F1 Madness

Tag: andrew green

  • 2019 Austrian Grand Prix: Thursday Press Conference

    2019 Austrian Grand Prix: Thursday Press Conference

    TEAM REPRESENTATIVES – Mario ISOLA (Pirelli), Andrew GREEN (Racing Point), Paul MONAGHAN (Red Bull Racing), Toyoharu TANABE (Honda), Andreas SEIDL (McLaren)

    Q: Mario, if we could start with you please, you had a meeting this morning with the 10 team principals. Please can you explain what that meeting was about and what conclusions were drawn?
    Mario ISOLA: It was mainly to understand if there is anything we can do to improve the show. We know the dominance for Mercedes is not helping the show at the moment and we had a discussion of the opportunity to reintroduce the 2018 tyres but after analysing the positive side and the negative side the conclusion was that we want to stay on the current… well, there was a vote from the teams and the decision is to stay on the current tyres. The meeting was quite productive; there were new ideas, new proposals for maybe the end of the season. Obviously we have to analyse that. At the moment they are just ideas. Let’s see. We will continue the discussion in the next days and maybe we come with a proposal for Silverstone or something like that. I don’t know yet because it was discussed two hours ago.

    Q: Thank you. Can you also tell us what the plan is for next week’s tyre test here at the Red Bull Ring?
    MI: We continue our development for 2020. As I already said, the main target is to have a wider working window for next year’s compounds. So, both in Austria and after Silverstone we will test new compounds, new philosophy, new types of compounds in order to achieve this target, in order to finalise the new construction for next year – because the current cars are really faster and faster, so that means they are putting more energy into the tyres and we have to cope with this energy and all the modification of the construction is to make them work better, and the compounds to have a wider working range and no issues with the aero map, and no blisters and overheating. Obviously the target is always to reduce overheating because it’s something the tyres don’t like, so I would say the two main targets are keeping that… safety is a target that is always there, we cannot consider a tyre that is not safe for Formula One. The targets are to have a wider working range and less overheating for next year.

    Q: Andreas, if we could come onto you. Welcome, your first FIA press conference. You’ve been team principal of McLaren for a couple of months. Can you just tell us how it’s going and what you found when you arrived at the MTC?
    Andreas SEIDL: Well, what did I find? Still early days, to be honest. It’s a big organisation. I got a very warm welcome from the team from the beginning. It also helped to get started that, compared to last year, the team has made a huge step forwards with the car. So all the changes that have been initiated last year already are paying off. I’m still in the period of really analysing in detail what’s going on inside the team, to find the strong and the weak points inside the team in order to then work out a clear plan how I want to, let’s say, approach the future with the team. Obviously Zak and the shareholders gave me the clear task to work out, as quickly as possible any deficits I see, also on the infrastructure side. So, I was very happy to announce last week that we got this positive decision on the wind tunnel, which was a quite obvious deficit compared to the top teams. So, very happy, it’s good to see that we are making steps, race by race now at the moment. It’s important for me to keep this positive journey going.

    Q: As you say, McLaren is a team on the up at the minute. What is the mood in the camp?
    AS: It’s obviously very, very positive. As I said before, results help; it’s good to see that the car is reacting to developments, different to last year. We are still bringing bits also for the next races, so we better and better understand the car. Also, we have a great working environment also together with the drivers. They perform very well on track. They have a great interation in terms of car development, also with the team at the track and the guys at home. All pretty positive. At the same time, the battle in the midfield is very, very tight – so it’s also no reason to get over-excited. It’s just important now to keep our heads down and keep pushing day and night.

    Q: You have a great result in France last weekend, sixth and ninth – but how concerned are you about a repeat of the hydraulics issue on one of your cars this weekend?
    AS: We obviously disassembled the car afterwards and found an issue on a single part.  We think we have identified the root cause of the issue and hopefully it was a one-off.

    Q: Paul, can we start by talking about this year’s RB15. What were your expectations coming into the 2019 season and has the car met them?
    Paul MONAGHAN: I suppose form a team point of view, no we’re not walking off into the distance and winning every race, so there’s an element of frustration rather than disappointment. Don’t forget, we were the ones that changed power unit and then picked up the bodywork changes, so we probably took more on in the winter than some of the others. These cars don’t stand still. They’re prototypes, aren’t they? So every race it’s changing, sometimes by larger amounts, other times by smaller amounts. Our friends at Honda are upgrading as and when they can. So, as a package we’re trying to move forward. The target is clear and yeah, it’s improving all the time and the rate of improvement relative to our opposition that will see whether we can catch them?

    Q: Well, how do you rate your chances of catching the two teams ahead of you? Do you think it’s possible within the current season to do that?
    PM: Yes, I think you have to, otherwise you sort-of say ‘we’re going to look at next year’s’. We’ll try and learn and move on at every stage we can and if the closer we get to them, the better off we are for next year, if we catch them, great. It’s really a case of making our own progress. The only thing that’s within our control is the performance of our car. We can’t influence the others, they’ll do what they’re going to do and it’s heads down and get on with it really, isn’t it?

    Q: And can we talk about drivers. We’ve seen tremendous consistency from Max Verstappen this year – but it’s been a bit up and down for Pierre Gasly, although he appeared to have a good morning this morning. What have been Pierre’s issues with the car?
    PM: Pierre finds it a little bit more difficult to drive in certain sections of the corners – I think – than Max from his comments but he’s a quick, young driver. Let’s not forget that. And he’s up against a very strong team-mate. He’s much happier this weekend, straight away. He’s on the pace, so his confidence is on the up again. He’s part of our team. We’ll support him as best we can with every bit of energy we’ve got and I think he’ll come good.

    Q: Tanabe-san, Paul says that you’re bringing upgrades as fast as you can and three of your cars run the new spec-3 power unit in France. All four cars are running it here. Did it perform at Paul Ricard as you expected?
    Toyoharu TANABE: Basically yes. We could see some improvement in the data when we ran the lastest spec at the track. And then, we compared to the dyno data and we see improvement trackside as well. But, on the other hand, the improvement is not significant, so as I mentioned before, when we introduced spec-3, there was a reliability and then a performance improvement – but the performance is not huge, which means we still keep pushing to perform well.

    Q: You talk about pushing to perform well. It’s quite early in the season to have introduced your third upgrade. Will there be another new spec this season and, if that’s the case, can you tell us when that might be?
    TT: Yes, so as you are thinking, just before halfway in the season, we already apply third PU and we are planning to introduce another spec sometime this season – but I don’t tell you exactly when and how much improvement we will have. We will announce later.

    Q: You’ve said development of this spec-3 involved working closely with Honda’s jet division. Can you just tell us how that worked?
    TT: So, we have a Honda R&D, so the one division is Honda Sakura R&D which takes care of the Formula One racing project. Then we have a big technical centre including many types of technology. The we use that resource and collaborate very closely. Not only jet engines but also other parts. As a result, we introduce at the last race the new turbocharger using… from the collaboration between Honda Racing technology and jet engine technology. So, we tried to make performance better, not only from the small Racing group but also the all the resources of Honda R&D.

    Q: Andy, very tight midfield this year. Checo was 12th for the third consecutive race last weekend. Can you tell us about the performance of your car, the RP19, its idiosyncrasies and where do you see your main opportunities in the next couple of months.
    Andrew GREEN: Yeah, you’re absolutely right, the midfield is incredibly tight. It only takes very small margins to move you from one end of the field to the other. The car has got some balance issues that we started the season with and really I think that’s a bit of a legacy of where we finished off last year and where we were as a company, position-wise. We’ve got a lot of changes coming ahead in the next few races and beyond, after the break as well. So, I think we’re making progress and, as Paul alluded to, it’s all a relative game really: we’ve got to make more progress than our competition – which is hard to do. It’s very hard to do. We’ve got a lot of work to do but the atmosphere in the team is incredibly buoyant. The team’s future is incredibly bright. We’re looking a long way forward with the team now, that we’ve never been able to do before, and so the fact that we’re in a bit of a tight scrap at the moment is not distracting now from things that we’re looking at much further down the road – so it is an exciting time for the team, it really is, like I’ve never seen before. So, we’re really looking forward to not just fighting this season but, from what we can do and what we can achieve going forward as well into the season beyond. It’s an exciting time.

    Q: And what about Lance Stroll? He’s raced well this year – three points finishes – but he’s been struggling in qualifying. What have been his issues and how can his engineers help him find a solution?
    AG: Yeah, there’s no denying his Saturday afternoon performance, he’d say the same, he struggles on a Saturday afternoon but we have to put it in perspective. He’s in a very early part of his career and he’s up against a very mature, experienced driver on the other side of the garage and he’s learning a lot. In each race and in each session we give him targets and what to look for and how to improve and it’s small margins every time – but he understands it. He’s an incredibly talented driver. We’ve seen that numerous times – and it’s a case of just getting the experience. And once he gets the experience and gets the confidence, we’ll see him close the gap to Checo and potentially take a leap ahead of him. So, we’ve got every confidence he can do it – it just takes a bit of time.

    QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR

    Q: (Scott Mitchell – Autosport) To the three team representatives please. We started the press conference talking about changing the tyres mid-season. Can you just give us your thoughts on the decision not to change tyres and the prospect of a change later in the season? Obviously there wasn’t a change now, so why would it change later on?
    AG: Really, we listened to the arguments and we especially listened to this man on my left; Pirelli are the experts in this area. And from what we could tell, it wasn’t clear cut at all that a change, reverting to last year’s compound gauge thickness was going to be a positive change. It sounded like a significant risk to us. From our perspective it’s too late for this season and I think the decision to focus on trying to do something and trying to improve the tyres and the show for next season is the right thing to do. And I think to try and not distract from the testing that’s going on post this event and post-Silverstone as well is the right decision and focus on next year, and try to do something for next year, rather than a kneejerk reaction in the middle of this year.

    Thank you. Paul, your thoughts?
    PM: It’s difficult isn’t it. It puts Pirelli in a slightly difficult position. They’re doing a decent job, they’re going to win every race, the tyres are surviving on the cars, and as Mario points out, they’ve got to maintain their safety record. At the risk of being slightly controversial with regard to Andy’s comments, we would quite happily accept the 2018 tyres to come back. I don’t think the risk is as great as some perceive. But it is about creating a show and I think we almost have to take a step back and take a slightly less team-centric position and turn around and say ‘well, if it would be better for the show, could the teams cope with it’ and our opinion is yes, we could. We accept there has been a majority vote not to do so but we hold a slightly different view to the majority then.

    And Andreas?
    AS: Well, I think first of all it’s important in all fairness to Pirelli to mention that we don’t have a tyre issue in general here. I think Pirelli, the product we have this year is matching all the requirements we set out last year, as Formula One, for what we want to have. I think in the end the reason why we have this discussion at the moment is that we have three top teams with the same resources and one team is doing a significantly better job than the other two. So that’s that situation we are facing. There is nothing we can really influence as McLaren. I think it’s down to the three top teams, with the FIA and Formula One to see if there is anything that can be done short-term to fix that issue. I think in general we have a far bigger issues which is this big gap we have between the top teams and the midfield. That is also where our focus is on. This is something also that cannot be solved in the short term, so we have big hopes for all the changes that are on the table on the financial side, technical side, sporting side, regarding the regulations in ’21 and hopefully F1 and the FIA with all the experts which they now have onboard, which is a unique situation, pull through. We full support the changes that have been sent out some weeks ago and that is our focus to be honest.

    Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines / Racefans.net) Mario, the vote, 5-5, do you take that as a vote of confidence in your product or a vote of no-confidence in your product? And if your product was in line with the target letter then should the target letter just be scrapped? 
    MI: No, I don’t think so. The target letter is fixing some parameters in terms of delta lap time and degradation and characteristics of the tyre. That means we can change the target letter for the future and we can put numbers that are better for the show. As Andreas said, we made a product in line with the requests coming from F1. Don’t forget what happened last year: the drivers were complaining about overheating, and if we go back to 2018 tyres we go back to overheating, to blistering, and all the different stuff, where basically we were working on to make a better tyre for this year. So what is clear to us for next year is to develop a wider working range in order to have more teams that are able to use the tyres better. I am very confident that for the second half of the season most of the teams will learn how to use the current tyres, because it’s always a learning curve. Every year it was the same. Going back to last year’s tyres on the technical side was not the right decision and I’m happy that five teams recognised that and voted against the change. On top of that we are very happy to work together with the teams, the driver and FIA and FOM to find a better solution for the sport as we did in the past and as we have always done. Provided that safety and the image of the company are protected we are here to do something good for Formula 1. If this is not the right direction then let’s change the direction, but we need to agree what is the direction, because at the end of the day we make one tyre for everybody, not get customised tyre for any car.

    Q: (Ian Parkes – New York Times) A question for Andreas. Andreas, you talked about the positivity within McLaren, but you’ve come into the sport at what appears to be quite a negative time, primarily due to the dominance of one team, as you mentioned, Mercedes. Can I just get your thoughts as to what your perceptions were of F1 before you joined McLaren, what your perceptions are now that you have been with the team for a couple of months, and what you would like to see going forward, primarily from 2021 onwards?
    AS: Well, I’ve been following Formula One the last 10 years as a fan and I think it hasn’t lost anything. It is still the platform, which works. It does not change compared to 2009 when I left Formula One. Of course there is an issue, as I mentioned before, with this big gap between the top teams and the midfield teams. Simply the resources these teams are having, let’s say, went out of control compared to what we, for example, can do. It’s not possible for us to be competitive and sustainable at the same time. Again, this should not hide that we have, in general, some work to do inside the team, independent of, let’s say, the boundary conditions we are in at the moment. So I think it’s very, very important to get this right for 2021. I think the objectives are clear for everyone involved and there is also huge agreement regarding the objectives. First of all I think the biggest, or most important topic, is to introduce the budget cap, because that is the only guarantee really to have somehow a level playing field between the teams. We would prefer that is even lower than the numbers that are under discussion at the moment. But we also understand that it needs to be a compromise in the end. Then I think it’s simply important to get the technical and sporting regulations right. It’s important to be a bit more restrictive in terms of the freedom on the development side, which then allows to have the field closer together. At the same time we are up for still having some freedom as the better team should still be able to make a difference. I think everything is on the table and it’s just important now that Formula One and the FAI is pulling through and the whole regulations that are in discussion at the moment don’t get softened again by, let’s say, the agendas of the teams, their own agendas.

    Q: (Julien Billotte – Auto Hebdo) A question to Tanabe-san and Paul. Max Verstappen said yesterday in this press conference that he is keen to evaluate the updates that are coming on your package over the next few races. How confident are you that you can give him the equipment he needs to continue to trust the Red Bull-Honda project and stay with the team longer term?
    PM: To answer your question directly: we are confident that we can give Max a car that enables him to challenger for race wins and beyond. The time scale is not within our control, because you have to catch the others and pass them to achieve this. There are a number of update on both, as Tanabe-san said, with the engine and on the chassis side to improve our performance. We will deploy those as and when they are ready and we know that, or believe that they are right and will make a reasonable difference to the car and if we can make some progress towards that it’s really all on the cars for the start of next season and who rolls out the door fastest then.
    TT: Yes, so we both work very hard to achieve our objectives or our target. I understand the feeling from the cockpit, so we try to deliver performance, not only PU but also chassis. So as Paul said we keep working very hard to keep our driver, so Max, in the confident car. That’s our goal anyway. So we are working very hard. We understand there is a space or a gap to achieve that top level also the period to improve our performance.

    Q: (Péter Vámosi  – Racinglines.hu) Andreas, Bernie Ecclestone confirmed yesterday that four years ago he was in talks with Volkswagen Group and Porsche and Audi that they can come to Formula 1. Can you confirm this and could you imagine that in 2021 we can again have a marriage between McLaren and Porsche? 
    AS: Well, obviously I have a new shirt on, so I can’t comment on what happened at my previous employment. I think in general it’s very difficult for a new engine manufacturer to come in. This is why I think also that from ’21 onwards it makes sense at the moment to really keep the regulations as they are, because we see at the moment already that with keeping the regulations stable all the power trains are coming closer together. And then, I think as far I can see at the moment, we simply have to wait for the next cycle of the regulations and we have to see then also how the automotive industry is going, in which direction, to see if then there is any chance to create any interest for another manufacturer to come into this sport.

    Q: (Maria Reyer – Motorsport-Total.com) Mario, Toto Wolff said after the meeting today that we could see at the end of this season already 2020 tyres being used, maybe in practice, to be tested. Do you see this is possible from a protection side and do you think this maybe could be the case at the end of the season? 
    MI: Yes, it is possible because the current regulations allow us to do that. So we can supply two additional sets of prototype tyres for evaluation during Friday. And there was also the discussion to slightly change the regulations to understand if different tyres can be used during the race weekend, not just in free practice. This is, as I said, a completely new idea and it has to be evaluated and discussed and the FIA should come with a wording to propose but we are open to evaluate that and we will continue our development test for the next weeks, but if we also have the opportunity it is a good opportunity to test the product for next year during the season.

    Q: (Sam Collins – RaceCar Engineering) To Andreas and Paul: just following on from one question back, Andreas you’ve worked with a number of technical working groups in different championships and you mentioned that you wanted to see the new engine regulations in future that will attract new manufacturers to the series. What rule changes would it require, what would the new power unit need to be to attract a new manufacturer to the series in your opinion? And Paul, as a team that has relationships with two automotive manufacturers, from Red Bull’s point of view as a team, what do you think is needed from the engine regulations in ’25 to bring new manufacturers into the sport? 
    AS: First of all, obviously there are a lot of changes ongoing at the moment in the automotive industry with the powertrains, electrification and so on, so I think for the next cycle of regulations you simply have to make the next step of hybridisation, definitely. This is the technical aspect but in order to be attractive as a sport for a manufacturer to enter again, I think it’s also very very important to make sure you can enter this sport with an investment which is a lot smaller compared to what you have to do now with budgets that are a lot smaller, because again, if you want to enter this category at the moment, then the investment you have to do for the infrastructure  and the budget you have to use in order to get to the point where the established manufactures are, you have to be realistic. Pretty difficult to imagine that anyone would invest that money at the moment.
    PM: It’s an interesting question for 2025. I suppose I will answer it by saying that – if you asked me what would I presently do, I would try not to upset the four that are there at the moment, to find ourselves down to two, one of them being new, just as an example. So if you take that point of view, the four that are currently investing and developing engines are supplying them to all ten teams, you could argue on a complete clean sheet of paper but then it rather negates all the work that they’ve currently done. And taking Andreas’s point that you don’t want the new rules to be intimidating to anybody else wanting to come in, you clearly have to strike a compromise somewhere and where that lies I wouldn’t want to comment at the moment. That’s my thought for 2025.

    Q: (Daniel Majet – GPHirek.hu) When there is talk about the spectacle of Formula One, it is often compared to IndyCar. Do you see in it from a technical aspect, chassis, engine, whatever, that can be considered, which is now in IndyCar, for the future of Formula One? 
    MI: I believe that we should look at any other series that’s providing the show, not just IndyCar. If we look at the other series with an open mind, we can find solutions also for Formula One, keeping in mind the DNA of Formula One because it is clear that we cannot have a Formula One that is a standard series like Formula Two or something like that. There are a lot of dedicated aspects to consider but observing the rest of motorsport with a critical view can only be positive.
    AG: I think the regulations moving forward in 2021 do take some of other formulas technology, I think with moving towards more of a ground effect car going forward. I think that definitely comes from the north American series, which, if we’re looking at, trying to have the cars race closer together then I think that’s the right thing to do, that makes complete sense. But I think the same, I think we need to keep Formula One at the pinnacle, it needs to be a technological amazement really. That’s where I think the sport needs to be, it’s not just about having cars that are close, it’s about a bit more of a Wow factor and we need to make sure we don’t lose any of that.
    PM: To answer your question directly, yes, I think you can learn from other series. Your specific question of IndyCars Andy has partly answered I think in that the way they generate their downforce is of interest to us. The question becomes can they run closer, can we still maintain differentiation between the cars as opposed to stock bodywork as they would call it over there? So I think you keep an open mind and you look and you learn and you don’t assume that you have perfect knowledge. I think that open-mindedness will serve us well.
    AS: Yeah, same from my side. I think we all do –  Formula One, FIA and the teams should also currently look at what’s going on in other categories, on the technical side and also on the sporting side which has a big impact as well, the sporting regulations of how the show is actually happening on track. I think some aspects of the ’21 regulations like standardisation and so on, limitation of the freedom regarding the aero development and so on, they’re going in the direction we see already in other categories. There’s a lot of work going in to also to allow this closer racing so I think we are not far off with the proposals that are on the table. As I said before, we just need to pull through now.
    TT: Yes, IndyCar and Formula One are sports and also entertainment. I think there is a big differences between the two series and also the spectator characteristics are different. But it’s good to learn from each other or share the idea which enforces the Formula One, which enforces IndyCar and then supplies much more until the spectator is good, I think.

    Q: (Carlo Platella – F1ingenerale.com) A double question for Mr Seidl: McLaren introduced a new front suspension in France. Is the introduction of such an important component in the middle of the season a result of the new organisation of the team? And have you noticed a significant improvement in performance thanks to it? 
    AS: Well, I think with the limited testing which is available in Formula One nowadays, which we all support also, you simply have to use the Fridays also to try let’s say adventurous stuff, which we did in Paul Ricard. It’s nothing we follow up at the moment. It was – let’s say – an engineering exercise, a learning exercise for the engineers and we have to see now what we do now with the conclusions of that test, regarding future developments we want to bring to the car this year or next year.

    Q: (Ian Parkes – New York Times) Andreas, can I just get your thoughts on the season Lando is having so far, his plus points, what he’s done? Well, he’s obviously had a bit of bad luck but his plus points, what he’s done well, where you feel he needs to improve?  He needs to learn in his first year, at the end of the day, and also get your thoughts on his obsession with his home simulator and how much that is helping improving him as a driver? 
    AS: Well, first of all, I was obviously very very impressed, straight from the beginning, even during the first races when I was still watching the races from home, with what Lando was doing on track. If you come into Formula One and you go into your first qualifying in Melbourne with a car that was maybe somewhere between – in terms of performance – ten to 14 and you score P8, it’s an impressive achievement and it was not just a one-off, he did that now several times which is great to see, also how he handles the races, I think it’s great. He had some bad luck in terms of results but I think that’s nothing which is too worrying at the moment, so we are very very happy inside the team, also how he interacts with the engineers regarding the development of the car, with the guys here at the track and also back home so very encouraging to see and I think he will have a great future in Formula One and obviously with the McLaren team as well, long term.

    Q: And his home simulator? 
    AS: Yeah, I think that even here in the motorhome there’s a big competition going on between Carlos and him each day, battling each other on the simulator so he’s obsessed with that, he’s convinced and we can see that also that it helps him to prepare the races, to be sharp when he’s arriving here, in addition to the simulator work he’s also doing with the guys back home in Woking. It’s great to see, this new generation also how they prepare themselves for this challenge in Formula One, and again, very excited to work together with him and the same for Carlos, I think we have a great driver line-up and they will be the future for this team.

    Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines / Racefans.net) To Mario and the three team representatives: if one has a single tyre supplier, surely it’s inevitable that some teams are going to be marginalised by this. If we are looking at tyres to improve the show, should we not be looking at multiple tyre suppliers in Formula One in future when the current contract expires? 
    MI: You know everybody is talking about the budget cap and multiple tyre supplier means a lot of cost more. Don’t forget when we had the multiple tyre supplier, the top teams had a specific test team just for tyres and introduction of new tyres, new prototypes every race so it’s a bit against the philosophy of having a cap on the budget. But if this is the decision of the sport, we will evaluate that as we told you in the past and obviously with a different approach, it’s a lot more about the performance and other stuff rather than the same product to everybody and with the characteristics which are decided by the famous target letter. Or we can try to find different values in that document to enhance the show. Maybe it is possible. We are working with the FIA and FOM in order to have different numbers for the future.
    AG: Yeah, I think multiple tyre suppliers goes against the whole ethos of trying to compress the grid and improve the show. You are going to end up with the haves and have-nots with respect to tyres. Currently we all have the same tyre and we can all do the same job, up and down the grid. I think the team that does the best job with the tyres should be rewarded for that so I don’t think that’s the right way to go for the show, to be honest.
    PM: In the current generation of Formula One then multiple tyre suppliers don’t really fit with the model. We don’t go tyre testing every week and tyres per se are not a prime performance differentiator so at the moment our current working philosophy, if you like, is to have a single supplier. It would change everything that is on the table now and I believe plans for the future if we were to bring in multiple suppliers and I don’t if you would close the field up or spread it out in that circumstance. At the moment, we’re not really equipped to go down that route.
    AS: Well, I think we should also not forget that even in the years of the biggest tyre war, sometimes we had a total dominance of one team throughout the entire season so I’m not convinced that this is the solution. I think it’s simply important now that between the teams, together with the FIA and FOM that we have, let’s say that we take our time to really define clearly what is the target letter for the tyres for next year and for ’21 and I think that’s the way to go, to be honest.

  • 2019 Monaco Grand Prix: Thursday Press Conference

    2019 Monaco Grand Prix: Thursday Press Conference

    TEAM REPRESENTATIVES – Claire WILLIAMS (Williams), Christian HORNER (Red Bull Racing), Cyril ABITEBOUL (Renault), Zak BROWN (McLaren), Andrew GREEN (Racing Point)

    Q: Following the passing of three-time Formula One World Champion Niki Lauda this week, we asked all of the drivers yesterday for their memories and thoughts of Niki. We’d like to start in the same fashion with you today please. Cyril, is we could start with you: your thoughts and memories of Niki?

     

    Cyril ABITEBOUL: It’s another sad news for the Formula One community. Frankly, I had not a lot of interaction with Niki, but clearly he was one of the role models that form our youth and the reason we are admiring Formula One – for the fantastic animal that you come across in life. He was a model of resilience. He was taking the fighting spirit very, very hard and impressive what he managed to do over his career. Any meeting with him was kind of fun. You never knew what could happen. He will be another person badly missed in Formula One.

     

    Christian?

    Christian HORNER: It’s a huge loss for Formula One – the whole paddock. Obviously for Mercedes where he was so active as well. I think it was a shock for everyone. Obviously he’s not been in great health for the last pretty much 12 months. He was an iconic person. What he achieved in the sport was phenomenal. Just the most remarkable story. You only have to watch the movie, which I think is a pretty decent representation of actually what happened and the fight back that he had, which obviously happened prior to my really understanding of who he was. When I really came across him, he was working as a commentator, quite an outspoken commentator at that time, and he managed to where all these hats, commentating for RTL, running the Mercedes team as their chairman. He was just a larger than life character, obviously as an Austrian, and us an Austrian team, he spent a lot of time with us, particularly Helmut Marko, a very close friend of his, as they pretty much had grown up together. We’ll certainly miss the breakfast where he would come, pretty much every morning and Helmut and he would be like the two old guys in the Muppet Show, Waldorf and Statler I think it was, and they’d basically be commenting on all aspects of life, none of what I’m going to repeat here, that’s for sure – but his openness, his sense of humour, his ability to say “how did you screw that up?” something “was rubbish” – or complement you when you’d done well. He was a great guy, a great personality and he’ll be very, very sadly missed.

     

    Claire, your thoughts?

    Clair WILLIAMS: I obviously had the pleasure of knowing Niki through our relationship with Mercedes. I can’t profess to knowing him extremely well but everything that he’s achieved in motorsport is extraordinary and, as Christian said, watching that film really demonstrates exactly the kind of character that he was. Latterly, working with him in the Strategy Group meetings, he was always the voice of reason. When Niki talked, people listened. Personally, we always had a bit of a joke about my single status. I think I probably wouldn’t have got married as quickly as I have if Niki wasn’t pressuring my husband into proposing – so that will always be a nice memory for me. The sport has lost an icon, hasn’t it. Our thoughts go out to his family.

     

    Zak?

    Zak BROWN: Yes, I echo what everyone has said before me. He was an absolute legend of the sport. A loss for all of us. Never met anyone who didn’t like Niki. He was a real likeable guy, a real racer, had a strong opinion and when you look at what he came back from , that’s a real inspiration. I think not many would have been as brave as he was – not only to come back, but to go on, win World Championships. He won his last World Championship with McLaren. So, a lot of people in our factory, Mansour Ojjeh, one of our owners, were was super-close to Niki, so it feels like we lost a member of our family and, of course, the whole racing community has. Just wish his family the best and just grateful to have the fond memories here in Formula One forever.

     

    Andy?

    Andrew GREEN: Unfortunately I never had the honour to work with Niki. He was the background to my youth when I was watching Formula One. He was a big part of it. Some very big images from back then, and part of why I got into the sport. What he did from then until now is just incredible. He’s a real icon and will be sorely missed.

     

    Q: We’ll now turn our focus to this current season. Christian, we’ll start with you. For Red Bull it’s been a consistent start to the year. Max Verstappen in the top four at every race and this is usually a race that you target victory at. After the way FP1 has gone, is that a realistic target for you again this weekend?

    CH: I think it’s been a strong start to the year after the engine change over the winter. I think we’ve been very consistent, we’ve had two podium positions, we’ve finished in fourth place every other grand prix. Obviously, having introduced some upgrades in Barcelona, you ought to try to optimise those and Monte Carlos has always represented a track that we’ve performed well at. We’ve had an encouraging first practice but I think having seen Mercedes’ performance, particularly in the slow speed sector of Barcelona, they are absolutely the stand-out favourites for this event, so if we can get anywhere near them, and put a little bit of pressure on that, that would certainly be our target going in to the weekend.

     

    Q: Cyril, you’ve got last year’s Monaco Grand Prix winner driving for you this season – but currently sitting eighth in the Constructors’ Championship. Were you expecting to be a little bit higher at this stage of the season?

    CA: Yeah, of course, I think you can even say that it’s not the season start that we wanted, that we were ambitioning working for and advertised. It takes clearly a reaction from all of us. In my opinion obviously there has been a collection of issues, not excuse, but issues over the first five races that do not reflect the ambition, the level of our drivers, the level of the team. So it’s up to us to react and come up with clear answers to the different issues. We hope to see those answers starting to kick off with this weekend. Indeed, we have last year’s grand prix winner. It just creates another obligation to come up with the best possible car at this point of our journey.

     

    Q: Claire, the start to the season probably not gone the way Williams would have envisaged either – but since the start of the year you’ve had better qualifying performance in Barcelona and then the test, working on some new ideas. Do you feel like there are shoots of recovery now? Are you starting that rebuilding process?

    CW: Yeah, you say it wasn’t the start to the season that we envisaged – but I think we anticipated what was coming. Yeah, I definitely feel that we can see some light at the end of the tunnel now and I think probably just from the time sheets and the last race in Barcelona, we demonstrated that we are closing that gap. It may be slow but we all know that it takes time to bring performance to your car. There’s definitely a lot of good work going on back at the factory that people may not necessarily be seeing yet. The aero team are doing a great job finding performance in the tunnel and we’re going to be bringing that to races over the coming weeks and months with a package coming mid-way through the season that we will hope will bring some significant performance to us. Yes, there are definitely signs of improvement. I think there’s a certain positivity in the team at the moment. Morale is still pretty good, and that’s all we can ask of everyone: just fighting hard, not giving up and keep on brining performance to the car.

     

    Q: And Zak. I’m sure you’ll be facing questions about last weekend’s events in Indianapolis from the floor but focusing on Formula One right now, McLaren actually extended its advantage in fourth in the Constructors’ Championship in Barcelona. Would you say that’s actually ahead of expectations for this season?

    ZB: It’s early in the season and the midfield is so tight, I think the swing can swing at any one race. We’re pleased that we’re sitting forth in the Championship. We think that’s realistically, on our road to recovery, about as much as we’re going to be able to realistically achieve. So we will fight hard to retain that position, and those behind us are going to fight hard, of course, to knock us out of fourth, and we’ve got a long way to go, so I think anything can happen – but I’m really pleased with all the effort everyone at McLaren has put together. We had a better winter testing, and certainly have built a better race car. Drivers are doing an excellent job, we’re quick on pit stops now, so you can feel the team’s coming together. We have Andreas Seidl now and James Key who’ve joined, so I feel I’ve got all the right players on the field, so to speak and now we just need to put our head down and execute.

     

    Q: Andrew, if we look at Racing Point, that’s one of the teams looking to close down McLaren. You introduced a new upgrade package in Barcelona – but it looked like a tough weekend for you. So, what worked with the update and what still needs to be optimised?

    AG: Yeah, we were sort-of anticipating Barcelona was going to be a tough race for us. It has been, it’s been part of the DNA of the car for while, which is something we’re actively working on back at the factory. From what we see the upgrades did what they were supposed to do. I think we were quite content. We’ve got a route forwards and the car is evolving quite quickly and it will do over the next half a dozen races. We think we’ve got a good direction to go in – it just takes time. Like Clare said: you can’t change cars overnight, these things do take some time to evolve in the factory and come to the track. We’re happy with the route we’re going in. Are we happy with where we are now? No. But we can see that we’re going in the right direction.

     

    QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR

     

    Q: (Scott Mitchell – Autosport) Claire, in the build-up to this week you announced Jamie Chadwick as a development driver. You explained that it will involve simulator responsibilities to begin with. Is there a plan – or a hope – to give her on-track opportunities or the opportunity for that partnership to maybe evolve in the future?

    CW: Like you say, we’re delighted that Jamie’s joined the team. She’s obviously part of the W Series Championship this year. She won the first event and then she had a good run in Zolder last weekend. We announced her on Monday, she’s going to be doing simulator work, as you said. Full immersion in the factory, working with the engineers to support her campaign this year and to just help… well it all goes to promoting women in motorsport. Doing this for her is hopefully going to elevate her competitiveness. At the moment it is reserved to simulator work and then coming to a few races with us to see the team trackside and how we operate in F1. There are no plans at the moment to put her in an F1 car at this stage.

     

    Q: (Oliver Brown – The Telegraph) Question for Zak. The Indy 500. You gave a fairly remarkable interview to the Associated Press about the full reasons behind Fernando’s failure to qualify. I just wonder, how embarrassing has this episode been and how do you explain how a company of McLaren’s sophistication can make these kinds of errors.

    ZB: I’ve spoken a lot about Indy Car, as you pointed out, and I think this is a Formula One environment, I have my Formula One shirt on, so I prefer to talk about Formula One. To answer your question, we got it wrong and I thought it was important to be transparent and open as much as sometimes the truth hurts. I think the industry isn’t necessarily that open, that often. And we got it wrong and I’m responsible for that. I felt I needed to share with everyone. There’s of course little stories behind each of those individual issues and how they transpired but y’know, we didn’t execute and therefore we didn’t qualify for the Indy 500. It’s happened to the best of them before and we learned a lot. I was watching this morning, a little tribute to Niki and, when he grabbed his Laureus award, talked about how he learned more from losing, which is what made him a winner, so we’ll dust ourselves off. We’re racers. It was a big, public failure. I wanted to communicate what happened. Yeah, it’s embarrassing. It’s not to the McLaren standard. It’s not acceptable – but it happened and we’re going to learn from it and we’ll come back stronger.

