Q & A SESSION WITH

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Perhaps it's worth saying the geniuses come

after me.

DAVID CROFT: Well, I thought I'd give you the option to be a genius

or not. Thanks for joining us. This is the first time we've

heard from you this morning, so we ought to start with the

car; what do you think?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Well, it's already been commented on, it looks

beautiful. I should probably pull these chairs away, stop

hiding it, but -- no, it looks beautiful at the moment, but cars

really do look beautiful if they win races. And, you know,

the beauty is more than skin deep. I think there's

tremendous engineering underneath. A lot of thought has

gone into this car and, really, refinement. I'm sure it will

look different when it gets to Australia. That's the nature

offer Formula 1 these days, we're constantly evolving the

product, but I think it's nice, when you're going to have to

stand around a car for quite a long period of your life during

a year, if it looks good at the outset that helps us.

DAVID CROFT: Lewis and Jenson said there's only one goal at the

start of the season; is that your goal as well, to win

a championship?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Well, yeah, I'm sure it's no surprise to

everyone here that our goal is to win two world

championships this year. That's what we exist to do.

That's what we try to do every year. We don't always

succeed. It's a very challenging, competitive series and -- but, you know, we are there or thereabouts. We don't like losing. Coming second the last two years has had it's frustrations. You know, we're proud of some great moments and some create victories in those years but ultimately we want to win and we want to win world championships.

So, you know, we're very fortunate. We've got two great racing drivers, who are -- they're good on the stage here as well but they're also good in the car, they're good on the track. They're fearsome competitors. I mean they have -- I think anyone can detect the chemistry, they have a great relationship, but they want to beat each other very badly, but in a very positive way. And I think that spurs them on, it spurs the team on.

They talked about the genius that we have and -- the genii that we have in the team. Then we're very fortunate, we've got a very strong team. Some of them will be on the stage later and they can talk to you in a more informed way about the car, but I think it's important that -- that they work, as they have said, with the drivers. It's important we listen to them, it's important they listen to us as well, but I think, you know, it's important as a team that we all listen to one another. We all have views and opinions; some of the team members are better informed than others; but I think we've all got the passion, the desire to win, and I think that,

you know, that comes across for anyone, I think, who

spends team in this organisation. You know, we expect to

win, we have that burning passion to do so. And we know

that that's a combination of brilliant team work, great

people, inspiration, hard work, dedication, discipline,

attention to detail, all those things which are very much

part of McLaren DNA, that's what you need to win in

Formula 1 today.

So, you know, there's some very strong competitors out

there but I think we're feeling at the moment that we're in

a good place. We know there's a long season ahead of us,

we're looking forward to getting testing, developing the car

and getting to that first race and campaigning for

championships.

DAVID CROFT: Just before we open up questions to the floor once

again, Martin, on the subject of this season: six world

champions, for the first time ever; new race in North

America; DRS and KERS hybrid; evolutions of those.

What are your thoughts about the season in general? How

close do you expect it to be?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: It will be close. It's a massively competitive

championship these days. There's no doubt about that.

No one, in my view, is going to run away with this victory,

not us, not anyone else.

I think six champions is great for the sport. I think -- we

look at the last two world championships, we've come

second in both of them, but they've been great

championships, they've been exiting. I think development

of the DRS that you mentioned, KERS. In fairness, Pirelli

contributed a lot to the spectacle.

So for a few years I think people were a little bit worried

about -- you know, they recognised Formula 1 was the

pinnacle of motor sport, it was the most technically

advanced, the best drivers in the world, the best teams, but

they were a little bit concerned about the spectacle and the

show, but I think the last two seasons have been, you

know, full of drama, fantastic overtaking, great races, you

know, and just a great television spectacle.

So we can always make it better. The sport sometimes is

a little bit inward looking, a little bit introvert. It doesn't

always do the best job of promoting itself. We have

perhaps too much cynicism in our sport because it truly

is -- you know, there are -- Formula 1 and soccer are the

only true world sports. They're the only two. And we can

make this sport a lot bigger and a lot better. And it's

sometimes a challenge for teams to work together, as we

know, because we're trying to compete, we're trying to beat

each other on a Sunday afternoon, but we're learning

slowly, not always as quickly as any of us would like, but

I think we're in for an exiting season.

DAVID CROFT: Certainly keep our fingers crossed that that will be the

case. Let's take some questions from the floor, please.

This man with his hand up straight away, there?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Mike Dinson(?).

Last year I asked Ron about engines and he sort of

discounted the possibility of you building your own engine,

but you are a company that aspires to be the same as your

Italian rival, I presume in the long-term building

a Formula 1 engine is in your plans but have you for the

time being put that on one side? What is the possibility of

McLaren building their own engine?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Okay, well, firstly, we've got a great partner;

we've been 18 years in partnership with Mercedes-Benz.

They make probably the best engine in Formula 1, so the

motivation to change is very limited. We enjoy that

partnership and we intend to continue for a number of

years. But I think ultimately Formula 1 is a very, very

powerful environment to promote an automotive brand, to

get brand exposure and brand differentiation. We have no

plans, so it doesn't feature in the short-term, medium-term

or long-term, to manufacture our own engines.

You know, I think we're not trying to be a facsimile of

Ferrari. I think we've got great respect for and what

they've achieved but I think we've got to do it our way. And

a feature of McLaren is that we've had long-term

successful partnerships. You know, we've got partnerships

on here in excess of 30 years, 27 years. We're very proud

of the relationship with Mercedes-Benz. We think we bring

value to their brand, we give them good exposure and

good competition for their own team, and I think it works for

both of us and I think we'll stay like that for the foreseeable

future.

