Shanghai saw an opportunity offered to sit down, together with other members of the regular FIA WEC press corps, with Gerard Neveu, President of the ACO Pierre Fillon, and President of the FIA Endurance Commission Sir Lindsay Owen Jones.
One subject dominated proceedings of course, the departure of Audi from the FIA WEC after the 2016 season, but there was plenty of detail to drill into, and that’s just what entailed!
We’ve had the Audi news, have there been discussions since the announcement about a short to medium term plan that might help to bolster the LMP1 class?
Gerard Neveu (GN): “We had to face this news last week, it was not part of the plan! Our mission, together with the FIA and ACO is to work on the issue and to make sure that the WEC continues to grow every season.
“We have had many discussions over the last few days with all of the different teams in the paddock to see how we continue. We’d remind you that there are two manufacturers, so all of the conditions still apply to have a World Championship with everything going forward as it was planned before.
“We still have discussions with all of the manufacturers that are interested in coming to the WEC and we are working very closely together.
“The Presidents of the Endurance Commission and of the ACO are working together too to try to provide the best conditions, as was planned before Audi’s announcement, in order to provide the best future for this Championship.”
What timescale are you looking at to get a new manufacturer in to LMP1?
GN: “There is no announcement today but there is current discussion, and there are many discussions and as soon as a manufacturer is ready we will announce a schedule for sure.
Do you think it’s realistic to expect one in the next couple of years?
Sir Lindsay Owen-Jones (LOJ): “The news is fresh, from three days ago, but for all of you, as for us it is not a total surprise given the overall context so, obviously the organisation, the commission, have anticipated this situation to some extent and been preparing for it and trying to prepare a future and I think we are seeing that quite optimistically but we cannot give you an absolute timeframe at this point.
GN: “On the other hand the World Championship is not 2,4 or six LMP1 hybrids. It is 32 cars on the grid. The question is whether we have 30 or 32 cars next year? The target is definitely to have a constant grid next year so probably less 2 LMP1 Hybrids, but we will still have 30 or 32 cars on the grid as we have had for around 4 years now on the grid.”
You will have had those discussions with potential LMP1 manufacturers well before Audi’s announcement. Various manufacturers have made it clear they are edging towards different technical solutions to LMP1. Is that a process, to encourage those different technologies that could be accelerated to encourage them in?
GN: “The main target is to save on costs, to preserve the conditions to welcome manufacturers and to guarantee the best conditions for them. After that there is a Commission working and this is not a day top make any comments on that whether that would be won any delay on technical regulations or an adjustment to technical regulations. They are all working together, but always a compromise between the main actors, the manufacturers and organisers.”
Pierre Fillon (PF): “We do not want to adapt the rules to have more manufacturers but we want to make good conditions to attract a lot of manufacturers.”
GN: “You will remember that at Le Mans Pierre and Sir Lindsay said that we have to think about cost because this is the real world and there is an economic situation.”
LOJ: “I think there are really two steps to your question. “One is: What can you do to open this Championship as much as possible? And I think that not making it too complicated, too fast, too difficult and too expensive is the sort of concern that you have to have and which the rule makers and promoter are working together very closely on. I can tell you that we are working without any sort of obstacles and very closely together. That’s in hand.
“I think there’s a longer term aspect to your question this is that yes, some manufacturers say that the day you move to such and such a technology then we will be there. Can you accelerate that? Not necessarily, new technologies take the time they take before they become realistic so even if you would like to have a new manufacturer by saying, let’s do ‘fuel x’ or something, it would sound nice but if it made everybody else totally uncomfortable and face them with a huge cliff of expenditure to get there I don’t think would be a good idea either, that would be throwing away what you have for something new that you don’t have.
“I think there are people that will join the train when the train naturally moves on to something else but that will happen in due course.”
“Do you think that the introduction of new technology will raise costs even more, Hydrogen fuel cell or whatever or are you trying to keep that contained to be less expensive than what we have right now?”
LOJ: “I think we are saying two different things short-term and long-term and it’s normal.
“Short-term we are trying to keep this as open as possible and not make it over-complicated.
“Longer-term, of course to keep it exciting and relevant this Championship will move forward with new technologies.”
Which makes it more expensive?
LOJ: “But if they plan sufficiently, reasonably in time then people can amortise their approach.”
Is there a dichotomy that you offer manufacturers this amazing platform but it is just so expensive that very few manufacturers can afford it?
LOJ: “I think we should be careful not to make that conclusion just because one manufacturer left the Championship for reasons that I think have absolutely nothing to do with the annual budget.
“I think it’s a good moment to revise what we think is reasonable because to attract new people that’s probably a slightly different definition. But I don’t think that to be technically challenging and interesting to manufacturers has to be dissuasively expensive to do. I don’t think that’s true, it doesn’t have to be.”
It is at the moment?
LOJ: “For some people it was but my suspicion is that it will be less so.”
GTE Pro looks like it will grow reasonably rapidly in the coming years. If we look at the prototype grid the opportunities for manufacturers are quite limited now.
