22 October: The Friday
press conference for the 2004 Brazilian Grand Prix was dominated by the
announcement of the FIA regarding the 2005/2006 Formula 1 Regulations.
Technical directors from Ferrari (Ross Brawn), Toyota (Mike
Gascoyne), BMW Williams (Sam Michael) and Renault (Pat Symonds)
spoke to the media about these new regulations as well as the prospect of a
third team car.
Guest questioner: James Allen (ITV)
Q: Obviously today has been dominated by the rule package for ‘05/’06
- package two confirmed, no great surprise, but confirmation of two race
engines for next year, and 2.4 litre V8s from 2006. Just a reaction from each
of you to that please, starting with Mike. MIKE GASCOYNE: Well, I think first and foremost relief that we’ve
actually got some regulations and from the chassis side, pretty much what we
expected obviously, and what we’ve been working to. So relief on that side.
Toyota have always supported the 2.4 litre V8 and the two race engine for next
year, so that’s not a problem for us. The only thing where our stance is at
odds to what’s happened is that Toyota wanted freedom in the engine
regulations and freedom to put technology in the engines, which is one of the
reasons that Toyota came into Formula One. So we’re disappointed, but
overall it’s pretty much what we expected and, as I say, just a feeling of
relief that we can get on with it and design and finalise the design of the
cars. PAT SYMONDS: Very similar comments to Mike. The rules are really
exactly as we expected, there are no surprises in that. We also have
supported, in general, these changes, certainly accept that something needed
to be done on the engine side to reduce performance. I think it was a good
thing, at the same time, to maybe look at a few cost–saving options and
those have been incorporated so all in all, a package that we’re quite happy
with. SAM MICHAEL: Same for us, nothing was really a surprise in there
because it was all basically formulated in the last three or four TWG
(Technical Working Group) meetings anyway. I think everyone’s been working
to the new bodywork and aero regulations for next year, but as the guys have
said, it’s very important to make sure it’s on a bit paper that says that’s
what’s happening for next year. Same thing with the tyres, there’s no
surprises there and also the engine, all of that was nothing new to us so it’s
good for next year. ROSS BRAWN: I think in common with the other guys we recognise that
periodically you need to slow the cars down. We all work very hard to make
them as quick as we can but then you start run out of space on the circuits,
so it’s necessary, periodically, to slow the cars and I think they are a
sensible set of regulations to begin that process. I think we’ve got 2008
coming up which will be a blank sheet of paper for Formula One. I think we
need to really think about what we want in Formula One from 2008 onwards.
There’s no constraint of a Concorde Agreement at that stage, at least not to
the present understanding. I think vis-à-vis the technology of the engine. We
were totally supportive, we believe it will reduce costs, and I believe there
has been an imbalance in the regulations, the technical regulations consists
of 40 pages of which one page was about the engines. The other 39 were about
the car. That doesn’t seem sensible. The constraints we place on the car, I
think we are now starting to place some constraints on the engine, but there
will still be plenty of potential for people to create discriminating
technology between the cars and engines.
Q: One set of tyres for the weekend, does that mean more testing,
because presumably to evaluate a set of tyres that’s going to do three or
four hundred kilometres you’ve actually got to do three or four hundred
kilometres to understand what they’ll do. So does that mean you’re going
to be out running a lot more often? RB: I think there will be a lot more predictive techniques developed to
avoid that because I don’t think it’s practical to be out testing every
set of tyres for three or four hundred kilometres. I think the teams and tyre
suppliers will develop techniques whereby after a short period you can make an
initial assessment and then when you’re down to the – let’s say – a
short list of candidates you may well do long runs on them, but I don’t
think it is necessary for us to do that sort of mileage on every set of test
tyres.
Q: So much for Bridgestone, what about the Michelin contingent? Do
you share that view? SM: I think it’s the same. It’s pretty difficult to do much more
testing than we do at the moment. It will have to involve either testing those
compounds, or doing less long runs on those compounds or using predictive
techniques which has just been mentioned.
