Q: (Miguel Sanz- Marca)
Mr Newey, do you think it's possible that one of the final five circuits won't suit your car? Is there any chance?

Adrian Newey:
It's wholly possible. Just don't know which ones yet! As I said, I don't know which one yet.

Q: (Kate Walker - Girl Racer)
James, you're one of the last teams if not the last team to play around with the coanda effect. I know you've had it in development for a while. What was it that took so long to get it to the track?

James Allison:
Well, at the point when we were committing to what we were going to start the season with, we had two paths, a coanda path and what we chose which was a very simple exhaust which was there to optimise power. At the time, the coanda solution was worth a little bit more theoretically than the power maximising solution but you had to be confident that it was going to deliver all the downforce that it promised, because you could be fairly certain that it was going to deliver all the horsepower loss that the more convoluted exhaust pipe requires. So if the downforce didn't materialise, you knew you were down on the deal, so where we were when we launched our car, that was a relatively finely balanced decision. We launched with the simple thing and then we got under way and have had a reasonably bright season and have been pretty competitive deep into the year. We kept working on the other solution because it was fairly clear that that was where the centre of gravity of opinion in the pit lane was and also because it was a reasonably productive avenue back in the wind tunnel. It got to a point where the gain of the coanda system was sufficiently far ahead of our previous race system that it was quite clearly something that we ought to look at both for this year and also to make sure we're doing the right thing for next year. That's pretty much the history of it; probably could have committed a bit earlier but then things were going quite well for us on the track as well.

Q: (Daniel Ortelli - Agence France Presse)
James, are you going to again try your double DRS or are you slowly giving up on that project?

James Allison:
Certainly not giving up on it because there is some goodness in there but that really is tricky - well, we've found it so anyway. So we will keep working on that but you probably won't see it as much on Fridays; we're going to bring it out to play again at the young drivers' test and hopefully make a bit of progress there.

Q: (Vanessa Ruiz - ESPN Radio)
Some drivers mentioned that they could not practise on the simulators for the Korean Grand Prix because the teams didn't have the laser models. Did that happen to all your teams, and secondly, to use an expression that Mark has just used, how does that affect the capitalisation of your cars?

Adrian Newey:
Well, yes, Mark went in the simulator prior to leaving for Singapore, did both Singapore and Korea. Sebastian, to the best of my memory, didn't do Korea. I think, really, the level that Formula One drivers are at - the more experienced ones, certainly - then they don't really need to go in the simulator, if you like, to warm themselves up and remember whether turn one's a lefthander or a righthander. As you started to hint at in the second part of your question, it's more for the engineers to understand what's required at that circuit, but at the same time, everybody has simulation techniques as well. The only difference, really, between simulation and simulator is that one has the driver in the loop, the other is effectively driven by the computer. We're not going in blind, we've had two years of experience at this track so I don't honestly see it as a particularly big factor.

David Greenwood:
I think, from our perspective, it was a little bit more difficult for Charles to learn Korea versus Japan because of the quality of the track model. That has shown up a little bit this morning. He did say it was harder and definitely in Japan he got more on the pace quicker. It's not ideal but we're all in the same situation, so that's what we use and we get on with it.

Mark Gillan:
I agree. The level of fidelity of the simulator model obviously depends on the quality of the laser scan or whatever other information you can extract from it. What Adrian says is quite true: the more experienced the driver, the less they require the simulator in terms of preparing for the event but for instance, with Valtteri, who has not been round this track before, the simulator is a very important tool, so he maybe spent a little bit more time getting up to speed with the track than he may have done if we had had a very detailed model.

Pierre Wache:
For us, we don't have a simulator so it doesn't change anything for us, compared to other tracks. For sure, in this case the driving time during Friday is very important and also the set-up is defined by simulation before Friday and to leave as much time as possible for a good set-up for the driver, so then he can train on the track.

James Allison:
Neither of our two drivers had been here, and I don't think Kimi had even been round the track but you could see how quickly both of them adapt to it. I think any racing driver worth his salt can very quickly come to terms with the track and I really don't think I can add much more to what Adrian said. The driver-in-the-loop simulator is much more for the engineers than it is for the driver.

Paddy Lowe:
Yeah, the same. I think ultimately it just affects the quality of that particular track that you create and it would mean that this wouldn't be a circuit that you would use for very in-depth studies because we don't have that data, but it doesn't actually affect this event particularly for us.

Q: (Edd Straw - Autosport)
James, will you continue to run the new exhausts tomorrow?

James Allison:
I think so, yeah. We haven't decided yet but it looks like we will.

Q: (Daniel Ortelli - Agence France Presse)
Is anyone of you brave enough or senior enough to tell us what's on the agenda of the October 23rd meeting in Paris?

Paddy Lowe:
Well, we had a meeting in - was it May or June? - yeah, we had a meeting in Monaco in May and I believe there was going to be a second meeting in August or late July and this is that meeting postponed. It will be to continue the same agenda, which is about cost-saving and regulations.