It’s LMP1, there’s the opportunity for a customer engine in LMP1 Privateer, there’s been a marginal change in terms of branding in LMP2 (to allow Alpine to continue)
Are you considering lower cost short-term options within your prototype family now to get a rapid change, more rapid than a technology change would allow?
We know in commercial and philosophical terms this is something that you have resisted to this point, that P2 is not an OEM formula at all, not a formula that against the strategy that was initially laid out that wa not where you were permitted to put a factory effort or branding.
GN: “It is a good question on what we can do overall to stabilise the LMP position and the position of the manufacturers that are currently exploring and that’s typically the work that the Endurance Commission, the FIA and the ACO are conducting together but also with the manufacturers that are conducting the technical and sporting working groups to see what we can do.
“To be sincere with you we were starting this a long time before the announcement of Audi, it is nothing to do with that. it was how we can ensure a good platform.
“Today is not the day to make any announcements but we are working very hard to look at the different options we can have and that we can propose in the near future.”
LOJ: “It is a good question and that is one of the questions that we are asking ourselves. In a Championship you should see the things that are pushing particularly strongly. Right now, 6 months ago
“if we had been at the same table you would have said. “Nobody has bought one of your new LMP2s, looks like it’s not going to happen next year. What has happened is that all of the teams have bought a new LMP2. First echoes are that they are going to be blindingly fast, it’s very exciting, it looks like we have actually found a very good definition for the private teams to do some very cost efficient and exciting racing.
“So I think one of the absolute principal channels of endurance racing has just had a huge boost and we should keep that in mind as we have this discussion.
“But it’s equally true that those of you that have long memories like I do, that manufacturers, while not yet ready to be at the top, Porsche for example for many years raced in the two litre class and dominated it in the 1960s and there was a class that was a step up for new entrants and future factory teams.
“You could ask yourself the question what would the equivalent today be of the entry class for manufacturers be but without the ambition of overall victory but getting involved, learning the discipline, making a step at a reasonable expenditure – and maybe there is an opportunity of that sort.
“I think its a question mark at this point but I think its a good question.”
GN: ”At the moment you can run a manufacturer supplied or branded engine in LMP 1 Privateer.
“We are exploring all of the different options. You cannot over-react because we have had one announcement from one manufacturer in this Championship. This is a long story, you have to have a long-term vision and to make sure that what you are doing is the right decision to guarantee a good balance and a good average for the Championship.
“This is a permanent exercise we are doing and we are not taking an emotional decision.”
LOJ: ”I understand that this is the right time to ask all of these questions and it is for us too but some of the best pages of the history of endurance racing have been written by two brands fighting each other.
PF: ”Ford Ferrari, Ferrari Porsche, Peugeot Audi.”
LOJ: “There is nothing wrong with two manufacturers fighting it out in a Championship and at Le Mans. That is absolutely part of the great days.
“If you ask me could we get back to three or four I would say from a regulators point of view then I would say from a regulators point of view it is always better to have more people at the table and more guarantees but there is absolutely nothing dishonourable about the present situation and what was the one before Toyota came back in.
What is the outlook of the current manufacturers in LMP1 on the question of stability vs flexibility of a rulebook?
GN: “One of the specifics of this paddock is the permanent dialogue between the competitors and the organisers.
“Every month we have a permanent working group with a representative from each team sitting around the table to see how we can manage the future.
“At the end the final decision comes out of the Endurance Commission but most of the time this is a result of compromise amongst them.
“Everybody is working in a very co-operative attitude.
“It is important too to recognise that this team, Audi Sport and Team Joest are responsible for nothing about this consequence. We really appreciate the other competitors attitude to this situation whilst, at the same time they get ready for next year and we have already started some meetings to see how we can manage the future together.
LOJ: “The teams really are all working with a very co-operative outlook
“We are very sad to lose such a great competitor in Audi, we really are but at the same time it does present an opportunity for some greater fluidity.
“We spent a large part of our rule making time trying to work out equivalences between diesel and petrol cars, a LOT of it and it became a slow, grinding, complicated and difficult process with large numbers of technicians defending both sides with huge amounts of scientific knowledge.
“When two immovable sides meet there can be deadlock and things become a little bit more complicated and I think that this new situation actually creates more fluidity, less complication, more ability to react as we spend less of our time on this very specific question of diesel/ petrol equivalence.”
What are you saying to Toyota and Porsche about running third cars?
PF: “There is a selection committee and at the moment I don’t know how many cars Toyota and Porsche want to engage there.
You have put lots of things in place to help (LMP1) Privateers, they haven’t really taken off. That must be a big thing for you to encourage Privateers?
“You know we proposed new rules for P1 non Hybrid in June. Maybe it’s not enough. For sure the arrival of the new P2s makes 2017 a transitional year but we are working at this time to improve, to attract more people in LMP1 Hybrid for 2017, but it is late.”
Peugeot Sources have been reported as saying they might be attracted by P1 without a hybrid?
GN: ”No. The discussion with Peugeot is regarding the LMP1 Hybrid technology definitely.
“It is not a secret to say that Peugeot is one of the manufacturers in discussions with us and that is with Hybrid technology for sure.”