Q: This morning in the team principals meeting three car teams were
mentioned again, running a third car was mentioned again. Is this becoming
closer to becoming a reality and if so how will you approach that?
PS: I believe it is becoming closer to reality but like all things, it’s
is a binary decision, it either happens or it doesn’t and you don’t know
until the last minute. It shouldn’t be underestimated, the difficulty of
running a third car. Of course, we have some experience of it from operating
under the Heathrow agreement last year. It’s surprising how it ramps things
up. It is pretty difficult to co-ordinate and control two cars at times, and
three cars is that much more difficult. It involves quite a lot of expense for
us, the obvious ones of building the extra parts and things but even the
number of personnel you need at the circuit, the number of people you need
backing up at the factory. Just simple things like modifications to trucks and
what have you, it’s an expensive exercise and what’s perhaps a little bit
unfortunate is that the way things look at the moment there’s a high
possibility of running three cars in 2005 and perhaps a low possibility in
2006, so there’s an awful lot of work there for one year.
MG: We obviously ran three cars today. When it is just one day and you are
not racing that car you can plan for it. It still involves extra effort and
extra expense. We have extra people here to be able to do that and we would
have to increase that were we to do it so that we were racing that car. So I
don’t think it should be underestimated. Like most things in this business,
it’s do-able, we could do it, but that doesn’t necessarily mean to say
that we would want to do it under ideal circumstances.
Q: Sam, the CRB (Contract Recognition Board) obviously went in BAR’s
favour so you’re looking for a driver in 2005. Is it a risk, do you think,
to put Antonio Pizzonia alongside Webber given their history and antipathy
between them?
SM: I don’t think there’s an issue at all, to be honest. The main
thing is, the first thing we consider when we look at a race driver is, is he
quick enough and Antonio’s definitely in that category. He’s obviously one
of the candidates on the list and someone who we will make a decision on in
due course.
Q: Going back to the engines rules, you were saying that you were in
favour of two race engines and none of this is a surprise but BMW… SM: I didn’t say I was in favour of them, I just said it wasn’t a
surprise. Q: But you did vote for two race engines in one of the TWG meetings,
didn’t you? SM: No. Q: But BMW are saying that they are going to take some time to consider
this. What’s your view on how angry they are about it? SM: It is something that is playing on and something that I’m sure
will be going on in the background and in due course we will see what happens
with it. It’s not something that I’m really in a position to comment
strongly on at the moment.
Q: Can you give us a summing up of your 2004 season? Obviously,
given where you were last year, you were expected to win the championship or
at least challenge for the championship this season. Why were you not able to
and where do you go from here? SM: Well obviously, yeah, you’re right. We came off the end of last
year and we made a lot of poor decisions on the car, particularly aero and
mechanical decisions early on in the design stage, and it took us all year to
correct half of those and there’s probably two or three things on the car
that we can’t change until next year, but obviously it’s been a
disappointing year, but at the end of the day it doesn’t mean you give up on
this year or at least try and correct things for 2005. So we’re busy putting
as much effort, like everyone else, into next year to try and return to return
to fighting at the front but yeah, it has been disappointing but you keep
moving on.
Q: And your analysis to today’s running? How are you
looking? SM: Still a bit early to tell at the moment because obviously on Friday
you don’t know what condition tyres people are running and what fuel loads
they are running but a fairly normal Friday. We’ll see what happens
tomorrow.
Q: Mike, two different drivers finishing the season, compared to the
two that started. What does that say about Toyota’s year?
MG: Obviously we’ve had a difficult and frustrating year. We haven’t
had the results that we wanted at the start of the year. I joined last
December and I think our level of performance didn’t come as a great
surprise to me. We knew what we had to do to improve the team and a lot of
that has involved work back in Cologne in the factory, in the way that we work
there and that’s inevitably going to take time. It’s a process I’ve done
before and I have to say I’m very comfortable with where we are. But we
still have to do the best we could this year and obviously we haven’t had
results we wanted. In terms of drivers, certainly the last change, with Jarno
becoming available, given that he was going to be a driver for us next year,
wasn’t something that we expected and the ability to have him in the team is
something that is very useful to us. Obviously very direct feedback from some
of our competitors who are obviously much more competitive than we are and
that’s obviously very useful feedback. It’s been a season of change for us
and with the drivers that’s reflected that, but we have to make the
decisions to make sure we get set up to be in the best position at the start
of next year because one thing’s for sure, if this season’s been
disappointing, next year can’t be.