     

    Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines/racefans.net) A question for all of you. Give or take a week we’re a month away from Formula One’s self-imposed deadline on the regulation changes for 2021. Given the magnitude of everything that’s required – governance, commercial, sporting, technical etc – can it actually get done in time?

     

    Q: Shall we work our way along the line with that one, starting with Cyril?

    CA: Thank you! It’s vast question and the usual question. Will we have a signed contract by FIA, Formula One and all 10 teams by end of June or mid-June for the World Motor Council? No, obviously no. But in my opinion there has been a lot of groundwork already covered. I think it’s all about trying to agree what will be the key principles for 2021, from a commercial perspective, financial perspective, the key principles on the technical side and the sporting side. And in my opinion we are probably 80% or 90% from that point, from that milestone, so with enough faith and enough goodwill from all participants and probably a bit of a push from the key stakeholders, FIA and Formula One, there is no reason why something cannot be presented at the World Motor Sport Council that will be advanced enough to give useful guidelines for the remainder of the year, so that we have a complete set of guidelines for the end of the year. That’s my opinion, obviously, but there is still some work to cover.

     

    Q: Christian?

    CH: I didn’t understand any of that.

    CA: We are not partners anymore. You can’t make fun of me anymore. It’s not part of the contract anymore!

    CH: But it’s still enjoyable. Sorry, what was you question about? Regulations coming out. Look I’m sure something is going to be presented. It will probably nowhere near what actually gets signed. I’m sure the regulations will change and evolve. Something will come out in June, it will change in September, October, probably in November, and yeah, there’s plenty of ground to cover, but there is a watershed where something will be put in front of us fairly shortly and then the fun really begins.

     

    Q: Claire, is June realistic?

    CW: I’m going to be really boring now after that, aren’t I? Clearly we’re getting close to ’21. When we first started these negotiations, it was a long time ago and we’re now at that point where we need to have that full set of regulations so that we can plan and prepare out businesses for that season. As Christian says, I’m sure there are going to be some further negotiations after that point. For a team in our position clearly when it comes top the technical regulations we wouldn’t want too much movement after that. People are going to start working on those, people are already working, and we don’t need to be wasting resources with a huge change subsequent to the issuance of the first draft. I don’t think there’s much choice. We have to get those regulations out and so I believe it should be done and I’m sure it can be done.

     

    Q: And Zak?

    ZB: I agree with everything that I’ve head. I don’t believe we’ll get it done in June and it will play out over the second half of the year and we’ll get there and racing will go on.

     

    Q: And Andy?

    AG: I can only speak from a technical aspect, but I know that the FIA and F1 have done a huge amount of work in the background on this. We were exposed to some of it last week in a technical working group meeting. We could see that it’s quite well evolved. It’s going to need some tidying up for sure. We have meetings planned from now until the end of the year, which is where we all anticipate it’s going to go to. It’s a significant set of changes, bit like I said, they have done a huge amount of work in the background and I think we can get there.

     

    Q: (Sam Collins – Racecar Engineering) Predictably, another question on regulations, but this time the 2025 power unit regulations, which we hear will be completely different to what we have now. I’d like to ask the whole panel this, as there are some different opinions on this, what you’d like to see in the new power unit for 2025, what technologies and what things are good and what things are bad?

     

    Q: We’ll reverse the order then and start with technical thoughts first.

    AG: What a question: 2025! I think what we have now is an incredible piece of engineering in the back of the car. But it could just be too incredible. I think what we have is potentially something where the technology bar of the power unit is just way too high and I think I would like to see something that is just slightly simpler. That’s my view. I think I’d never say no to more horsepower. I think the sport can’t have enough horsepower. We need to make the cars harder to drive. I think more power; a simpler power unit. That’s where I would be going.

     

    Q: Zak, your thoughts?

    ZB: More power would be great. Less expensive would be outstanding.

    CA: There is the message!

    ZB: And I don’t know that it’s achievable but if we could have some diversity in the engine itself and not be limited to a certain amount of cylinders, things of that nature, I think would maybe spice up the show. But whether that’s achievable or not… We don’t build engines, so Cyril is best to answer whether a scenario like that would be feasible.

     

    Q: Claire, your thoughts on 2025?

    CW: Again, at Williams we don’t build engines and I’m certainly not an engineer who is educated enough to give you a sensible answer. But from our perspective, as Zak says, something that is cost-efficient, environmentally appropriate and loud. Noisy would be nice.

     

    Q: And Christian?

    CH: Emotionally, a normally-aspirated, high-revving V10 or V12 engine would be a wonderful thing to have back in Formula One, but unfortunately I think they’re rather outdated now. I think as Andy was saying, the technology in these engines is phenomenal. We’ve now got a period of stability with the engines until 2023 I think or 2024, so it’s important that Formula One makes the right decision for the future. Obviously the automotive sector is moving an awful lot at the moment and what technologies are going to relevant then? Because when that engine comes in in 2025 that’s going to have to be for a 5-10- year period, so we’re actually talking up to 2035, which is a long way down the pipelines. The romantic in me says go back – loud, noise, high revs, normally aspirated.

     

    Q: And Cyril, from a power unit supplier point of view?

    CA: The romantic in me would say the same thing, but obviously in 2025 the world will be different, that’s for sure. Electrification will be a profound trend, so it’s not going to go away. In my opinion we need to look at the next couple of years to form an opinion regarding MGU-H road relevance, because it’s clearly a component that was introduced for that purpose. Right now, we don’t’ see any application on road cars but it may come. It may actually be in the pipeline of some manufacturers, so we need to be careful not to be basically in reverse in that respect. And then diversity of technology would be great but we need to be careful not to open up the field and create some discrepancy. One thing that might be interesting that starts to be discussed is not necessarily not the next generation of engine but the next generation of fuel, because we still believe that Formula One is about hybrid technology, not full electric, for a number of reasons. Clearly we need more power and sustainable power and long races, but there will be new forms of fuel coming up in the next few years, whether you are talking about more bio-fuel, so a different composition, or even synthesis fuel, coming from non-fossil sources, that could be attractive and that would require new development. So, probably the way forwards. Less exciting, obviously, than a very high-revving, normally-aspirated engine, but still probably the way forward if we want to be relevant, not just to car makers, but to society.

     

    Q: (Jerome Pugmire – Associated Press) A question for Zak. Just picking up on what you said earlier about the need for transparency and coming forward with the reasons for what happened. Is the motivation behind that because fans are owed those explanations or more the sense that the people who did not do their job properly need to face up to that or is it a combination of both that prompts that?

    ZB: No, I think anyone that maybe didn’t get the job done, you have a private conversation with them. I don’t think that would be ever be appropriate to discuss in an open forum, which is why names in a variety of areas were mentioned, and that was about being transparent with our fans and partners and not glossing over something that was not as minor miss but was a major miss. I felt obligated to explain that to the world and the best way to do that was via the media, to get the message out, and I’m glad we did it.

     

    Q: (Julien Billotte – Auto Hebdo) – A question for whoever would like to answer. There was some hope at the start of the season that the new regulations, the 2019 regulations, could shake things up a bit in terms of the pecking order, and here we are five races in, Mercedes is winning everything and the top three are miles ahead of the midfield. What makes you confident that 2021 can be the game changer that Formula 1 probably needs?

     

    Q: It was whoever wants to answer and you all look delighted to jump in. Christian, why don’t you start?

    CH: Thank you very much. Look, the regulation change this year; the outcome was rather predictable unfortunately and it’s up to us, the teams competing against Mercedes to close that gap down. I think for 2021 it’s a clean sheet of paper, it will be a big regulation change and I think one of the things that we debated is that you need to be a little bit careful, because if you release very early regulations then quite the teams that have more resource quite simply put that resource earlier on than the smaller teams. So it’s about finding that balance of when is the right time for full regulations to be released. And I think the cars will be a lot simpler. Inevitably teams will get it right and teams will get it wrong. But hopefully the concept of what they are looking at should put more inference on the driver to be a bigger variable than he or she currently can be. And that’s what Formula One desperately needs. It needs the drivers very much to be the stars, to be modern day chariot racers and that we have wheel-to-wheel, exciting, and to a degree, unpredictable racing, because serial winning like we have at the moment, the teams in many respects are getting too good at predicting the outcome of a weekend with the updates they introduce. Hats off to Mercedes, they’ve done a better job than anybody to be in the position they are, but hopefully the technical regulations will be the biggest driver to shuffle that around and change that, and hopefully introduce more variance.

     

    Q: Claire, for a team playing catch-up at the moment, does the late release of regulations do you think benefit you and equalise things a little bit across the field?

    CW: Yeah, as Christian said, if we can have those regulations released slightly later then clearly for a team like ours, then we’re not going to be battling as a team like Christian’s or Toto and Ferrari, who can all put so much resource across three programmes. For a team like ours, it’s much harder to do that but it’s just more about having clarity on when those regulations come out for us and to make sure that those regulations are defined as when they come out rather than people tinkering with them in the TWG or whatever and then there’s a second draft to them. We just need them as soon as possible but not too soon so that people can’t put an arms race against them.

     

    Q: Zak?

    ZB: Well, yeah, I would agree with what I’ve heard the additional add I would have is it’s going to come along with the budget cap so not only would the rules be very different, there also won’t hopefully be unlimited budgets to be able to put against developing the new car. As far as timing, coming out, I think later the better but they have such great resources, the teams at the front, that they will just have the ability to push out more boats in more directions over a shorter period of time so I think the technical rules, tied to the budget cap is what’s going to maybe drive some change in the sport.

     

    Q: Andy, from a technical point of view does it feel like a big opportunity?

    AG: Potentially. I think the technical regulations definitely focused on allowing cars to follow more closely, I think that’s quite clear, but I think, with every season there’ll always be teams that do a better job than the others so there’s always going to be a quicker team and a slower team and the problem is, you line those teams up and that’s the  order on Sunday afternoon and I think you’re going to get the same result so I think that somewhere along the line, there needs to be a look at the sporting aspect as well as just the technical side, otherwise we’re just going to end up with cars that can follow each other but they’re going to follow each other in a procession.

     

    Q: And Cyril?

    CA: The only thing I would say is that we basically need to do the opposite of what’s been done this year. I don’t think the intent of this year was really to change the pecking order; it could have been a secondary benefit but this year it was a superficial change, late and we need a drastic change early if we want to change things, in my opinion.

     

    Q: (Stuart Codling – F1 Racing) Claire, right at the top of the press conference you said you had a big development step coming in the next few months. Now, bearing in mind what you’ve already just said about the 2021 regulations, what is the Williams development road map over the next few months? How far do you take development of the current car? When do you start looking at 2020? Does 2020 in effect become a write-off as you start thinking about 2021?

    CW: No, nothing is a write-off at Williams, ever. It never has been and it never would be, regardless of where we are. It’s just not our mindset a Williams. We don’t write a season off just because we aren’t doing well. For us, at the moment, we’re really looking at ’19 and ’20 very much as almost two seasons, where it’s just evolution and development and we’ve just got to keep bringing performance at each and every race, and as I said earlier, we’ve definitely seen that we’ve done that, we’re closing the gap to the ninth-placed team and we’ve got to keep doing that as the season progresses and we’re looking at obviously what 2020 looks like from a development perspective, what we’re going to be focusing our resources and attention on, to make sure that we certainly do a whole lot better job next year for us. And then again, we’ve got to look at ’21 and make sure we’ve got the right resources in place and the focus in place to take advantage of that situation. Clearly, as everyone knows and have talked about a lot, ’21 could be a really great opportunity for us with the cost cap that’s coming and with whole new technical regulations.

     

    Q: (Daniel Horvath – Racing Line) Zak, Nyck de Vries is no longer part of the McLaren Junior programme. Could you tell us what was behind this decision?

