HANS Device

[DSM]

Originally Posted by chezza

You have kind of proved Sams point there. His accident was not the type of accident that HANS was designed for and he has said that there is a possibility that if he had been wearing a HANS it might have caused him further injury.

Yes many drivers have been killed in "classic 1-o-clock impact" type accidents. What about all the other types of impact/rolls that this device is not designed for?? How many injuries will it cause?

I certainly do no think that the HANS should be compulsary in rallying (as it currently is in the WRC). With single venue rallies good all round vision is needed as there are often many merges and splits. Also I have seen it where the device has slipped...what happens if the driver had an accident then??

I wonder how long it will be before we see a serious injury/fatality that is directly attributed to the HANS device?!

Look at it another way. The device is in wide use now in many forms of circuit racing, particularly, all over the world. I understand that the reduction in fatalities due to BSF is measurable and significant. Can anyone point to a specific case of an injury caused or made worse by wearing a HANS?

Dale Earnhardt was the 12th (13th?) driver killed in US Racing in the decade from 1991 to 2001 because of BSF. how many since HANS introduced?

[ss_collins]

Motorsport accidents are an inexact science - for fothcoming feature I'm writing, I am going to be working and consulting with Cranfield University to develop some sort of iproved safety system or perhaps a slightly clearer understanding of what goes on during a shunt - cranfied students have already done some good work on this. And I have seen a very good and practical systen (though does nothing for BSF) from the students there.

I suspect that HANS will be the cause of increased injury at some point, and am stongly against its being made compulsory - to the point that I would quit the sport and move to the ovals. I feel it is a flawed device - it is good in thoery but its practical application is not right yet and is not fully understood.

Just remembered that one of the new lads in Vee complained about it ver nearly causing a very big accident at Snet recently..

[DSM]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

Motorsport accidents are an inexact science - for fothcoming feature I'm writing, I am going to be working and consulting with Cranfield University to develop some sort of iproved safety system or perhaps a slightly clearer understanding of what goes on during a shunt - cranfied students have already done some good work on this. And I have seen a very good and practical systen (though does nothing for BSF) from the students there.

I suspect that HANS will be the cause of increased injury at some point, and am stongly against its being made compulsory - to the point that I would quit the sport and move to the ovals. I feel it is a flawed device - it is good in thoery but its practical application is not right yet and is not fully understood.

Just remembered that one of the new lads in Vee complained about it ver nearly causing a very big accident at Snet recently..

An improved safety system would alwys be welcome, but again, what evidence is there to show that HANS can be detrimental. I have looked and looked but can't find any. I can find plenty of driver statements convinced that they were saved from serous injury in actual crashes because they were wearing HANS.

'one of the new lads in Vee complained about it very nearly causing a very big accident at Snet recently' is hardly strong evidence is it?

[ss_collins]

The makers of HANS have gone to great efforts to show the benefits of the system for obvious reasons. As stated above there has not YET been an accident directly attributed to Hans but I suggest it very much a matter of time as the device becomes more prolific. No accidents happening does not mean they can't/won't.

For evidence of one siutuation where HANS became a distinct risk - Gilles Panizzi - I forget the event, but the HANS did the 'impossible' and came out of the belts leaving the solid piece next to the drivers neck - dread to think what whould have happened in a side impact. Note the WRC boys dislike HANS.

[Red Baron]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

Hans wear it if you like but remember it might kill you as well as save you.

I know that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that strikes me as a really irresponsible thing to say, especially with little evidence to back it up. I hope you are more impartial in the article you are writing.

I am not especially well educated in the pro's and cons of the HANS, but I have seen the program that refers to Dale Earnhardts accident and talked about them at length with various Rescue personnel, and 'tis my opinion that the life saving potential would far outweigh the possiblity of any damage the HANS might cause (if any). If a HANS moves during an incident, then surely it was not fitted correctly in the first place??

Again, I respect the fact that you are entitled to your opinion, and maybe rally driving isn't as suited to the device as circuit racing, but maybe Martin (Teletubby's) training session could go some way towards ocnvincing you of the benfit of HANS, if not changing your mind about it completely.

Rosie

[flagwaver]

I have to agree with Red Barron, if SS Colins is involved with doing research I hope he will keep his unfounded bias to his self.

[fazzaz]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

The makers of HANS have gone to great efforts to show the benefits of the system for obvious reasons. As stated above there has not YET been an accident directly attributed to Hans but I suggest it very much a matter of time as the device becomes more prolific. No accidents happening does not mean they can't/won't.

For evidence of one siutuation where HANS became a distinct risk - Gilles Panizzi - I forget the event, but the HANS did the 'impossible' and came out of the belts leaving the solid piece next to the drivers neck - dread to think what whould have happened in a side impact. Note the WRC boys dislike HANS.