In the longer term then, as I say, we have no plans to

develop our engine. People will speculate because of our

road car programme but at the moment it makes no sense

to us.

DAVID CROFT: Next question please. Joe Saward was fractionally

ahead.

Martin, if you don't mind standing for this question -- not

because it's Joe, but for the cameras?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Martin, you were talking about

strength in depth of engineering before. This winter you've

been selected by other teams as a place to enlist a lot of

your people. How much of an impact has that had or can

you soak up that kind of loss? It's big numbers of people,

isn't it?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Not big numbers in the total sum of it but we

have lost some people. Our people are attractive to our

competitors. That's a compliment. It might be a frustration

when it happens, but it's a compliment; it means we've got

good people, what we're doing and how we work.

I think we're quieter about how we go about our

recruitment, so we do, of course, recruit very good

graduate engineers that we develop and train within our

business, but we also periodically dip into some other

teams, and I think at least one of them will be on stage

a bit later.

So, you know, I think we are selective generally. Certainly

on the engineering side we've recruited from some of our

competitors. We haven't seen the purpose in advertising

that fact, we just go about it quietly. So the fact is we have

a great engineering team. We're not -- you know, we're not

planning on failing, and we're certainly not going to fail as

a consequence of lack of depth in engineering. We've

great engineers. We've got as many as we need to get the

job done. Providing we work hard, providing we're smart,

provided we make the right decisions, we'll get the job

done this year.

DAVID CROFT: I have a question from Vodafone, but Ian Parkes

first?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Morning, Martin.

Obviously it goes without saying that we're not going to

know how good this car is until it gets out on track over the

next three tests but, compared to the wrong direction taken

at the start of the last season, is there quiet confidence

within the team that you have got it right this year?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Well, firstly, we won't really know until

Australia qualifying, you know, through the practice and

testing sessions that we have in front of us -- we'll be

embarked on a whole range of programmes, but turning to

the real point we had, by -- well, by anyone's standards,

and McLaren's standards, an abysmal winter testing

session last year, where we didn't have reliability or pace,

and I think it was really a tribute to a fantastic team, work

and everyone within the organisation to respond that, and

in fact we arrived in Australia in reasonable competitive

position, which I think surprised a lot of people. But it was

a relatively stressful process, so I'd be much happier to --

to be not fighting those sorts of issues. And I think we've

put a lot of work into this car and we don't think we're going

to have a repeat of last winter.

DAVID CROFT: I have a question, Martin, from Maxine Birmingham

from Vodafone, who asks on behalf of her 10-year old son

Piers -- I think she is probably blaming her 10-year old son

Piers for this: what feature on any of last year's F1 cars do

you wish you'd have thought of in the first place?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Well, I think the blown diffuser we were -- we

had different philosophies but ultimately the teams

converged to very similar approaches. I think we were

very good in developing that but we were -- perhaps went

down a different route so I guess this time last year it

would've been -- we would've been stronger were we to

have had what we had in Australia rather than what we had

at the start of the testing session.

Q. Thank you Piers for that question.

Any more questions from the floor? This man, if you could

stand up, at the front, so we can all see you.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: After last year and the problems

you had in testing, have you been more conservative this

year? Have you held back a bit, do you think, or have you

been able to go gung ho, like you'd like to?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: I don't believe we've been inherently

conservative. Inevitably, there are creative brains out there

that seek to find the eureka moment that is going to find

a second's worth of performance. Sadly, in Formula 1, to

some extent those eureka moments of seconds of

performance increment are very limited and, you know,

nowadays Formula 1 is about refining every single detail

part, so a one or two per cent performance differentiation

from the front to the -- almost to the back of the grid is

made up of tiny, tiny fractions of performance increments

from just about every component within the car, every

system, so -- but if you come up with something which is

performance, you're going to chase it.

I think this year I think we've been -- not cautious, but

I think the way the development has happened, I think

we're finding good performance, we've set ourselves some

tough targets that we think, if achieved, will allow us to win

the world championship. We haven't reached those

targets yet but fortunately we're not at the first race, but the

progress and trend is towards meeting those targets, so

I think we will meet the targets.

If we set the right targets, we'll start to establish when we

get to Australia, because clearly with rule changes, with all

of your competitors -- they're off our radar screen. You

know, during the year, every fortnight we have

a performance calibration, you know, "Where are we

relative to our competitors?" They're off the radar screen,

we've been flying blind now for a few months, and that's

the exciting thing. You know, you have to now set your

own targets; we've got our engineers who have to have

their own moments of inspiration, and they've got to

develop and work hard to make this car competitive.

So, you know, I think we set targets which we believed

were going to be tough. I think we will get there. We'll see

as the season progresses. Then it's not just about --

certainly, it isn't about testing, it's not just about the first

race; you have to improve the car through every single

race throughout a season to sustain a championship

campaign these days and that's something I think we're

quite good at, and I think, providing we have a good and

competitive start to the year, then there's no doubt we'll be

in there for the fight for the championship at the end.

DAVID CROFT: More questions from the floor? Dan Knutson has his

hand raised at the back. Dan, can you stand up? We can't

see you there.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Hi, Dan Knutson, Auto Action.

We're going to Austin, Texas this year. How important is it

for the fans, the sport and the sponsors to be racing in the

United States again?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: I think all the teams believe it's very important

and we've got to make a success of it this time. As we all

know, our time in America has been spasmodic and

unsuccessful. We have to treat it almost as a new market.

But actually, you know, there's a huge interest in Formula 1

that is untapped in the States. We've got to work harder.

You know, what we have to accept is, you know, America

doesn't need Formula 1; we need it more than it needs us.