    ZB: Well, we’ve got our junior drivers, junior driver and Sergio and we’ve got two very young – well, one very young Lando Norris and Carlos Sainz who we’re extremely happy with and we don’t see the need, at this point, to stack up some drivers and then run into a situation where you don’t have a home for them, so we felt that it was best – because we felt it would be highly unlikely he would end up in a McLaren, given our current driver situation – that he would be a free agent to be able to drive for other teams because often, when a Junior driver is under a contract that then deters other teams from taking them and then ultimately can end up sometimes hurting their career which we don’t think is the right thing to do.

     

    Q: (Louis Dekker – NOS) Christian, do you agree that this is your best chance to beat Mercedes and is Max ready for redemption in Monaco after difficult years?

    CH: Well Max’s track record here has been a tricky one and I think particularly last year, obviously, was a tough weekend for him. We had promising pace in the first session. I think Mercedes is a mighty machine this year but Max has been in the form of his life, he’s driving incredibly well and it probably does represent our best chance since the beginning of the year to at least get close to them and hopefully put them under a little bit of pressure. Yeah, hopefully we can build on the first session and through the rest of the weekend.

     

    Q: (Luke Smith – Crash.net) Zak, how much did last week’s failure to qualify for Indy impact your relationship with Fernando Alonso with McLaren? And how involved are you in helping outline Fernando’s future racing plans beyond the end of the current WEC season?

    ZB: Our relationship with Fernando has never been stronger. He was obviously very disappointed. We let him down, he deserved to be in the race, he was an absolute star as he always has been when he’s raced with us, and my personal relationship in working with him. What he does post-Le Mans is up to Fernando. We have a contract with him for some McLaren activities. I think when you come off an emotional weekend like that you want to take some time to reflect and see what he wants to do in the future and if that aligns with some of McLaren’s activities then that would be great but just like he’s been driving with Toyota, I think he’s a bit undecided on what he wants to do yet so we will pick up those conversations when I see him in Le Mans.

     

    Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines, Racefans.net) The equivalent FIA conference in Spain two weeks ago, Mattia Binotto said that they were negotiating to retain the Ferrari veto, the implication being that this was in order to save the teams or to protect the teams from any sort of dubious rule changes. How do you feel about them retaining the veto and do you think that Ferrari should be the watchdog?

     

    Q: Claire, can we start with you?

    CW: Why do you keep coming to me? No, I think it’s just silly if I can be honest. I have a problem in our sport anyway in the fact that I feel it’s far too democratic. I’ve been quite open about that. I feel that F1 and the FIA should take more ownership of the regulations. We run it too much in a collegiate way, which is detrimental when we all have our own agendas. We need to be looking at this sport and its sustainability into the future and protecting it and protecting the true DNA of that. By doing that by committee I think can be very difficult. And I really don’t feel that one team should have a right, a veto. That makes no sense to me at all.

    CH: It’s pretty outdated now. That veto was put in place – from my understanding – years and years ago to stop regulations changes. Ferrari had V12 engines, they didn’t suddenly want that to be vetoed, those rules to be changed because there were all these British garagista teams that were coming into the sport. But that was in the sixties and things have obviously moved on. I think it’s a right – if I’m not wrong – for the longest standing team, not bespoke just for Ferrari but they are the longest standing team. You can view it two weeks: you can say, OK, it’s a safety net, if they are there representing the teams, but ultimately they are there representing Ferrari. Probably, if we’re going for a clean sheet of paper it makes sense for it not to be there and as Claire says, same rules for everyone.

    CA: I would concur. I think we need Formula One to be progressive rather than defensive and the ability to block due process can be perceived or decided to be a positive for the sport is probably not good. Having said that, we completely recognise the specific value of Ferrari to the sport but which can be reflected probably in the commercial agreement and not in the governance.

    ZB: I think it’s very kind of him to offer to represent the teams’ interests but I think, as has been said before me, we all have varying interests and I think like Claire said, Formula One themselves want to do what’s in the best interests of the sport which I think ultimately is in the best interests of all us and we we’re best having our own individual negotiations when and if that is appropriate and as Cyril said, I think Ferrari bring a tremendous amount to the sport and that can be recognised in other ways.

    AG: I try hard not to get involved in F1 politics.

     

    Q: (Jerome Pugmire – Associated Press) Christian, you were speaking about Max being in the form of his life. Yesterday he said he’s matured a bit, do you sense that and is that linked to his form and in what ways do you think he has matured if he has?

    CH: I think really if you wind the clock back 12 months it was probably the lowest weekend, last year, of his career, having a car capable of winning and crashing in FP3 and not being able to take part in qualifying. That was very tough for him and I think he went away from that race and he reflected hard on it. Since Montreal last year he’s really just stepped things up a gear and he’s been a phenomenal force whenever he’s been in the car. The way he started this season has been outstanding. He’s overachieved in certain aspects and I think he’s got that roundedness of maturity and is very much leading the team development-wise. I think he’s enjoying and relishing that role as well, so yeah, if you compare Max Verstappen May 23, 2019 to the equivalent time last year he’s evolved a tremendous amount and I think that’s again the benefit of experience as well.

  • 2017 Monaco GP: Thursday Press Conference – Part 1

    2017 Monaco GP: Thursday Press Conference – Part 1

    PART ONE: TEAM REPRESENTATIVES – Andrew GREEN (Force India), Paul Monaghan (Red Bull Racing), Jörg Zander (Sauber).

    PRESS CONFERENCE

    Q: Andy, let’s start with you. Stunning start to the season: 53 points; clear fourth place and even breathing down Red Bull’s neck in the championship. With the resources that you have, how have you managed to do it?

    Andy GREEN: It’s been, yeah, it’s been a good start to the season but as we proved last season, you can’t take anything for granted and our lead over fifth place is a lot smaller than where we were behind the Williams last year. So, reminding the guys that it’s a long season and we’re only a quarter of the way through it with a long way to go where a lot can happen. So, we need to keep pushing, keep developing, do what we’re doing – we’re on a good trajectory at the moment – and not to slack and see where we end up in the end. So far it’s gone better than expected and I think we’ve capitalised as much as we could of in those first five races. I don’t think you look back at those first five and think ‘what if?’ I think we’ve basically got the best out of it.

    Q: In Spain only three cars finished on the lead lap, which is the fewest since 2008 so obviously, does that speak to the problem that the field in Formula One, with these new regulations, has become very spread out? Do you think that’s going to remain the case for the rest of the season?

    AG: I hope not. It was another point I did make to the factory last week. I hate being lapped. It just shows the potential that there is in these regulations and how much there is to find. We look at it as an opportunity to make the car even faster, knowing that there’s that much performance left in it.

    Q: Paul, coming to you, 75 seconds behind at the finish in Spain last time out but a clear and very promising looking P2 in practice today with last year’s pole-sitter. What’s your overview of today’s running and how competitive do you think you’re going to be this weekend?

    Paul MONAGHAN: It’s nice to see us nearer the sharp end than we’ve arguably been at points this year. Our overall competitiveness… it’s still hard to tell. I’m not sure Mercedes showed their full hand today. I think it’s going to be pretty tight on Saturday and you need to have a reasonable qualifying around here to then capitalise for Sunday. So, I’m not going to count any chickens yet. We just knuckle down, do what’s within our control, get the most out of our car, and get the most out of it on Saturday and see where we end up.

    Q: So where’s the shortfall been then in the first five races of this season – some way behind, as we said, in Spain. Is there still belief that you can catch them over the span of the season?

    PM: There’s belief, yes, and a strong desire as well. I think if we lost belief it would be a fairly early end to our season. So, there’s a strong belief, a strong desire and a real determination to get more out of this car and close on the others – because they’re not standing still and as such our development rate has to exceed those guys. I think it can. It’s fair to say that we’ve not extracted as much as we can in terms of points-scoring from the first four and there’s a little bit of performance coming each race. We set out on a pathway to catch them, let’s see if we can.

    Q: But where’s the shortfall? It’s fair to say you haven’t extracted the most from the regulations. You’d have expected, looking at the way they were framed, that this was going to play to Red Bull’s strengths, particularly on the aerodynamic side.

    PM: Well it’s strange thing, isn’t it? In that, within our own control is our own destiny and what others do will always be judged against that. And yes, it’s fair to say we don’t have the leading car at the present time. I wouldn’t want to say that it’s one area. It’s going to be several areas and it’s up to us to identify the ones that have the greatest returns that we can alter, capitalise upon those and get the most out of our car. It’s only what lies within our control. Can’t do anything about what the others do. We will identify the shortfalls – I don’t think it’s going to be a singular – it will be a plural, and we will chip away at them as we have been for some time now.

    Q: Jörg, welcome to you. Very valuable points, obviously, for your team in Spain that puts you ahead of McLaren in the Constructors’. How optimistic are you that you can stay there?

    Jörg ZANDER: First of all there was obviously a massive boost for the morale and motivation of the team. We actually didn’t expect us to be there in Barcelona. The upgrade package which we planned for Barcelona, we moved to this event. So somehow things seem to have been turned upside down. We didn’t expect us to be on P19-20 today. It was a bit more of a difficult start for us, into the season and it was affected by various parameters. As you know, we didn’t have Pascal for the first two races, so we had to go with Giovinazzi and, of course, that introduced quite a bit of a change to the operational side. So we had a very young, new driver into the car, which we needed to get adapted – but obviously, let me say, from a development point of view, we do understand that the car is behind, compared to our, let me say, defined competition, which is the midfield, primarily because we started pretty early in the season to develop that car, so we have to try and catch-up. But the parameter we fight here, of course, is time and it’s difficult to gain time over the competition. They have a certain time available as we have, so there’s not any difference. The thing is, of course, about resources, and these resources, we’re just about to configure and to adapt. We have made plenty of recruitments but these are all new people so there is a human factor involved, with regards to getting more out of this operation – and these are the kind of difficulties that we are fighting at the moment, let me say.

    Q: You mentioned today P19-20. It looked a bit of a struggle, lap time-wise. I was out on circuit. The car didn’t look too bad but the times were a long way off the next-slowest car. What’s going on?

    JZ: There’s definitely something wrong. It’s a little bit more work ahead of us. At the moment we don’t seem to get the tyres to work, at all. So, as I said, it was a bit of a surprise. We came here with a new aero upgrade which works according to the data, actually quite fine. So, as expected. We thought we could draw some more potential from it. Of course, now while the tyre temperature management worked very well in Barcelona and panned out very well for us on both compounds, supersoft and the medium, yeah, we do seem to struggle at the moment. The same is true of both compounds: ultrasoft, supersoft. We don’t’ really seem to be able to put the energy into the tyres that it needs to develop the grip which is required.

    QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR

    Q: (Ralf Bach – Autobild Motorsport) A question to Paul. I read last week that Adrian Newey said that he was more or less not involved in the new cars. Not his car. Can you tell us how much involved he really was?

    PM: In terms of hours, I can’t tell you how he’s split his time. He’s part of our team, has been for a long time and continues to be so. He was involved in the process of developing the car and continues to be so.

    Q: (Jerome Pugmire – AP) Question for Andy. Esteban was saying yesterday that he’s confident that he can get a podium this season. How confident are you that he can do that and how impressed have you been with his start?

    AG: Well, I can tell you how impressed I am: very, very impressed with the way that he’s come into the team, adapted, the speed at which he acclimatised himself to this track especially this morning, for me shows what a talent he is. Undoubtedly. I watched him for quite a long time in the simulator last week, pounding around the lap here, and his car control was incredible. He could put the front wheel through the barrier by an inch every time. He just needed to bring it back an inch! He’s an amazing talent. Can he get a podium? Well, we need to give him the car to do that – because ultimately on our current car pace and ranking, if everybody finished we would never get a podium so it would need a big slice of luck. But he has an uncanny ability to finish races. He races really well on a Sunday. He has a lot of mental capacity remaining, when he’s driving the car, which is a really, really good sign. If he’s given the opportunity, I’m sure he’ll take it.