Q: You’ve had a year, as you say to get your feet under the table,
you’ve got two top drivers for next year, when will Toyota start to deliver,
do you think? MG: Well it has to start delivering from the start of next year. There’s
absolutely no doubt about that and I’m very confident we’re in a position
to do that. You can’t make the step to the top in one step. It’s far too
difficult to do that, and the teams you are racing against are far too good to
allow that to happen but I’m very confident we will make a significant step
forward.
Q: What about today’s running? Jarno seemed to be pretty
consistent on the long runs. Are you reasonably happy with where you
are? MG: Yeah, I think all the drivers did a good job today and Jarno, in
particular, has added a lot to the team and he’s very happy with the car.
Obviously it was a difficult first race for him in Suzuka with no running
before raceday but he still did a good job and he’s confident and happy with
the team and it’s definitely lifted the whole team.
Q: Pat, you’ve moved forward, at least, one place in the World
Championship, probably just the one place. You’ve won a Grand Prix, you’ve
had pole, you’ve had a few podiums and yet there’s a slight feeling of
disappointment about Renault’s season. Do you look at it that way or are you
quite pleased with 2004?
PS: I’ll always be disappointed if we haven’t won the championship,
that’s what we do it for. It’s right but there seems to be a lot of
perception that we haven’t had a good year but of course, we have. As you
say, we’ve won a race, been on the podium, we’ve moved up, not just one
place in the championship but actually a lot closer on points. It hasn’t
been an unsuccessful season. I think within Renault one of the things I like
about our team is we are very self-critical. We don’t try and hide our
feelings from the public and the press. A lot of things haven’t met our
expectations this year but that just makes us try harder. It certainly hasn’t
been an unsuccessful year and I think any team that finishes third in the
championship, and let’s remember it’s not quite over yet, should be proud
of it.
Q: Your car number seven hasn’t scored any points since France,
seven races ago. For team of your calibre, your level, that can’t be allowed
to happen. In retrospect is that a big error, allowing that to happen?
PS: We didn’t allow it to happen, we certainly didn’t intend it to
happen. There are several things this year and I certainly would say it is a
year of missed opportunities. There were races - Canada, Indianapolis, Spa –
races where we could have had an extremely good result. In Canada, I think we
were really in with a shout of winning that one and right up there in the
other two. Reliability in a couple of cases and an accident in one let us
down. Yes, it is true that one of the cars really hasn’t had a very great
second half to the season. You say why do you let that happen; you don’t let
that happen. You are trying as hard as you can to get both cars up there all
the time.
Q: What’s your analysis of Jacques performance in his two races so
far. Obviously he was caught out by the extraordinary circumstances in Suzuka,
but over the two races, what’s your analysis?
PS: Well, I think that…I guess I didn’t know Jacques particularly well
before he came to drive for us. I’d spoken to him a few times and you may
remember a few years ago he was quite high on the list of possible Renault
drivers, so that time we were speaking quite a lot. Certainly the perception,
I think, largely through the press is that he is very laid back and a little
bit undisciplined and I’ve found that to be completely untrue. The guy works
very hard and I always respect people who do work hard. It has been difficult
for him and the first tests that we did at Silverstone, he was taking a while
to get into things and it sort of woke me up a little bit when he said well,
OK, that’s not a great time, but it is nearly two seconds quicker than I’ve
ever gone round here before. And when you think that was only a year ago, that’s
a measure of the progress that’s been made. Some of the things I think he’s
found quite hard. Physically he has found it hard because no matter how much
training you do, there’s nothing like driving a racing car. He has had to
get used to different tyre characteristics which I think he’s probably now
got used to. We sent him down to Jerez last week to do a bit more work with
that and today we have seen a pretty good performance from him. So it’s been
hard for him but I think he’s a guy with quite a lot of ability.