So I think the onus has got to be on the teams, the

promoter, all of us, to work -- and the commercial rights

holder -- to work very hard to make sure that we educate,

we promote, we develop the interest, we reach out in

America. So we've got to work harder than, perhaps, you

know, a new Grand Prix in Europe or Asia or South

America, where, you know, there is a ready interest and

a ready uptake. We've got a real challenge.

But it's important. It's important to our commercial

partners. The States is still a rather big market for really

any multinational company. We are -- as I mentioned

earlier, there are only two world sports, soccer and

Formula 1, and, you know, for us to be a great world sport,

we've got to conquer the States.

DAVID CROFT: More questions from the floor. Another one in the far

corner there. If you could stand up, please, as well?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Hello, Kate Walker, Girl Racer.

Given what you were saying to Dan about needing to make

a special effort for in the States, what kind of plans do you

have to have tucked up your sleeves to bring McLaren, not

Formula 1, to the American fan?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: Well, again, I think the teams need to work

together. We won't create interest in McLaren Formula 1

team or Vodafone McLaren Mercedes without there being

an inherent interest in our sport, so I hope and believe

that -- we started a range of fan forums, which were very

popular, in the last 18 months, through what was originally

a photo initiative. It is our intention to continue those,

which are -- is reaching out to fans. They take a lot of time

and a lot of organisation but a lot of people turn up and the

quality of the audience has been fantastic. We did one last

year in Canada for instance.

They are things that take a lot of our time but I have never

personally -- I've been to most of them -- never come away

regretting we did it, because Formula 1 doesn't reach out

enough to the fan base and I think we've got to work

harder at that and make sure that we're seen as

accessible, as interested in their views.

You know, the teams have worked hard with fan surveys.

The DRS, which I think was a significant development, the

overtaking capability of the DRS, came as a consequence

of feedback from the fans and an effort on the part of the

teams to make the sport more attractive and meet their

needs. So I think there's a whole range of things that

we've got to do, working together as teams and

commercial rights holder and promoter to make sure that

we are successful in America this time.

DAVID CROFT: More questions, ladies and gentlemen.

Mike Doodson got his hand up first, I think. Sorry, Joe.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Last year, Martin, we saw a big

difference between the two types of tyre provided by Pirelli,

and it resulted in a rather artificial situation sometimes

when -- picking another team -- sometimes you've lost a

(inaudible) against Ferrari and then got it back again when

you moved to the other tyre. That seemed rather artificial

to me. Will the changes to the Pirelli tyres reduce that

factor this year?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: They will, but I think -- I mean -- maybe I have

a slightly different view. I think we often within the sport

view this from a very purist perception and we don't like

these artificial elements -- it's the same argument, people

don't like DRS -- and I can understand and respect that,

but I think we have to accept that, you know, we are in the

entertainment business, we have to make the show.

It -- deeply frustrating for me a few times last year, when

we were on the wrong tyre, or on the right tyre at the wrong

time, and you know it makes it more challenging for the

pitwall and for the drivers, but, you know, I think it added --

personally, I think it added to the show. But as it

happens -- we don't know yet, because we haven't tested

the Pirelli tyres, but the probability is that the gap between

them will be narrowed. So the purists will prefer it.

I wonder, though, whether it will be to the detriment of the

show.

DAVID CROFT: Joe Saward?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Martin, you said that we wouldn't

see the full car until Australia. One, is it true of all the

teams, two, are we going to see sandbagging and

grandstanding, and three, does McLaren do any

sandbagging or grandstanding?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: A series of questions there.

All the teams will develop their cars, I'm sure, so the car

that's unveiled as they pull the cloth back will not be the car

that's being used in Q1 in Australia, and that's a fact.

There will be a greater evolution in some teams than

others I would imagine.

Is there grandstanding and sandbagging? Yes. Do all of

the teams do it? To varying degrees. We don't go out of

our way to grandstand, we've got a long-term serious

programme. I know, you know, inevitably we see it every

year, a team that may be on the point of a new

sponsorship deal that appears to be very quick in some

tests and then suddenly doesn't look quite so quick when it

gets to the first race.

It is so easy. The weight sensitivity, as I think most of you

know, of Formula 1 cars, you can make a car artificially

a second or two quicker if you need to. We don't do any of

that. We could be accused of sandbagging in that we try to

hold back a little bit, but again, not as a real conscious --

we don't try and be too clever on ourselves.

I think really testing for us is data gathering, it's allowing

our engineers to start to work with the drivers, understand

the car, feed back information here so that we can do

a better job of developing the car in the future, and allow

the driver and the race engineers to be in a position that

they can optimise it at the right time, which isn't during the

winter tests, it's when we get to Q1 in Australia.

DAVID CROFT: We have time for one more question, if there is one

more question, and that falls to you, sir, in the middle there.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Martin, what means FOTA

without Red Bull and Ferrari?

MARTIN WHITMARSH: What is FOTA. Well I think, again as

I mentioned earlier, I think it's important, regardless of the

name tag of FOTA, that the teams continue to work

together. We are seeing that the teams, all of them,

including Ferrari and Red Bull, are still participating in the

testing agreement, they've signed the same contracts with

the circuits to go testing, so I don't -- I'm not too hung up on

the brand FOTA. I think what's important is that, you know,

the teams realise there are critical times, there are critical

issues within this sport where it will be better if we

co-operate, take sensible decisions, and I hope and

believe that we'll continue to do that.

It's always difficult because, you know, competitive teams

like to score points against another, and they may have

their own commercial interests and motivations, but I think

overall we've got a responsibility in this sport, it's a great

sport, that we work together to make it better.

DAVID CROFT: Martin, thank you very much indeed for joining us this

morning.