If you are in fact attempting to write a balanced paper as opposed to simply memorializing your own biases (expressed in the quote above) I strongly suggest you contact the inventors and makers of the HANS device. It dates from 1988, was patented in 1992, and is presently mandatory for every professional racing series of consequence in the United States. The HANS device has been extensively tested by both General Motors and Daimler Chrysler as well as various motorsports bodies including Formula One. I'm not certain how much more prolific it can become...unless you feel that as you and your friends don't use it, no one does.

If you have an engineering background (the inventor has a PhD in Bio-Mechanical Engineering) the data will be of use to you; if that is not your background, I suggest you retain such an engineer to evaluate the data for your paper.

I would also suggest that some of the so-called HANS "failures" are instead the result of improper mounting and/or adjustment of the tethers on the device, or the shoulder harnesses. The HANS is part of a safety system, and a failure in other parts of that system can compromise the HANS. Fortunately almost all of those other failures can be prevented by proper installation of all elements.

While I know the inventors of the HANS, I have no connection to the company. I have been around motorsports all my adult life, and have had one friend whose life was saved by a HANS device, and another who avoided serious injury. I have had access to some of the testing data, and I firmly believe that this device is a major contributor to racing safety. For those reasons I am disappointed when I see biases such as yours (and others in this thread) presented as factual.

I hope that before you present any analysis that you do obtain all the facts; I believe that an unbaised, factual look at the device may change your view.

[ss_collins]

Rosie yes of course the article is balanced - it would be unprofessional of me to let my opinion cock up an article. (thats what columns are for!). But I ask that the same attitude is applied in this thread - be open to the idea that the HANS is not perfect and is not always safer... its rather like proban and nomex - apparently in some conditions (laboratory one assumes) Proban is better than Nomex!! yet which do we assume is better?

Safety devices are not always that - our rally accident was caused by the organisers - altering a chicane on the grounds of safety...

If a HANS moves during an incident, then surely it was not fitted correctly in the first place??
Again I would presume this to be the case but when a works WRC driver has a problem with it then I would say that suggests the opposite. If a works team at world championship level cannot be guaranteed to fit it correctly - then who can??? I have a feeling that Kimi Raikkoneneonoen also had problems with his HANS in the last 12 months at one race - though it may have been another driver.

I'm not certain how much more prolific it can become...unless you feel that as you and your friends don't use it, no one does.

close actually - F1 and WRC are not the be all and end all of motorsport, national motorsport makes up the majority of the sport and HANS is still fairly uncommon. Interestingly the area of British motorsport where HANS is least used is also the area where you would expect to see more BSF's short oval racing.

To apply another thoery - people on the whole assume ABS is safer because it makes you stop quicker - actually it can lengthen bracking distances and is really designed for steering under heavy braking - great if you have somewhere to go. with motor vehicle safety assume nothing!

Engineering background - yes I do. I have been involved with motorsport engineering as either a hobby or a profession (or a education in) since I was 15.

The feature is not on Hans, rather rally saftey as a whole. But as someone who has been a mechanic, I know that the engineers figures are not always correct.

What sparked my idea for the article was a fairly high speed crash, and also some very good and provable research on rally saftey and side impacts. This research says I am dead. But the same research as used by students to create some innovative new safety systems - so we applied those to the accident and found that about 65% of these systems that work fantastically in thoery - did not stand up in our shunt or in fact worsened it.

Now obviously this is a heated subject but I find it a compelling one and I hope when you all read the piece you will see that perhaps there maybe other safer alternatives.

This is a good proper discussion thread innit!

[Red Baron]

I'd imagine that even WRC Teams could get things wrong some times. Perhaps we should invite them and Kimi to Martins training session

[Woolley]

Yes, as I said earlier I want to be careful not to attack Sam for his point of view, even though I disagree with it. I would suggest that in rallying there's more chance of the seat belts not being correctly tightened in order to make the HANS do it's proper job. Drivers are in and out of the car even during a stage, and diving back in after a puncture and rushing off while still doing up the belts. An improperly secured HANS could probably do more damage as well as being ineffective in it's intention. In a rally car you're at greater risk of being trapped in a burning car with assistance not yet arriving and it could contribute towards this. I'm also sure that improvments will follow - it is after all still quite new and not all possiblilites have yet been tested, though some drivers do seem to adopt the role of crash dummy!

I am sure, however, that it has a major benificial effect in many of the accidents where death or paralysis occur and where there is little other injury. This appears to be against an increase of minor injuries in certain circumstances. I cannot imagine an incident that could be made fatal because of it, though I'm prepared to be proved wrong, and I suspect that most of the other problems occur because of poor adjustment.

Much of this discussion could have been aimed at crash helmets. Indeed it could be argued that the sort of injury which HANS is designed to prevent is only caused by the wearing of a crash helmet anyway. I will guarantee that the ratio of deaths caused against lives saved is so biased towards the latter that not wearing a helmet is unimaginable. I suggest that the same will become true of the HANS.

[ss_collins]

my point was that if they who are without doubt the very best in the business make errors then imagine the increase in error as you go down the scale. Safety devices must be applied correctly to work as we all know.