Q: Talking to your drivers throughout the season, the mantra has
been ‘it’s a tricky car to drive.’ Is making the ’05 car a less tricky
car to drive a big priority for you? PS: No, the big priority is to make it quicker. It is true that our
2004 car is more difficult to drive than the 2003 car, but equally it’s
quicker and if I went to Fernando and said ‘what do you want, an easy car to
drive or a quick car?’ I think I would know the answer.
Q: Ross, I believe you ran a 2005 car spec car recently, what was
the feedback from the drivers and what did you learn from it? RB: It is not strictly a 2005 car, it’s a car which we have modified
to achieve the performance levels which we think we will have in 2005. It
wouldn’t comply to the 2005 regulations but it’s a sort of muletto of bits
and pieces that put it at the performance level. I think we got exactly what
you expect when you reduce the downforce by 15-20 percent: less grip, more
tricky to drive initially, so for the first day, the drivers were finding it a
little bit of a handful but once they readjusted their reference point, then
it was fine. The reason for doing it is to have some meaningful development on
tyres and engine management and things like that. It’s been very useful in
that respect. I think the tyres are at a very early stage. We don’t have a
tyre yet which can do a complete race. It would be pointless to try and
develop a one race tyre with the car we have now. We need to develop a one
race tyre with the car we think we will have next year.
Q: You said your car has 15 percent less downforce. What sort of
amount lost would you be happy with by the time you get to Melbourne? How much
of that do you expect to have clawed back, percentage wise? RB: Well that’s where we would hope to be. When we put a 2005 package
on the wind tunnel model we lost nearly 30 percent. We’re gradually getting
that back. We would be pleased if we get to 15 percent less than where we are
now.
Q: Can I just ask you the rest of you if that’s the target you’ve
got? PS: Well I think if Ross’ target is 15 percent we will go for
10. SM: Yeah, we’re the same. We lost almost exactly the same. How much
we get back is the big question. It’s obviously a long way away, but then so
is Melbourne, but at the moment, because of the changes to the bodywork,
particularly the diffusers, there are fundamental restrictions on how much
expansion you can get, so no matter how much you work away with it, it will be
never be anywhere near what you had before. MG: If Ross’s if 15 and Pat’s ten, I’ve got to go for zero.
Obviously we’re all doing the work and pushing very hard. It a very key
area, it’s an area where we have been doing a lot of development because it’s
where Toyota have been behind and so it’s the key area of development on the
chassis for next year.
Q: Back to Ross again, you’ve ticked just about every box there is
to be ticked this year. Rubens said yesterday he doesn’t expect any presents
in going out to try and win his home Grand Prix but it would complete the
picture for a totally dominant 2004. How are you going to do it, what’s
going to happen? RB: There is obviously a lot of people trying to stop us doing it, so I
think it’s going to be a challenging weekend. We are very pleased with the
car and tyre performance today. We started the session a little bit out of
shape, the car was a bit tricky to begin with but the engineers and drivers
dialled it in pretty quickly and when track cleaned up a bit the whole thing
was working well and we had some very encouraging runs in the second session
with fuel and race tyres. But it looks like Rubens and Michael are going to be
very close this weekend. Rubens is very determined to correct his record in
Brazil, it would be fantastic if you could. But Michael’s determined to stop
him and I would be disappointed if he wasn’t. There is no team orders and
they are free to race so it’s going to be a fascinating weekend.
Q: You mentioned team orders, when the championship’s still open,
I think I’ve right in saying your policy is to let them race up until the
final pit stops and then to hold stage. As it’s the last race and the
championship is already wrapped up, are they racing to the flag on
Sunday? RB: Well, the only reason we apply any management is to preserve the
cars. We have a good finishing record and that doesn’t come by accident. We
don’t want the drivers abusing the cars any more than they have to. It is
important that they finish the race, so I don’t think we will change our
policy because it’s the last race. But they are free to race and there’s
plenty of potential.