Vodafone McLaren Mercedes team principal,

Martin Whitmarsh. (Clapping)

Well, we've heard now from the team principal on his

thoughts on the season ahead. Shortly technical director

Paddy Lowe and director of engineering will join

us to take your questions on all technical matters.

But first we have a few minutes to focus on all matters

sporting, so if I could please invite , the

managing director of McLaren Racing, and ,

the sporting director, to our stage please.

Q & A SESSION WITH JONATHAN NEALE AND SAM MICHAEL

(11.54 am)

DAVID CROFT: Thank you very much for joining us. Jonathan, it

must be great to get out and see some daylight, I'm sure.

You've probably be bunkered down here at the McLaren

Technology Centre since, what, the end of the final race in

Brazil last year?

JONATHAN NEALE: It certainly feels that way listening to Lewis and

Jenson talk about how their winters were, and I was

looking at my colleagues here thinking that that feels very

different to the winter we've just been through. And I think

a short winter for us as well, for all Formula 1 teams. We

lost a month in an extended season now where normally

we'd finish work at the end of October and then start on the

engineering programme, we suddenly find ourselves

a month short, the same kind of complexity, the same pace

to win, and a very short testing period.

Testing time is precious, and Martin spoke there about

what happens around sandbagging or grandstanding. It

would be lovely to be in a situation where you have

a second's worth of advantage over everybody else and

you're having to would rein it back. But the reality of the

situation is that we have so much to work to do in such

a short period of time that our mind is on getting the job

done and we'll see what happens in Australia.

DAVID CROFT: You of course have worked very closely not just with

the employees here at the McLaren Technology Centre,

but with the team's partners as well. Vodafone is not only

the team's title partner but also the official Total

communications partner as well. So what does that

actually mean in practical terms?

JONATHAN NEALE: I think for all of our partners -- I mean, the car

behind me is sporting some pretty powerful technical organisations, Vodafone being of course the title partner and a very important one.

We run an organisation with huge global reach and a very competitive product in a world class sport but we're still a relatively small organisation, I have 500 people or so just along the corridor here. To compete with the likes of a driven organisation like Vodafone, with that scale and reach in communications and network, it would just be nigh on impossible. The same is true for Exxon Mobil and

Mercedes-Benz. So we have to be very adept at making sure that we are looking very closely at their research and development programmes and making sure we get what we need from those programmes.

Vodafone, like all of our partners, are a very demanding organisation, very driven in their own right, very high levels of innovation, and their business, like ours, depends on rock solid execution. So from a values point of view we're very closely aligned.

I think as well that they kind of dragged us into the light in the last six years, and I hope most of the people in the room here, certainly from talking to the media in the last twelve months, would recognise a McLaren that is more open and more approachable in the last few years.

Perhaps more inclined to reveal some of the machinery that's going on behind the scenes, and occasionally

inclined to laugh at ourselves as well. I think the virals that

have gone out have had huge reach and probably touched

a much wider audience than we would otherwise have got

to.

Sitting beneath that of course there's the platform of

technology itself. The McLaren Technology Centre runs on

communications that keep us connected in whichever

business we're in around the globe with the Vodafone 1

network. They're helping us make sure that our secure

data, and there's gigabytes of data flying across the globe

through some difficult places to reach, whether we're going

to new territories or whether we're just bringing data back

from favourites like Brazil, then they're there for advice and

security and distribution of that data.

Then at a forensic level, if you like, around the circuits, on

the point-to-point stuff, they're always very involved there.

So right from the cultural piece through to ground level

technology they're actively involved.

DAVID CROFT: Fantastic. I haven't seen all the buttons on the

steering wheel but can we tweet from it yet?

JONATHAN NEALE: I'm sure Lewis can.

DAVID CROFT: Sam, three months since you joined Vodafone

McLaren Mercedes as the sporting director. What struck

you most about your new workplace?

SAM MICHAEL: That's right, it is three months. Good morning to

everyone, it's a pleasure to be here. I'm really proud to be

working for McLaren even though I've not been here long.

I think it is a big family, a lot of the people here they take a lot of care of relationships, obviously externally but also internally as well, and it makes quite a big difference when you're operating in a high pressure environment, and it's much more than what I expected it to be and it helps you perform.

But one of the drivers used a buzz word and I thought -- or the synergy of this place is strength and depth, and its a word that's used quite a lot, and I thought, when he said it, what does that actually mean to everyone who's listening today? Having just started in this company I do have the benefit of being able to observe what that is.

From an engineering point of view and the sporting side, and in terms of the racing team and the people here, the one thing that really strikes you when you come into this organisation is the academic level within the engineering group. It is phenomenal, and it's not just -- it's not just the leaders, it's not just the technical director and the engineering director, it's all the people that work below them, and it is the biggest strength of this company.

One of the questions that came from the floor before to

Martin was about staff leaving to other teams, and Martin is correct, there's equally as many people have come into

McLaren from those top teams in the last twelve months but it's not advertised. But I think even more important

than that, this strength and depth is not something that you

buy off the shop floor, it's not like if you're missing a 7

poster rig or a CFD computer or a wind tunnel, you can get

your cheque book out and buy it and catch up, it's

something that's instilled in this company over many years

by the leaders of this company, and you can't invent it, it's

something that's ingrained in the company.

Even being here after three months I can see that already,

and it's really rewarding working around it and getting to

know the system. I'm still literally on a curve like this. You

don't know a company within three months, I think it takes

you a good year or so to -- and I haven't, although I did two

races at the end of last year it was in a sort

of observational capacity so I'm looking forward to

Melbourne.

Everything so far has been really positive, that's what

I think strength and depth here is.

