This week's Grapevine brings you information fresh from the paddock on: McLaren Target Brazil HANS On!

McLaren Target Brazil

Despite David Coulthard's upset over the reliability of his car, it has to be said that McLaren are very pleased with the start to their season - and certainly didn't expect to have two wins to their credit already. Championship position being vital, maximising the team result is the priority for the year; however, with Ferrari's dominance in 2002 leaving McLaren only one win to take to sponsors, being seen to close the gap is an important factor for 2003. Their strategy is based on satisfying both requirements.

The irony is, Ferrari themselves inspired this season's opening performance. Last year, when Ferrari started the season with the F2001, they clearly demonstrated the advantages of taking a car they knew very well to the flyaway races. Although they were caught out by Williams in Malaysia, forcing Schumacher into the F2002 for Brazil, the car was clearly competitive. When changeable weather cut into practice time, having a known quantity to work with was a clear advantage: Ferrari already knew how to adjust the car to suit the changing environment, and it showed in their performance on the track.

Changes to the rules for this season mean that Championship positions are going to be based on scoring regular points finishes. Winning individual races is a nice bonus, but not worth the risk of failing to finish: there's more points scored by coming third and fourth than from a win, and a breakdown! So, it is only worth running cars that are as close to bulletproof as possible. At the same time, closing the performance gap means delaying the introduction of a new car as long as possible, in order to maximise the technological step forward. Traditionally, this results in a difficult balance to be drawn by teams introducing their new cars. The earlier it is launched, the more it can be tested, and any problems resolved. But the later is comes out, the more it can be developed, and the more likely it is to be quick.

Adding to the normal pressures, Mercedes have been planning a big step with the engine, worth around 25 or 30bhp, intended for the new MP4-18, but despite getting it on the dyno in February, it was only ready to put in to a car for the middle of March. Given that this is a key element of the step forward the new car represents, and it involves a change in packaging, it is no surprise that weeks of testing are needed to be certain that reliability is not compromised.

Ferrari's demonstration last season resolved that dilemma for McLaren. Evolving the older, more reliable, better-known car to take to the early races should yield a solid handful of points - especially if other teams are dropping the ball. In the meanwhile, development continues apace on the new car, offering the team a leap in performance, probably competitive with the new Ferrari and Williams offerings. The FIA's rule changes, which reduce the time available to set up the cars over the Grand Prix weekend, confirmed the decision was the right one, causing time-scales to stretch, as reliability in the new car became a firmer priority in consequence.

When McLaren began improving last season's car, developing it into the MP4-17D that started 2003, they looked at the year ahead, guessing at the impact of their decision. They anticipated Ferrari repeating the delayed introduction of a new car, and expected Williams to have a new challenger. Conservatively, they could not discount the likelihood that both might have a performance edge; so basing reliability on the start of last year, they expected to score around fourth and fifth for Australia and Malaysia. but in Brazil, where the original MP4-17 was very competitive, there seemed to be the potential for at least one podium finish. Under the new points system, that prediction should score eighteen or more points before Brazil.

In the event, it transpires that McLaren's approach to the race weekend has worked out well. Quick thinking in Melbourne saw both drivers change to slick tyres and a better fuel strategy that compensated for poor qualifying, whilst Ferrari's uncharacteristically poor strategy took them out of the equation. Williams lack of familiarity with the new car played a part in Ralf Schumacher's off-form weekend, and it all came together for the Woking outfit. Similarly, in Malaysia, McLaren were encouraged by their pace, which clearly showed Kimi Raikkonen's race pace to be on a par with Ferrari's Rubens Barrichello: had Coulthard's car not faltered, they reasonably expected to have both at the top of the podium.

Under the circumstances, it would be surprising if McLaren did not have some hope of winning in Brazil. Although the BMW engine means Williams are expected to be very strong, and Schumacher in the F2002 can never be discounted, Interlagos is a circuit that has positively suited recent McLarens.

HANS On!

Following Justin Wilson's HANS related retirement, and Rubens Barrichello's special dispensation to race without the device in Malaysia, the FIA are coming under increasing pressure to alter their stance on making HANS mandatory equipment for drivers.

Empirical evidence from other motorsports, particularly IRL, has led the FIA to take the position that the device has demonstrably saved lives in high speed head on impacts, without ever being implicated as the cause of a major injury. Statistically, that's a pretty compelling reason for mandating HANS in a racing series that carries a significant risk of high speed head-on impact.

However, both the races where HANS has been compulsory have seen accident or injury based on problems with the device. In Rubens Barrichello's case, the HANS frame was mounted on an air cushion, which ensures it fits comfortably over his collarbone. During the race in Australia, the cushion deflated, leading to the device being forced into the bone. This discomfort caused Barrichello to be distracted, with the result this is expected for any driver who attempts to race on the limit without his full attention: he ended up in the wall.

In Wilson's case, the device uses more conventional padding, but simply slipped out from under his seat belt. This had two effects - it introduced play, meaning that the driver was sliding around the cockpit, and it put pressure on his neck, leading to a pinched nerve, partially paralysing his arm. Both of these issues are dangerous, as they directly interfere with the driver's control of his car.

Opinion amongst drivers is split. Few agree with David Coulthard and Juan Pablo Montoya that it represents a step forward for safety; most are cautiously indifferent. Jenson Button, for example, believes it is a good idea in principle, but questions the benefit in side or rear impact, expressing concern that it might actually be damaging. The drivers have been presented with no evidence to assuage that concern. For the most part, if an opinion is expressed, it is negative: Jacques Villeneuve in particular has been outspokenly against it from the outset, pointing out that had Pedro Diniz been wearing HANS when he flipped his Sauber and the roll-bar collapsed, it would have killed him, and that it restricts head movement, reducing visibility for the driver.

The FIA, however, are not prepared to back down, even if all the drivers were to complain. Refusing to wear HANS is not an option, and until there are documented incidents where HANS has been demonstrated to cause or worsen a serious injury, that position is set to remain.

Currently, Coulthard's implementation of the HANS device is looking set to be adopted by a majority of the drivers, with Barrichello the latest convert. In order to resolve the problems of slippage and untoward pressure on the collarbone, this variant uses a double strap system, which sees the device with a belt guide for the normal shoulder straps from the standard belts, so that the driver is properly strapped in, with the second strap running over the normal belt to keep the device firmly in place. Because the device is properly aligned by these belts, shaped padding provides adequate protection for the collarbone that can't deflate.

It's safe to say, however, that the device will never actually be comfortable for many drivers, especially those with shorter necks, so there is going to be ongoing controversy as drivers blame their accidents on the device. On the positive side, if nothing else, in a world where every minute action of the driver is electronically recorded and analysed, it provides them with an easy, unquantifiable, ready made excuse for why their perfectly operational car ended up in a wall!