    Q: (Peter Farkas – Auto Motor) A question to Paul. I think if you look at qualifying in Barcelona, corner speeds of the new Red Bulls were quite encouraging. If that is so, how encouraging is that regarding the new upgrades. And also, has there been a change of philosophy towards more downforce versus less drag with the new update introduced in Barcelona.

    PM: OK, the first part of your question then. The changes made to the car for Barcelona yielded improvements to it, undoubtedly. There’s always a simulation target and then what the real car delivers – and the testing of the real car is usually imperfect. So, as far as we can tell, they’ve done what we expected to do – I’m encouraged by that – we did pick up a bit of speed. I think it gave the drivers more confidence and that’s another little bonus that you can take. In terms of change of philosophy, no, not really. We have efficiency targets that determine do pieces go on the car or not. It’s perhaps easier to judge that than it is your expected lap time gain of an update package. We’re not changing our philosophy: you can see how the car is set up; we’ve been pursuing that for some time and that remains. I think a change of philosophy at this stage would be, for us, unwise. What we do longer term is entirely our choice and our business.

    Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines) Jörg, if we look at your career, you’ve always worked with very, very well-funded teams: Toyota, Honda, in sportscars Audi, with BMW-Sauber when it was manufacturer-backed. How difficult is it to reset the engineering mind set to operate and work in a team with a more modest budget the way that Sauber is right now?

    JZ: First of all, I think we have actually quite a good budget, so we have all opportunity that you can find in other midfield teams to do a decent development and dover those development processes.  So, from that perspective I think we are not too badly adjusted at all. The other point is that, the way I see Sauber is actually, from the point of talent level, actually quite good. We have very experienced people, very, very… people have a good talent, they are very competent. They have been in the sport for a long time, so I think you may want to look into the economic side of things, which are really decent but you have to look from a human resource point of view as well: what kind of quality level of human resource do you have available for your developments. I think Sauber is actually placed very well in that regard.

    Q: (Sam Collins – Racecar Engineering) There’s been a lot of talk about the frontal cockpit protection system being introduced for the 2018 season. What have you heard from the FIA and their research institute about what form it will take, in terms of technical regulations. Also, what’s the latest in terms of monocoque design and lead times in manufacturer to start working and introduce it into the car?

    AG: Well, there has been a meeting a couple of weeks ago, the first meeting for the installation of the Shield. We weren’t part of that meeting but there is another meeting tomorrow that we are having with the FIA to discuss it further. We’ve seen some preliminary models. We’ve been looking at how we integrate those into the chassis next year. There are a lot, a lot of question marks over it. There’s a lot of work to do in the timeframe that we have been given. So we need to make some smart decisions going forward. Hopefully we’ll be discussing that tomorrow, with a view to how we answer all those questions in the time period we’ve got.

    PM: To answer your question, ‘what’s the deadline?’ I think it depends which colour shirt you have on. We, as a team, can be amongst the later, but we are going to very, very tight to get this on to a car for ’18. I think the research into its functionality and protection, it’s got to happen almost in parallel with the installation, which makes it quite a tricky job, because whatever they change in terms of screen then has an implication to a chassis and if you have cut your patterns then you are in a fairly awkward situations. I think if it all happens in parallel then the cut-offs are going to be somewhat team dependent. As Andy said, there is a hell of a lot to get through to ensure that this is a thoroughly developed and sorted package to put on next year’s car.

    JZ: With regard to the deadline, so usually we would by the end of July, beginning of August, define the monocoque. Of course the fundamental question here is about the integration of the shield and the attachment, so there is a question about structural integrity, but again, as my colleagues said, we are going to discuss this tomorrow, so we need those detailed informations of course. At the moment, as far as I know, we want to test this system at some point in September, which I think is good. I think the enhancement of safety, improving safety is a fundamental let me say job of ours and I think we should support that, we do support this. But of course we have to makes sure that these things are worked out sensibly and that they fit within the time schedule. But we are working together with the FIA in order to achieve this, don’t we Paul?

    PM: Absolutely.

    Q: (Jerome Pugmire – Associated Press) I just wanted to follow up on what I was asking about Esteban before. Could you just talk about his capacity and desire to learn, because he has said that he does hours and hours of simulator work and, quote, “intense debriefs with engineers”, so that shows his application. Could you talk about his desire to learn and willingness to improve?

    AG: He’s like a school child. He’s like a sponge and he just absorbs information as fast as you can give it to him. His want and his desire are unquestionable. He absolutely wants this and he has the talent to do great things but he is going about it the right way. He’s doing it a step at a time. He’s doing the learning at the pace he wants to and that we allow him to do and I have no doubts that he is going to get to where he wants to be in a few years’ time.

    Q: (Silvia Arias – Parabrisas) A question for everybody. Did you need to change the jack support at the back of the car after Laurent Mekies’ document, and what do you think about it, will it really help in the case of accidents?

    PM: To answer your first question: yes, we were requested to change, so we have changed. We’ve taken a bigger step than some of our competitors by the looks of it and we have done a new jack, we’ve modified the associated receptacle on the back of the rear impact structure. As for the note, well, it’s given to us, and it’s up to us to interpret it, deal with it, liaise with the FIA, achieve a design that design that satisfies them and equally that we could get here, and with a lot of hard work and dedication we’ve got a solution here.

    JZ: It’s the same for us. It added a little bit of complexity to our operations as well, but that’s what we have done. Of course, we have a Ferrari gearbox, so there’s a rear impact structure that is homologated by Ferrari. So we had to work this out in co-operation with our colleagues in Italy. So there was immediate action required which we did and yes, of course, we have had extra support here to make sure that it all works nicely. But then again, as I said before, it’s a safety critical subject, so we do understand and if there is urgency because of that then we would support that. That’s what we did.

    AG: We didn’t need to change our rear impact structure, we just changed our livery.

    PART ONE: TEAM REPRESENTATIVES – Andrew GREEN (Force India), Paul Monaghan (Red Bull Racing), Jörg Zander (Sauber).

    PRESS CONFERENCE

    Q: Andy, let’s start with you. Stunning start to the season: 53 points; clear fourth place and even breathing down Red Bull’s neck in the championship. With the resources that you have, how have you managed to do it?

    Andy GREEN: It’s been, yeah, it’s been a good start to the season but as we proved last season, you can’t take anything for granted and our lead over fifth place is a lot smaller than where we were behind the Williams last year. So, reminding the guys that it’s a long season and we’re only a quarter of the way through it with a long way to go where a lot can happen. So, we need to keep pushing, keep developing, do what we’re doing – we’re on a good trajectory at the moment – and not to slack and see where we end up in the end. So far it’s gone better than expected and I think we’ve capitalised as much as we could of in those first five races. I don’t think you look back at those first five and think ‘what if?’ I think we’ve basically got the best out of it.

    Q: In Spain only three cars finished on the lead lap, which is the fewest since 2008 so obviously, does that speak to the problem that the field in Formula One, with these new regulations, has become very spread out? Do you think that’s going to remain the case for the rest of the season?

    AG: I hope not. It was another point I did make to the factory last week. I hate being lapped. It just shows the potential that there is in these regulations and how much there is to find. We look at it as an opportunity to make the car even faster, knowing that there’s that much performance left in it.

    Q: Paul, coming to you, 75 seconds behind at the finish in Spain last time out but a clear and very promising looking P2 in practice today with last year’s pole-sitter. What’s your overview of today’s running and how competitive do you think you’re going to be this weekend?

    Paul MONAGHAN: It’s nice to see us nearer the sharp end than we’ve arguably been at points this year. Our overall competitiveness… it’s still hard to tell. I’m not sure Mercedes showed their full hand today. I think it’s going to be pretty tight on Saturday and you need to have a reasonable qualifying around here to then capitalise for Sunday. So, I’m not going to count any chickens yet. We just knuckle down, do what’s within our control, get the most out of our car, and get the most out of it on Saturday and see where we end up.

    Q: So where’s the shortfall been then in the first five races of this season – some way behind, as we said, in Spain. Is there still belief that you can catch them over the span of the season?

    PM: There’s belief, yes, and a strong desire as well. I think if we lost belief it would be a fairly early end to our season. So, there’s a strong belief, a strong desire and a real determination to get more out of this car and close on the others – because they’re not standing still and as such our development rate has to exceed those guys. I think it can. It’s fair to say that we’ve not extracted as much as we can in terms of points-scoring from the first four and there’s a little bit of performance coming each race. We set out on a pathway to catch them, let’s see if we can.

    Q: But where’s the shortfall? It’s fair to say you haven’t extracted the most from the regulations. You’d have expected, looking at the way they were framed, that this was going to play to Red Bull’s strengths, particularly on the aerodynamic side.

    PM: Well it’s strange thing, isn’t it? In that, within our own control is our own destiny and what others do will always be judged against that. And yes, it’s fair to say we don’t have the leading car at the present time. I wouldn’t want to say that it’s one area. It’s going to be several areas and it’s up to us to identify the ones that have the greatest returns that we can alter, capitalise upon those and get the most out of our car. It’s only what lies within our control. Can’t do anything about what the others do. We will identify the shortfalls – I don’t think it’s going to be a singular – it will be a plural, and we will chip away at them as we have been for some time now.

    Q: Jörg, welcome to you. Very valuable points, obviously, for your team in Spain that puts you ahead of McLaren in the Constructors’. How optimistic are you that you can stay there?

    Jörg ZANDER: First of all there was obviously a massive boost for the morale and motivation of the team. We actually didn’t expect us to be there in Barcelona. The upgrade package which we planned for Barcelona, we moved to this event. So somehow things seem to have been turned upside down. We didn’t expect us to be on P19-20 today. It was a bit more of a difficult start for us, into the season and it was affected by various parameters. As you know, we didn’t have Pascal for the first two races, so we had to go with Giovinazzi and, of course, that introduced quite a bit of a change to the operational side. So we had a very young, new driver into the car, which we needed to get adapted – but obviously, let me say, from a development point of view, we do understand that the car is behind, compared to our, let me say, defined competition, which is the midfield, primarily because we started pretty early in the season to develop that car, so we have to try and catch-up. But the parameter we fight here, of course, is time and it’s difficult to gain time over the competition. They have a certain time available as we have, so there’s not any difference. The thing is, of course, about resources, and these resources, we’re just about to configure and to adapt. We have made plenty of recruitments but these are all new people so there is a human factor involved, with regards to getting more out of this operation – and these are the kind of difficulties that we are fighting at the moment, let me say.

    Q: You mentioned today P19-20. It looked a bit of a struggle, lap time-wise. I was out on circuit. The car didn’t look too bad but the times were a long way off the next-slowest car. What’s going on?

    JZ: There’s definitely something wrong. It’s a little bit more work ahead of us. At the moment we don’t seem to get the tyres to work, at all. So, as I said, it was a bit of a surprise. We came here with a new aero upgrade which works according to the data, actually quite fine. So, as expected. We thought we could draw some more potential from it. Of course, now while the tyre temperature management worked very well in Barcelona and panned out very well for us on both compounds, supersoft and the medium, yeah, we do seem to struggle at the moment. The same is true of both compounds: ultrasoft, supersoft. We don’t’ really seem to be able to put the energy into the tyres that it needs to develop the grip which is required.

    QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR

    Q: (Ralf Bach – Autobild Motorsport) A question to Paul. I read last week that Adrian Newey said that he was more or less not involved in the new cars. Not his car. Can you tell us how much involved he really was?

    PM: In terms of hours, I can’t tell you how he’s split his time. He’s part of our team, has been for a long time and continues to be so. He was involved in the process of developing the car and continues to be so.

    Q: (Jerome Pugmire – AP) Question for Andy. Esteban was saying yesterday that he’s confident that he can get a podium this season. How confident are you that he can do that and how impressed have you been with his start?