JONATHAN NEALE: Glad to hear it. I'm sure we've got a few

questions from the floor for either Jonathan or Sam so put

your hands up, ladies and gentlemen.

Ian Parkes, first off the blocks?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Sam, good morning. Towards

the end of your stint at Williams you looked like a man

under considerable pressure in your role as technical

director, as if everything was on your shoulders to try and

get things right there. How much easier have you felt it

coming into this role with, as you just explained, that

strength and depth around you?

SAM MICHAEL: I think, just to say quickly, obviously Williams is

a fantastic team with a lot of heritage and I wish them all

the best for this year. I'm sure they will return to where

they're meant to be.

I think, continuing what I was saying before, a lot of the

people, the engineers here I knew from previous

relationship as well, either within technical working groups

or in the pit lane, so I had quite a good knowledge of who

the people were, not working with them but what their

personalities were like. So it has been really refreshing to

work with them and it's been really encouraging, I've really

enjoyed it.

I know the drivers a little bit as well, the two race drivers

who we've got. Jenson obviously used to drive for

Williams many years ago before I was there but I had a lot

of dealings with him, and Lewis I've known as well through

just contact in the pit lane. But no, its been really good.

DAVID CROFT: Next question, ladies and gentlemen.

Dan Knutson, and then we'll come to the front, and then

we'll com to Joe. So Dan at the back first.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Just to expand on that, tell us

what you've been doing for these three months, what are

your duties, and daily, weekly what do you do here?

SAM MICHAEL: I work within the senior management group. My main

focus within that group is track side, so sorting out the race

team, and when I say sorting out, it's already a very

defined machine. But McLaren is all about making things

better than what everyone else is, and not using existing

standards as a benchmark but trying to create new ones.

That can involve anything from car quality, operational

reliability, the structure of the race team. I work very

closely with the team manager and all the people that work

for him.

It's early days and, as I said, I came in at the end of last

year and a lot of, 90 per cent of the car was already

designed but there's a lot of things structurally around the

race team in the way it operates that it can still have a big

effect on. And there's different aspects to the way we go

racing, and I've had quite a good involvement for the start

of the season.

DAVID CROFT: Joe second but this man first.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Craig Scarborough.

Question for you, Sam. Obviously you've come from

a much broader role at Williams, now in the sporting role

that you've just described. Do you find you are naturally

much more drawn into the design side? Is that more of a

help or a hindrance from your background?

SAM MICHAEL: I think from -- first of all, all of the engineers here that

I've integrated with, I don't think there's been any example

at all of anyone who is not receptive to an idea or open to

input. It's been really, really great, there's not been any --

so you're always coming and giving them a different

perspective on things, you may not be exactly correct in

what you're saying about something. That could be

anything from the process that we employ to do our pit

stops, our build quality systems, or even the design on the

car.

So I think from that point of view it's another strength of the

company, really, in that people have been trained and

brought up in an environment that is very open, and make

sure that you don't have any arrogance at all so that you

don't think an idea could be better.

As I said it may not be, even with my background, it may

not be the exact idea you're talking about but that may

stimulate something else, another route.

DAVID CROFT: Joe Saward first.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Jonathan, I asked Martin a little

while ago about staff losses and the effect they have.

Closer to the work face, if you like, do you feel that more

than he does maybe up in the management offices?

JONATHAN NEALE: I think to put that in perspective, most

engineering organisations, and you could check with

colleagues here, will have a turnover rate of somewhere

between 10-12 per cent I think is industrial norm. Here for

the last certainly ten years the turnover in engineering is

around about 5 per cent, so it's never good to lose key

people, and there are some eye-watering salaries being

paid by teams who would dearly love to have some

talented people from here.

So as Martin said, in one sense it's of no surprise that

people will come and have a look at our talented people.

But we do have a good system of development of young

engineers and diverse talent. There are in excess of 200

engineers, mathematicians and scientists here, 23 different

nationalities. And just by the law of averages, even if my

colleagues might help a few, then statistically we are going

to lose 12 a year, and on that basis we're gonna find that

that's newsworthy for some people.

As I say, the reciprocal part of that is of course it's

interesting to have new people come into your organisation

who will benefit enormously from having the experience of

Sam in here, as we have with some of the engineers we've

taken from other teams. But there's not a skills bleed or a

concern at that level but it's -- I'm happy with it.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: More or less it was the same

question, but are you surprised that many engineers have

left McLaren to go to Italy?

JONATHAN NEALE: Not when you walk down the organisation and

you hear the Latin quarter of our organisation, no. We

have some great Spanish people, some great Italian

people. I think most of the structures department is Italian,

I'm not quite sure why that is. Aerodynamicists have come

from Ferrari, from Renault, from Sauber. It's all part of the

club.

But what's really important to say as well is that of the

recruitment that we've done in the last two years, a good

50 per cent of that has been from outside Formula 1, and I

think we've got some heavyweights in the organisation who

know their Formula 1 business and have been in

Formula 1 in multiple teams for 10 or 20 years. But I'm

equally as excited about some of the graduates that we're

getting who have no experience in Formula 1, and just how

challenging and demanding they're going to be.

So you can see those generations coming behind. I think

Formula 1 still offers really exciting end destination jobs for

science and engineering graduates, regardless of whether

you come from -- where your passport is, or whatever team

you've been or whatever industry, it's a great place to

come and work and we should be proud of that.

DAVID CROFT: Ted Kravitz, F1, talking of people moving.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Thank you, David.

A couple of times last year you got caught out by some

decisions which meant that the drivers maybe didn't qualify

as high as they might. Are you changing any of your

engineering philosophies, Sam, has that been a focus of

yours?

