that the Turkish Grand Prix will be dropped
from the 2012 calendar; what are your personal opinions about the Turkish
Grand Prix and did you share your opinion with Bernie Ecclestone?
JN: I think it’s always sad when we lose a grand prix from the calendar. I
think we’ve had terrific support from the Turkish people when we’ve been
there. We’ve enjoyed our racing there very much but the sport is popular and
there is a limited number of sessions that we have, so we have to accept
that the sport has to move forwards but we are sorry to see Turkey go.
EB: I feel the same. It’s obviously very difficult to lose any Grand Prix. I
guess there were some reasons to change the calendar. It is very sad not
being there, to give the show to the Turkish fans and especially at this
very nice track, but we have to deal with some changes in Formula One
sometimes, and we can just expect and hope that we will be back there.
GL: I agree completely with what Eric and Jonathan have said. I think you’ve
also said from a personal point of view that we will certainly miss going
there, really thoroughly enjoyed both the destination and the culture and
certainly had a lot to offer Formula One. The calendar has 20 races next
year and 21 – certainly talking as one of the smaller teams – 21 would have
been too many and so the reality is that there had to be some give
somewhere.
AN: It’s a shame, Turkey is a good circuit, a circuit that was enjoyable
from a car perspective, the drivers’ perspective. I think the key thing is
that we don’t go too far down the temporary tracks route, that Formula One
as an industry supports the permanent tracks. I gather there’s a danger that
Barcelona could be lost relative to Valencia, and I think that would be a
tragedy, to end up going to a temporary Valencia rather than a permanent
Barcelona.
RW: I think Turkey’s a great driver’s track and everybody enjoys it. A bit
of an anorak fact to throw in, just at the end, it’s also got the finest
dust of any track on the F1 calendar, and therefore to be an air filter
engineer, it’s the most difficult race.
Q: ( Peter Farkas – Auto Motor ) Follow-up on the PURE question: I’m not
sure that anyone took this PURE business really seriously at the beginning,
but now that Gilles Simon has gone there, I think it might be a different
story. Do you really think there is a place for a new engine manufacturer in
F1, someone like PURE which has no history, no background? Do you think
there are potential teams which will switch? What are your thoughts about
new engine manufacturers coming into the sport?
GL: Unlike Rob, we don’t make engines, so I will really answer it in a very
simplistic way. From our point of view, we really don’t mind about the new
engine as long as – first of all – it adds to the show, secondly, it
provides a cost-effective solution for the teams, both in terms of how much
the engines cost to buy and to run and also we certainly don’t want to see
this turn into an engine formula. As I say, we don’t make engines, we run a
racing team and that’s what we’re about. So from our point of view, it’s
nice to see a wide selection of engines but the primary concern from our
point of view is cost and availability and that’s really key.
Q: ( Peter Farkas- Auto Motor) Have you been approached?
GL: Yes, yes, I think every team has.
Q: (Frederik Af Petersens – Honorary)You said earlier that the new TV
contract in England, which is 50-50, as far as I know there has been no
increase of viewers for pay TV anywhere so why should it be better for the
viewers that they suddenly have to pay to watch, when a lot of people are
hanging on to the dollar that they earn because of the financial crisis, so
why should it be better when they have to pay for something that’s free
today?
EB: With the latest understanding that I have from… the good added value is
that Sky will broadcast much more information and show any reports and
that’s extra information that we will share with the public and with the
fans. This is where the added value is. RTL? Your argument is that this is
Germany, not England. I’m not sure that we understand RTL in England.
GL: Also, we haven’t seen all of the detail. I haven’t read about
pay-per-view. In the UK, you still have to pay for a television licence if
you don’t watch… People pay for everything.
JN: I just think it’s a little bit premature to be completely judgemental
about this until we’ve seen the detail.
Q: (Matt Coch – pitpass.com) Now that the 2012 calendar is set in stone a
little bit, I’m curious to learn how much that dictates the design of next
year’s car. Losing a circuit like Turkey, does that change anything, given
that there are more slower circuits?
AN: Not really, because it’s an incremental change so yes, if you consider
the changes in the calendar perhaps over a five or ten year period, the
general trend towards slower circuits then that would change your car, but
losing one race on its own doesn’t change the overall philosophy of the car. |