    AG: Well, I can tell you how impressed I am: very, very impressed with the way that he’s come into the team, adapted, the speed at which he acclimatised himself to this track especially this morning, for me shows what a talent he is. Undoubtedly. I watched him for quite a long time in the simulator last week, pounding around the lap here, and his car control was incredible. He could put the front wheel through the barrier by an inch every time. He just needed to bring it back an inch! He’s an amazing talent. Can he get a podium? Well, we need to give him the car to do that – because ultimately on our current car pace and ranking, if everybody finished we would never get a podium so it would need a big slice of luck. But he has an uncanny ability to finish races. He races really well on a Sunday. He has a lot of mental capacity remaining, when he’s driving the car, which is a really, really good sign. If he’s given the opportunity, I’m sure he’ll take it.

    Q: (Peter Farkas – Auto Motor) A question to Paul. I think if you look at qualifying in Barcelona, corner speeds of the new Red Bulls were quite encouraging. If that is so, how encouraging is that regarding the new upgrades. And also, has there been a change of philosophy towards more downforce versus less drag with the new update introduced in Barcelona.

    PM: OK, the first part of your question then. The changes made to the car for Barcelona yielded improvements to it, undoubtedly. There’s always a simulation target and then what the real car delivers – and the testing of the real car is usually imperfect. So, as far as we can tell, they’ve done what we expected to do – I’m encouraged by that – we did pick up a bit of speed. I think it gave the drivers more confidence and that’s another little bonus that you can take. In terms of change of philosophy, no, not really. We have efficiency targets that determine do pieces go on the car or not. It’s perhaps easier to judge that than it is your expected lap time gain of an update package. We’re not changing our philosophy: you can see how the car is set up; we’ve been pursuing that for some time and that remains. I think a change of philosophy at this stage would be, for us, unwise. What we do longer term is entirely our choice and our business.

    Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines) Jörg, if we look at your career, you’ve always worked with very, very well-funded teams: Toyota, Honda, in sportscars Audi, with BMW-Sauber when it was manufacturer-backed. How difficult is it to reset the engineering mind set to operate and work in a team with a more modest budget the way that Sauber is right now?

    JZ: First of all, I think we have actually quite a good budget, so we have all opportunity that you can find in other midfield teams to do a decent development and dover those development processes.  So, from that perspective I think we are not too badly adjusted at all. The other point is that, the way I see Sauber is actually, from the point of talent level, actually quite good. We have very experienced people, very, very… people have a good talent, they are very competent. They have been in the sport for a long time, so I think you may want to look into the economic side of things, which are really decent but you have to look from a human resource point of view as well: what kind of quality level of human resource do you have available for your developments. I think Sauber is actually placed very well in that regard.

    Q: (Sam Collins – Racecar Engineering) There’s been a lot of talk about the frontal cockpit protection system being introduced for the 2018 season. What have you heard from the FIA and their research institute about what form it will take, in terms of technical regulations. Also, what’s the latest in terms of monocoque design and lead times in manufacturer to start working and introduce it into the car?

    AG: Well, there has been a meeting a couple of weeks ago, the first meeting for the installation of the Shield. We weren’t part of that meeting but there is another meeting tomorrow that we are having with the FIA to discuss it further. We’ve seen some preliminary models. We’ve been looking at how we integrate those into the chassis next year. There are a lot, a lot of question marks over it. There’s a lot of work to do in the timeframe that we have been given. So we need to make some smart decisions going forward. Hopefully we’ll be discussing that tomorrow, with a view to how we answer all those questions in the time period we’ve got.

    PM: To answer your question, ‘what’s the deadline?’ I think it depends which colour shirt you have on. We, as a team, can be amongst the later, but we are going to very, very tight to get this on to a car for ’18. I think the research into its functionality and protection, it’s got to happen almost in parallel with the installation, which makes it quite a tricky job, because whatever they change in terms of screen then has an implication to a chassis and if you have cut your patterns then you are in a fairly awkward situations. I think if it all happens in parallel then the cut-offs are going to be somewhat team dependent. As Andy said, there is a hell of a lot to get through to ensure that this is a thoroughly developed and sorted package to put on next year’s car.

    JZ: With regard to the deadline, so usually we would by the end of July, beginning of August, define the monocoque. Of course the fundamental question here is about the integration of the shield and the attachment, so there is a question about structural integrity, but again, as my colleagues said, we are going to discuss this tomorrow, so we need those detailed informations of course. At the moment, as far as I know, we want to test this system at some point in September, which I think is good. I think the enhancement of safety, improving safety is a fundamental let me say job of ours and I think we should support that, we do support this. But of course we have to makes sure that these things are worked out sensibly and that they fit within the time schedule. But we are working together with the FIA in order to achieve this, don’t we Paul?

    PM: Absolutely.

    Q: (Jerome Pugmire – Associated Press) I just wanted to follow up on what I was asking about Esteban before. Could you just talk about his capacity and desire to learn, because he has said that he does hours and hours of simulator work and, quote, “intense debriefs with engineers”, so that shows his application. Could you talk about his desire to learn and willingness to improve?

    AG: He’s like a school child. He’s like a sponge and he just absorbs information as fast as you can give it to him. His want and his desire are unquestionable. He absolutely wants this and he has the talent to do great things but he is going about it the right way. He’s doing it a step at a time. He’s doing the learning at the pace he wants to and that we allow him to do and I have no doubts that he is going to get to where he wants to be in a few years’ time.

    Q: (Silvia Arias – Parabrisas) A question for everybody. Did you need to change the jack support at the back of the car after Laurent Mekies’ document, and what do you think about it, will it really help in the case of accidents?

    PM: To answer your first question: yes, we were requested to change, so we have changed. We’ve taken a bigger step than some of our competitors by the looks of it and we have done a new jack, we’ve modified the associated receptacle on the back of the rear impact structure. As for the note, well, it’s given to us, and it’s up to us to interpret it, deal with it, liaise with the FIA, achieve a design that design that satisfies them and equally that we could get here, and with a lot of hard work and dedication we’ve got a solution here.

    JZ: It’s the same for us. It added a little bit of complexity to our operations as well, but that’s what we have done. Of course, we have a Ferrari gearbox, so there’s a rear impact structure that is homologated by Ferrari. So we had to work this out in co-operation with our colleagues in Italy. So there was immediate action required which we did and yes, of course, we have had extra support here to make sure that it all works nicely. But then again, as I said before, it’s a safety critical subject, so we do understand and if there is urgency because of that then we would support that. That’s what we did.

    AG: We didn’t need to change our rear impact structure, we just changed our livery.

  • Force India’s VJM10 Breaks Cover

    Force India’s VJM10 Breaks Cover

    The Sahara Force India Formula One team launched their 2017 contender, the VJM10, today at the Silverstone Circuit.

    With all the sponsors and media around the two driver for Force India, Sergio Perez and Esteban Ocon, pulled off the covers off the VJM10. The car cuts an imposing figure with it’s low and wide stance.

    “I can’t remember being more excited ahead of a new season,” said Force India Team Principal Vijay Mallya.

    “The VJM10 looks aggressive and purposeful, and is the result of a huge effort behind the scenes over the last twelve months,” he added.

    Mallya hit back at Renault Team Principal Cyril Abiteboul saying: “It’s not the amount of weapons but the quality in your armory!”

    Force India have targeted a top 3 finish in the constructors championship this season after a very strong 4th place finish in 2016.

    “This year the cars are completely new and nothing can be carried over from previous years,” explained Chief Operating Officer, Otmar Szafnauer.

    “Although we have completely new aerodynamics on the VJM10, it’s fair to say that our aero philosophy is very similar to 2015 and 2016.”

    Talking about the technical challenge of designing the 2017 car, Technical Director Andrew Green said that his team was under no illusions in designing the 2017 car and that it was a steep learning curve for them.

    “It’s definitely a big overhaul; one that requires a change in mentality,” said Green.

    “It took a bit of time to adjust at first, but we are there now and I am confident we know where to look and where the performance is coming from with this car.

    “The development slope is incredibly steep and we are going to see significant updates to the cars at regular intervals, right from the start; it’s going to be big updates and I don’t think development will start to taper off any time soon.”

     

    Photo credit: Sahara Force India Formula One Team

  • 2015 Formula 1 Shell Belgian Grand Prix: Friday Press Conference

    2015 Formula 1 Shell Belgian Grand Prix: Friday Press Conference

    TEAM REPRESENTATIVES:

    Nick CHESTER (Lotus)

    Andrew GREEN (Force India)

    Giampaolo DALL’ARA (Sauber)

    James ALLISON (Ferrari)

    Paddy LOWE (Mercedes)

    Paul MONAGHAN (Red Bull Racing)

    PRESS CONFERENCE

    If I could start with a question for all of you: coming in next year are further restrictions on driver aids and team radio assistance. Can you give us your thoughts on the difference it will make that fans will be able to appreciate? James, why don’t you start?

    James ALLISON: Well, if it has its intended effect it will make it so that the drivers who are most on top of their game can do a better job than the ones who needed to be led a little bit more by the hand. I think on the whole the drivers are all pretty good in Formula One so I imagine that within six months or so, or maybe sooner, it will feel very much like it did before but maybe in the transition to that there will be a few mistakes made and maybe some interesting events as a result.

    Giampaolo?

    Giampaolo DALL’ARA: Yeah, well, I can tell you about the engineering side of it: it changes quite a bit the way we work, approaching the issues involving the driver more and the engineering side of the car. Eventually I think the result is what James has just mentioned. The driver will be more in charge of what he is doing, also on aspects that today maybe are driven from the back. Judging then the perception on the spectators, this is very difficult from where I sit, honestly.

    Thank you. Paddy, there is obviously a big list of things you can and can’t say on the radio. How do you remember all those things?

    Paddy LOWE: I know. It’s actually quite tricky. We police ourselves on the intercom. People often ask: “Can I say that? Can I say that?” But yeah, we will work our way through it and get used to it in time. As the other two have said, I think we will see a little bit more variability. But the big thing for me is that to a larger extent if a driver has a good or a bad start that will be down to his skill and less dependent on the team’s performance on configuring the start.

    Nick, a step in the right direction?

    Nick CHESTER: I think everybody wants to see the drivers being in charge of their own starts, so I can see why it has come in, but I’d echo the comments earlier, I think people will get used to it very quickly. There might be a few little mixes early on but it will settle down fairly quickly.

    And Paul, looking ahead to next year, obviously more sweeping changes as well, what difference will that make?

    Paul MONAGHAN: I think you’ll see a little bit more variability. We’ll see the odd fluffed start; we’ll see a bit of a shuffle up of the grid order approaching turn one. Mid-race I think when the drivers get used to it and depending on how the teams treat the level of automation there will be subtle differences maybe in ultimate performance you can extract from the car, after that I think it will settle out. What the fans will see? A little bit at the starts maybe but once you’re in the race I’m not sure there’ll be much other than less radio traffic.

    A final thought from you Andrew?

    Andrew GREEN: Yeah, I’m the same. I think within a few months the differences will be quite subtle. Like people have said, maybe a few fluffed starts. But the main thing is that the radio is going to be quite quiet.

    OK. Coming back to you then James. Back on top with a victory in Hungary for Sebastian, but another technical problem on Kimi’s side. What was the reason for that and what expectations do you have both in terms of performance but also reliability for the remainder of the season?

    JA: I don’t think we tend to go into the nuts and bolts of why our bits and pieces fail on our car but enough to say that we had a problem with the ERS system that meant that we were unable to continue in the race. Initially we lost a decent amount of power and then thereafter unable to continue. I hope we have put that behind us with the modifications that we’ve made during the last few weeks and for the remainder of the season, I think it’s going to be a bit like the first half. We’re not a bad car, but we’re not as good as these guys [Mercedes] and if they have a bad weekend while we’re having a good weekend then we can upset the apple cart a bit and if things pan out more normally then we tend to come in behind them. So let’s keep our fingers crossed that they have a bad weekend and we do the opposite.