SAM MICHAEL: I think that comes under what we classify here as

"operational reliability", and it's something that is always in

the front of your mind when it happens, especially if it's as

high profile as a driver you're not getting through.

So McLaren obviously has processes in place, because that instance

that you're talking about I believe happened before I was

here anyway, and whenever we make a mistake, and we

always will, our job is to try and stop them but when we do

make them, make sure we put in place proper processes

afterwards to make sure it doesn't happen again.

So, yes, that comes underneath my remit, but on that particular

example that's just one aspect of what we do, and most of

that was already underway before I was here by the

existing people.

DAVID CROFT: Got a question from Dan Miles, Jonathan, who is

watching on Vodafone's intranet and asks: do you feel that

the latest technical regulations give you enough

opportunity to innovate for this season or are they just

getting a bit too restrictive?

JONATHAN NEALE: No, I don't think that they're boxing us in in some

way. I think if you take a 10-year view on regulations then,

yes, as the technology gets better and as our simulation

gets better the regulating bodies have chosen to box us

into a tighter window.

If I compare with that the developments in technology and

the talent and the innovation that's alive inside the

organisations, we don't ever appear to be ideas-limited.

And if you take any one of the cardinal performance

elements of the car, be that engine power or down force,

then you take a 20-year view, you see an almost linear

improvement in performance punctuated by these

regulation changes.

So I think for my colleagues, and I'm sure Paddy and Tim

will give you a view on that as well, the issue is not that we

feel boxed in or constrained in any way. The challenge

that we have on the rear of the car, given the change in the

regulations, opens up a real opportunity for us to test

ourselves against the competition again. It's that that

keeps us alive and running.

DAVID CROFT: We'll speak to Tim and to Paddy in a moment. We

have time for one more question first from the floor.

Michael?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: This year's compounds will be

much closer together than last year, at least Pirelli is

saying that 0.8 instead of maybe the doubler (?). How

does that change the strategies?

SAM MICHAEL: I think it's something we'll have to find out, but

basically what's happened is they've left the soft end at the

same position and they've just brought the harder end

closer to it, and some of those compounds that ran at the

last Grand Prix, it will be something that Pirelli want -- and

the show needs to keep high degradation in the tyres

because they don't want the racing to be stable, they want

it to be variable and mix things up, because it's always

good for the racing.

The target was really to try to shift it back to what it was

like earlier last year because as you -- even Pirelli, you

can't say to a company: make a bad product, because

they're an engineering company, they want to improve

things just like a racing team, and they naturally will

improve things. As well as the tyres improving, the teams

understand how to adjust the suspension geometry and

aerodynamics to improve that. So it will be the same

challenge, but I think you'll probably see a reset back

maybe twelve months.

DAVID CROFT: Sam and Jonathan, thank you very much. You may

now return to your seats.

Ladies and gentlemen, Jonathan Neale and Sam Michael.

Q & A SESSION WITH AND TIME GOSS

DAVID CROFT: We have time for two more guests up on our stage

this morning, so please put your hands together and

welcome the technical director Paddy Lowe and director of

engineering Tim Goss to the stage. Good morning.

Right, let's talk technical, gentlemen, shall we? Paddy, if

I can start with you.

On the surface, a logical evolution, the MP4-27, but

underneath plenty of changes, is that a fair description?

PADDY LOWE: Yeah, a create deal of change. I mean, it is in the

nature of Formula 1 now that, as Jonathan mentioned, the

regulations are trimming us into narrower and narrower

boxes, so inevitably we don't see the big radical changes

that we saw in the past from one year to the next.

So this car in many ways looks quite similar but, as you say,

underneath a great deal of change. Every single part has

been assessed, optimised for weight, stiffness,

performance in any other respect. And when you add all of

that up you get a car that's net quicker, that's the name of

the game. So in every area the teams are tasked to find

that 1 per cent, 2 per cent because we're looking for that

total.

Nevertheless there still are, you know, obvious innovations.

We, you know, have done a lot of work around the back

end, as has been discussed, a lot more tidy packaging

there. We've had to respond to the change in the exhaust

regulations, that's really the most significant change from

last year.

So that's given the aerodynamicists a great challenge to

come up with not only the down force but the means of

creating that balance that Jenson and Lewis were talking

about. You need the down force but you need it in a way

that you can use it, so a lot of focus in that area.

DAVID CROFT: At least the drivers don't think it looks ugly so that's

a start on that one?

PADDY LOWE: Yeah. As Martin, I think Martin said, it's a -- a car will

look good if it's quick but it's better to start looking good.

DAVID CROFT: So Tim, an exiting, nerve racking time for a car

designer before it actually takes to the track?

TIM GOSS: Yes, it always is. I mean you work very hard over the

winter period, in fact, well, since about this time last year,

so it has been over the course of a whole year we've

worked extremely hard on it and, of course, you're a bit

nervous and anxious to find out exactly where your

positioned in terms of performance with your opposite

numbers.

We've set ourselves very -- very tough and ambitious

targets, and we fully intend to reach those by the first race

and deliver a championship-winning car. I mean, it is --

I mean a lot of people have been talking about this car so

far over this launch but it is a complete rework from nose to

tail. I think there's very little that we've carried over, you

know. There's a few pieces of the fuel system but

otherwise I think just about everything on the car has

changed.

We've worked extremely hard at producing a very -- a very

integrated, aerodynamic and design package. There is

a few features that we were pushing very hard from early

on in the project and we've just stuck to the things that we

think really, really matter, where we're going to extract

most performance from the car, and I'm just really proud of

the whole team and their efforts so far this year.

From now we go into the next phase of the project, which

is just really wringing the performance out of it, and we

have a really good track record at that, at developing the

car over the season, and already we've got big plans, you

know, and we've got -- we've got upgrades for front wing,

rear wing, floor and body work already planned, and I'm

sure there will be a lot more coming through before the last

race.

DAVID CROFT: I always love that part of Formula 1: you design a car

for the launch but you know that by the time the first race

comes there's many, many upgrades will be put on it.

Let's take some questions from the floor. Andrew Benson

first at the back, then I will come to the guys in the middle.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Paddy, there's a couple of

obvious things stick out from the new car straight away,

one is that you haven't taken the Red Bull eyelet approach

at the front suspension mounting points in terms of the low

nose, and the other is although you have tightly packaged

the rear end you have that big bulge sticking out in the

airflow there which I assume, although I can't see from

here, is an exhaust exit.

Can you talk about those two features a bit please?

PADDY LOWE: Yes, there was a regulation change around the front

end this year to limit the height of the nose and the forward

part of the chassis. We've produced an arrangement

which meets that regulation, at the same time it follows

some of the philosophy that we've carried over from last

year, hence the line is similar in appearance, and we

haven't -- we haven't pursued the route that Red Bull took.

It's a matter of your philosophy and the different trades you

make. You know, you can't see performance necessarily

by eye, it's a matter of fine-tuning the balance between all

the relevant aspects. You know, if you look at the front end

you're talking about trading aerodynamics, trading the

height of the weight, the arrangement of the suspension

and its effect on aerodynamics and stiffness.

So all of these things have to be combined to produce the

best result according to your own philosophy and your own

measurements and that will come out differently for

different teams.

DAVID CROFT: Next question, Will first.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Guys, there's obviously a very

short amount of time between the end of last season and

the start of this season's testing, just 70 days I believe

between where we were in Brazil. Obviously this car has

been a year in development and, as you say, a completely

new car. With rivals such as Mercedes not launching their

car until the second test how difficult is it to weigh up, using

those extra two weeks between first and second tests for

working on the car or getting that car immediately on track

and using those first four days of testing?

TIM GOSS: I think Mercedes GP are clearly an exception in not taking

their new car to the first test. I think the accepted approach

is to get out there as early as you can.

We've worked very hard at putting together a launch

package that is competitive, but then we know that there's

lots of parts of the car that we want to develop, and we

give ourselves the opportunity to do that. So, you know,

the first test will be more about putting mileage on the car,

getting to know the systems, getting familiar with setting up

the car with different aerodynamic characteristics, but then

by the time we get to the third test then we said there will

be a significant upgrade package, and we give ourselves

the time to get that learning in and then get the upgrade

package in.

Certainly we've tried different approaches in the past. This

time round I think it's just the correct thing to do.

DAVID CROFT: Craig, I'll come to you in two seconds but this man

was here first.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Afternoon, gentlemen.

Paddy, last year's car was distinctively long wheel based, I

guess it was because of the exhaust layout at the

beginning. I realise you probably won't give much away,

but can you just tell me whether this car is more compact?

PADDY LOWE: The simple answer is it's very similar.

DAVID CROFT: That's not bad.

Craig.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Craig Scarborough.

Obviously we see the nose you've largely carried over in

concept from last year, but one obvious change is the

change in the side-pod concept this year where you've

gone away from the U-shaped side-pods. Can you tell us

about why the concept's changed, why you don't feel that

was a benefit this year?

TIM GOSS: Yes, last year's U-shaped side-pod worked very well with

what we were trying to achieve last year with the exhaust

layout, it was all intended at creating more down wash to

the rear end, and it performed particularly well last year.

This year at a fairly early stage we set about some --

a different approach to both the external and the internal

aerodynamics of the car, and then once the exhaust

regulations started to become a little bit clearer then it was

quite obvious to us that the U-shaped side-pod no longer

fitted in with both the internal aerodynamics and some of

the external aerodynamics that we pursued early on. So it

works, it worked very well last year, but it's actually just not

suited to what we're trying to achieve this year.

DAVID CROFT: Before we carry on with some questions from the

floor, Keith Cummings is watching today, and is from

Vodafone. He has a question for you, Paddy: with the

changes in the location of the exhaust, and the fact that it

can't be as low as it was, do you think that you've managed

to design in changes that will offset the performance loss,

or are you kind of stuck with it this year? How has that

whole process affected you in terms of lap times do you

feel?

PADDY LOWE: That's a very good question and one I think that will

receive quite a bit of attention.

Clearly the last 18 months, the performance profit area was

all around exhausts and blowing diffusers. We now have

new constraints in terms of the geometry, so that is where

we can put the exhaust pipe and what angle it can be

directed at, all of that intended to keep it high and away

from the diffuser. And there have been some restrictions

on what we can do with the engine, so some of the more

extreme things that were being done to engine tuning in

order to maximise the blowing effect have been severely

restricted.

The fact of the matter, though, is that exhausts exist on

a car, you have to have them, they blow gas. That will

always generate some performance, a finite level of

performance. Even just simply blowing exhaust out of the

back of the car produces thrust that makes the car quicker.

So there still is a very narrow extent to which you can use

exhaust gas to generate performance aerodynamically

much, much reduced from last year. But inevitably, you

know, we've been trying to look at the ways to make the

most of that in the face of the new constraint.

DAVID CROFT: Any more questions from the floor?

Sorry, Ted, one more at the back there, the other hand up.

It's your go, Michael.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Going on with that question on

the exhaust, if you rate the contribution of the exhaust to

the aerodynamics from last year 100 per cent how much

will it be today? And, I mean, last year obviously you were

blowing into the diffuser, are you now trying to blow on to

other aerodynamic components?