    Q: Paul, if James is saying the Ferrari’s not a bad car compared to the Mercedes, it looks as though the Red Bull has become a substantially better car in the last month. Obviously a double podium in Hungary. Big progress on the chassis side. Was that a question of new parts or was it just, as much as anything, unlocking the potential of what was already there?

    PM: It’s a combination. We have some new parts there. We’ve improved the car a little bit in many areas, not just, shall we say, focussed on one of them. It’s starting to show benefits. We’ve seen the benefits in increments and in Hungary it was more complete, shall we say. It was nice to be challenging at the sharp end of it again and I think at the moment we have to accept Mercedes have a bit of a performance advantage. Maybe they have a bad weekend, maybe we have a good weekend and then I think it’s all up for the fight, isn’t it? We’ll put ourselves in there such that, if we can benefit from circumstances then we’re there to do so.

    Q: Andrew Green, coming to you from Force India, talking about upward performance curves, you’re certainly a good example of that with Force India. New car, of course, introduced a few rounds ago certainly contributed to that. What do you think is possible for the rest of the season for your team?

    AG: Well, I mean we’ve bought new parts here, we’ve got new parts coming for the next couple of races. I think once we get to Singapore, we’ll start to begin to understand where this car actually sits – that’s where we plan to bring the last of this current suite of updates to the track. We’re looking to start moving ahead of the guys behind us, obviously for sure, and looking to see if we can stay on the coat tails of Red Bull to a certain degree. If we hadn’t had the issues in Hungary, we were racing well in Hungary. Hungary was a shock to us, gave us a bit of a shot in the arm. We’ve learned from that, we’re moving forwards. We’ve got some exciting races coming up for Force India.

    Q: Paddy, first of all, any update on the cause of Rosberg’s tyre failure from your side. What did you see on the screens?

    PL: I think we’ve really only seen the same the same thing that everyone else has seen on the video. So very unusual situation where there seemed to be some bits of tyre structure coming out up to a minute before the actual terminal failure of the tyre. Not something I’ve seen before. So Pirelli have obviously taken the tyre away to analyse. I think we’ll have to wait to see what emerges from that. We’re double-checking everything to do with the car as well, obviously. But yeah, that’ll be something we’ll work through the evening.

    Q: Obviously the reversed qualifying battle between Rosberg and Hamilton this season. Last year 11 poles for Rosberg, this year just one for him in the first ten races. Hamilton seven last year but nine from 10 this year. As the technical boss, the guy who oversees all of this, what do you see is going on there?

    PL: I think it’s just the two drivers’ form as it varies. I know Nico was finding it quite difficult at the beginning of this year but actually he picked himself up from Spain onwards and he’s shown himself a great competitor to Lewis, so the battle’s far from over. As we can see, it isn’t always won on the Saturday grid position so the championship is wide open to the end.

    Q: Coming to you Giampaolo, obviously you have bought some updates to the car this weekend. How happy are you. It certainly looked reasonably encouraging from the practice runs this afternoon. Obviously you can’t draw too many conclusions from Friday but how satisfied are you with what you bought to the track this weekend.

    GD: At the moment we are finding what we are expecting to find. Difficult to say, as you mention, what this will mean for the race. What leaves us with quite some optimism more in general is that we got to the point where, after some frustration after losing some momentum, we expect some updates to come. Some are already here, as I mentioned. This is mostly on Ferrari’s side: we have an upgraded power unit fitted which is seemingly giving up some laptime. On top of this, let me add, it’s one of those tracks where our car feels more comfortable. It was lately some track-by-track troubles that here we don’t expect to have. Plus, in the next couple of races and ultimately Singapore we expect some major aerodynamic update which for us means the main target of getting back into the fight to get the guys here in the midfield in order to be able to score points more regularly than we are now.

    Q: Finally Nick, a couple of talking points for you. On the one hand obviously encouragement with Romain Grosjean I think seventh fastest in that practice session, on the other an accident for Pastor this morning. How much does that kind of thing set you back in a race weekend?

    NC: Well obviously it does set up back a little bit. Pastor was having quite a good P1 session until he had his off, and then that disrupts his P2 because it took us a while to get the car back together. So he’s missed a bit of running in P2 but he’s got back out there, proved the car out again and I’m sure he’ll be back on it for P3.

    And encouragement from the performance of the other car?

    NC: Yeah, quite pleased with Romain in P7. I think there’s only nine-hundredths to P4 and the car’s going quite well.

     

    QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR

    Q: (Mike Doodson – Grand Prix Week) I’ve been very puzzled by the clutch stories we’ve been told. We haven’t been given a lot of information about what the procedure was and I wondered, now that it’s no longer what it was, whether one of you could explain to an ignorant journalist exactly how these clutch procedures worked. I understand there are two clutches, you give advice to the driver over the radio, you’re not allowed to do that any more. Could I ask for a volunteer from the front row to go through the procedure just for me?

    JA: The overall procedure is fairly long and tedious so I will try and shortcut it a bit. When you go with the car from stop to going, there’s a certain amount of grip available on the track. The tyre has a certain amount of grip, the track has a certain amount of grip, you want to go as close to that available grip as possible but not over it and you don’t want to go under it otherwise you’re not making as much performance as there is available. Now if you were super duper skilful you might have fingers that could judge exactly where that grip is but it all happens very very fast so a perfect start is one where you can just let go of the clutch, let go of it and it closes to the perfect point where it delivers exactly the right amount of torque, such that the tyre doesn’t light up and spin, but neither does it give less torque to the road than the road is capable of taking. So our job, during the weekend, is to try to judge exactly how much grip is available and to adjust our clutches so that when the driver says go, the clutch closes the perfect amount to deliver the perfect amount of torque to the road and then off it goes. And that’s something that happens without the driver adjusting stuff, he doesn’t fiddle around with his fingers. The way that we used to do that in the past was there’s two clutch paddles, one which he holds all the way in, keeping the clutch fully open and the other which he holds in a partially closed and open position. We then, as engineers, adjust the clutch so that this partially closed and open position is at exactly the right point to get this magic start. And then when the light goes green, he lets go of the first clutch and the clutch closes to the point that is being held by the second paddle. Off the car goes.

    All that’s changed is that now we‘re not allowed to advise or make any adjustments to that biting point between when the car’s on the grid preparing for the start of the race and when the driver actually does it so the parade lap start and the real start is done all by the driver and if he thinks it’s not closed enough or too open, he has to make his own judgement about that and make the calls. We can be sitting in the garage going ‘no, don’t do that’  but we don’t have any power to stop him.

    Q: (Mike Doodson – Grand Prix Week) I understand what you say but you could, from the pits, via telemetry, actually adjust the clutch? You could, or you couldn’t?

    JA: No, we can’t. All we can do is instruct the driver to change a map that he himself has to do with his fingers but we can judge what he should do. Now we can’t say anything. We can still judge but all we can do is go ‘no!’ or ‘hooray!’

    Q: (Joe van Burik – NU.NL) Paul, Renault Sport have indicated that they worked through the summer break to keep developing the power units. They say that they conducted some notable performance work and also concepts for next year, pleased with the results. How were you involved in the development as a client and do you expect a notable increase in the overall performance when the upgrades arrive for Russia, as Christian Horner stated before?

    PM: As a client, our involvement is in several stages. Clearly we will make a judgement on the relative performance of the car and power unit package. Then we try to separate the power unit from the chassis side of things if you like, to try and offer to – in this instance Renault – to say OK, that’s where we think you sit in relative terms. That sort of sets your targets, if you like, relative to how we perceive the best power unit. They will always push to get as much out of their power unit as they possibly can and it sets a target for that year, the following year and try to give them a relative positioning. If the changes are internal, it’s very much the business of Renault. If the changes again become more external, which can affect our packaging, then clearly we have to be involved. What they may want to do may not fit the car or may require changes to the car and that’s up to us to agree with them on an introduction and how we’re going to do it. So, if that’s making sense, it becomes a multi-phase project. We can get involved, we’re not necessarily involved, we look forward to whatever power increase is coming in the future and hope to exploit it as best we can with Renault.

    Q: (Heikki Kulta – Turun Sanomat) James, how close are the driving styles of Sebastian and Kimi compared to how it was last year with Fernando and Kimi, and if they are closer, is it a big advantage for the designer of the car?

    JA: They are certainly closer. I think what Sebastian wants from a car is pretty similar to what Kimi wants and that’s mildly helpful but it really doesn’t make much difference in the way that you set about designing the car. You’re looking for downforce, they both like that. You’re looking for power, they both like that. If one likes a front ride height or a spring stiffness a bit different to another, well there’s very… you’ve got a whole range of springs and dampers that you can fit to either car. It’s only flavours of set-up that change, not fundamental design parameters of the car and that would be true whether it was Kimi, Fernando or Sebastian.

    Q: (Pierre van Vliet – F1i) Nick, you told us a couple of times that the Lotus team is not for sale. Is that still the case and if not, how does it influence your planning for 2016 and maybe even 2017?

    NC: OK, but I’m not sure that I actually told you that but there’s a lot of press about discussions that are on-going. They’re not really at my level so I can’t really give you a lot of information about it.

  • Force India’s 2014 VJM07

    Force India’s 2014 VJM07

    Sahara Force India were the first to unveil their new 2014 contender the VJM07, as the team released an image of the car on Wednesday morning.

    The team said on their website that “paint schemes are the skins and souls of Formula One cars” and they’ve worked hard to maintain a distinctive look but have brought a fresh “aggressive” look to the grid this year introducing black alongside the traditional colours of saffron, white and green.

    Vijay Mallya is very pleased with the new look VJM07 saying, “The VJM07 looks stunning and the new livery reflects the way Sahara Force India is evolving. I’ve always believed our cars have been the most eye-catching, but adding black as a main colour gives us a fierce new look.”

    A number of new commercial partners have been introduced including telecommunications brand, Claro, signalling the start of a multi-year deal with the team. Their logo is displayed on the engine cover and there will be prominent Claro branding on the drivers’ race suits and kit.

    Other new sponsor branding on the VJM07 include lubricant oils specialists, Roshfrans who have also inked a multi-year partnership with the team and Astana, a foundation supporting sporting and promoting the capital city of Kazakhstan.

    Mallya went on to explain, ““It’s been a busy winter for us on the technical and commercial front. “When I founded the team my first ambition was to launch the first Indian team on the grid, but the next stage in our evolution is to develop a global brand. I think that ambition is reflected in the partners we are working with and our world class driver line-up. It certainly feels as though there is the potential for 2014 to be our strongest season yet.”

    The team said on their website, “As we enter our seventh season, this new fresh, dynamic look signals the team’s renewed ambition – the next step in our shareholders’ bold vision. Having achieved the objective to have an Indian team on the grid and having signed world-class drivers, our sights now turn towards the next target.

    Sahara Force India’s contemporary new look heralds the evolution into a global brand, supported by passionate fans the world over, ready to pounce on the higher echelons of the grid.”

    There are also a number of technical improvements and changes to the VJM07. “The new rules have presented us with a huge challenge, but I’m very proud of the approach we have taken and the direction of the technical team,” said Mallya. “It will be fascinating to see how different teams have interpreted the rules and at this stage it’s impossible to predict who has done the best job.”

    Technical Director, Andrew Green, explained just how different the VJM07 is compared to the VJM06, “Almost every single part is a new design, from the front wing right back to the diffuser. The genetics of the VJM07 still lie in the 2013 car, but we’ve had to achieve the same results in a slightly different way.”

    Green said that accommodating the power unit was the biggest challenge for the team, “It’s been a massive job to accommodate all the changes to the power unit – it’s the biggest change I’ve witnessed in the sport since I started in 1990. Cooling has been the biggest challenge with most of last summer taken up trying to understand the cooling requirements of the power unit, and how best to optimise it in the chassis.”