TIM GOSS: I think in short we could just say that, you know, it's

drastically reduced. I mean, there are geometric

constraints and you're just not going to achieve the same

effect that you achieved last year. It's as simple as that.

It's reduced a long way. You have to think about treating

the rear end of the car differently and concentrating on

what we'd call unblown performance as opposed to blown

performance.

PADDY LOWE: In effect, the performance we saw if you remember at

Silverstone last year, there was a brief period at which the

engine-tuning was restricted significantly, and we saw

a slightly different ranking between the teams in terms of

performance.

We were hit particularly hard at that point, which for me

was a measure that we'd done a good job in the area in

fact, we'd put our effort into the area that was generating

most performance. But that was an interesting sign of, as

Tim says, you know, what was the unblown performance of

a car, and we've taken lessons from that and built on that.

DAVID CROFT: Interesting.

Ted and then Maurice, if that's okay.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Both of you, the season hasn't

started and already we've had the FIA banning something

that a rival team had in development. Had you looked at

brake-operated ride height adjustments? Did you believe it

was legal, and had you had some in development for this

year?

PADDY LOWE: That was let's say in a family of designs that we've

considered often in the past. By our own assessment we

wouldn't have considered that to be legal so, you know, we

didn't really get involved in what was being done. Our view

is that wasn't something we would pursue. So I suppose it

was pleasing in that sense to see that that avenue was

closed down according to the same interpretation that we

would have taken.

DAVID CROFT: Maurice Hamilton.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Maurice Hamilton.

The lessons learned from DRS last year, have they

influenced your design much, for example, in how you

might use it more in qualifying in the race and so on,

particularly when doing the layout, and related to the

exhaust as well perhaps?

TIM GOSS: DRS was new to all teams last year and there are trades

you play on designing rear wings, in that you can design

rear wings for greater DRS performance and greater drag

drop, but the sacrifice you pay for that is that you tend to

lose ultimate down force and you play those trades a little

bit.

Early on last year we went down one particular route, we

changed a little bit for the second half of the year and put

a bit more emphasis on the DRS drag drop. You know,

you can see this year's rear wing is -- it is a totally new rear

wing but it's evolved along similar philosophies to last year.

We're learning, we know the importance of DRS, but

ultimately you've got to win the race, and whilst DRS

counts for qualifying, most in qualifying, then ultimately you

have to win the race.

Producing the best race car is what we've concentrated on.

We proved last year that we're particularly good in terms of

race pace, and again that's our philosophy and our

approach.

DAVID CROFT: Time for a couple more questions.

Ben Edwards first from the BBC.

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Thanks, David.

Just following on from what we've already heard, is there

a figure, now that you've done all the calculations on the

car you've built it, on the overall loss of down force

compared to last year? Is there a figure that all the drivers

are going to have to cope with? In general terms, maybe

not specifically your loss, but in general terms, and they

talked about it earlier, what is the loss of down force

compared to last year?

TIM GOSS: We've set ourselves some ambitious targets and, you

know, we'd expect to recover a lot of what we lost. You

optimise around a certain package and, as Paddy

mentioned earlier, we thought we were particularly good at

achieving performance from the exhaust system and

blowing the diffuser last year. We -- we paid prices for

that. You pay a price in terms of the base performance of

the car, we knew that, there were prices and trades that we

were accepting, and ultimately last year it produced the

quickest car.

This year we've taken those gains back and worked harder

on them and pushed that area harder so, you know, we

hope to get back a lot of what we lost. I mean, I don't want

to quote numbers, but we've set very ambitious targets

and, you know, we'd like to think that we go back with

an equally competitive car.

DAVID CROFT: One more question. Craig, we've had a few from you,

can we go to Johnny instead?

QUESTION FROM THE AUDIENCE: Tim, you talked there about

producing the quickest race car, but a lot of the foundation

of Vettel's wins last year were on getting pole position,

getting three seconds after two laps, and then controlling

from the front.

Have you looked into kind of extracting more from the car

on a Saturday? Is there a change of philosophy there? Or

do you still think your approach of having a better car on

Sunday can still triumph?

TIM GOSS: Yeah, there isn't a great deal you can do these days.

We've got restrictions in terms of programming the car now

we've got part firmer regulations, so there's not a lot you

can do between qualifying and the race. But one thing we

focus on very heavily, and again have concentrated on this

year, is just the tyre wear life and tyre thermal

performance, and that's about the race performance. In

qualifying you've got clearly, as we mentioned earlier,

you've got DRS you can play with.

Whilst I say we concentrate hard on race performance it

didn't go unnoticed that Sebastian Vettel put the car on

pole an awful lot of times and pulled the gap before DRS

was employed, so we are aware of it, we -- we have

attempted to deal with it again.

DAVID CROFT: Tim -- oh Paddy, you had something to say to that?

PADDY LOWE: I just want to take the opportunity to thank the team

that produced the car. I think many, many people who

I represent with Tim behind the engineering of that car

have worked very, very hard all winter, so just to say

thanks to them. And that includes the sort of wider

partnerships. We have some technical partners, Exxon

Mobile. But even as we said earlier, Vodafone we count as

a technical partner of some of the things we doing, so a big

team of people internally and outside working on this car.

DAVID CROFT: I'm sure they're all watching on line around the world

as well and hopefully very proud of their efforts.

Tim Goss and Paddy Lowe, thank you so much for joining

us on this stage. (Clapping)

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sure you'll agree that was

a fascinating hour or so that we've just spent. Thank you

so much for your time today. It is time to say goodbye to

all the people who have been watching on line around the

world. Have a very good day.

(12.31 pm)

(The Launch concluded)