An improperly secured HANS could probably do more damage as well as being ineffective in it's intention. In a rally car you're at greater risk of being trapped in a burning car with assistance not yet arriving and it could contribute towards this.

as an aside its worth noting that MSA standards for overalls for Rallying are lower than for racing!!! WHY!!!??

[DSM]

Originally Posted by Red Baron

I know that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that strikes me as a really irresponsible thing to say, especially with little evidence to back it up. I hope you are more impartial in the article you are writing.

I am not especially well educated in the pro's and cons of the HANS, but I have seen the program that refers to Dale Earnhardts accident and talked about them at length with various Rescue personnel, and 'tis my opinion that the life saving potential would far outweigh the possiblity of any damage the HANS might cause (if any). If a HANS moves during an incident, then surely it was not fitted correctly in the first place??

Again, I respect the fact that you are entitled to your opinion, and maybe rally driving isn't as suited to the device as circuit racing, but maybe Martin (Teletubby's) training session could go some way towards ocnvincing you of the benfit of HANS, if not changing your mind about it completely.

Rosie

Well said. I wonder how SS would feel, if someone who decided NOT to use HANS because of his opinion was subsequently injured in a situation that HANS would clearly have helped?
I appreciate that that can go both ways but, again, there is no evidence that the HANS can make things worse is there? There will always be risk but if HANS can reduce the risk, it shouldn't be criticised.

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by DSM

Well said. I wonder how SS would feel, if someone who decided NOT to use HANS because of his opinion was subsequently injured in a situation that HANS would clearly have helped?
I appreciate that that can go both ways but, again, there is no evidence that the HANS can make things worse is there? There will always be risk but if HANS can reduce the risk, it shouldn't be criticised.

That's not a fair comment to make, as much as I disagree with Sam on his opinions regarding safety, he is entitled to his view even though he is wrong in my opinion, but then I will be wrong as far as he is concerned.
I would hope that most of us are intelligent enough to make our own decisions after looking at all the evidence. I will listen to what he and others have to say on the matter and then make my own decisions. When I learn a lot more about these devices I will make the decision to buy or not.

[ss_collins]

A big spike sticking out of the steering wheel at the driver would reduce the risk (drivers would go slower for sure) but somehow its not the best idea.

If somone were killed after reading my comments and deciding not to use a HANS, I would feel nothing - I have not said anywhere here that I don't think other people should wear HANS - that choice is theirs. ~What I have said is that I think that its is not the be all and end all of safety that it is made out to be, and in fact could make things worse in some situations.

DSM there is evidence that hans could make things worse, albiet mostly from the rallying community.

[Al Weyman]

Why not just fill the cockpit with bubblewrap and have done with it.

[DSM]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

A big spike sticking out of the steering wheel at the driver would reduce the risk (drivers would go slower for sure) but somehow its not the best idea.

If somone were killed after reading my comments and deciding not to use a HANS, I would feel nothing - I have not said anywhere here that I don't think other people should wear HANS - that choice is theirs. ~What I have said is that I think that its is not the be all and end all of safety that it is made out to be, and in fact could make things worse in some situations.

DSM there is evidence that hans could make things worse, albiet mostly from the rallying community.

Firstly, I don't think anyone has ever said that it is the 'be all and end all of safety'. Who has made out that it is? It has been shown to be effective in certain situations that used to be all too common and there is evidence that it has reduced certain sorts of injury and death.

Secondly, where is the evidence from the rallying community? I'm not saying that there isn't any but I haven't seen anything despite looking.

[ss_collins]

there is alot of ill feeling towards it and it did have an adverse effect on panizzi. Co -drivers have also been very public in saying that they cannot really operate to thier bestt wearing them - at places like rally germany where there are splits and merges the crew simply cannot see well enough - this is clearly hazardous. Imagine the effects of a hans induced co driver error because he can't see properly.

all I'm saying is that HANS might not be as good as its made out to be - read my article when I finish it (though prolly won't be until out sept or even oct issue)

[DSM]

But surely that's a different issue to what we have been discussing and has no bearing on circuit racing at all. I know from personal experience, having worn a HANS in singke seater racing for just about 1 year now, and also through 1 significant accident in which I feel it helped me, that there is little, if any, inconvenience to either in car movement or vision.
I can see how it could be more significant, in that respect, in a rally / co-driver situation but surely things could be done to improve the practicability in order to get the benefit of restraint if the worst happens.

[johnw]

Originally Posted by chezza

I wonder how long it will be before we see a serious injury/fatality that is directly attributed to the HANS device?!

A lot longer than one which is directly attributed to not wearing one, methinks.
This is rather like the argument against seatbelts, but they are compulsory on the road, for the greater good.
Having said that, I am not for compulsion re HANS, but do find unreasonable, the unproven statements suggesting that HANS is harmful.

Sam, we agreed on the last HANS thread, that you are somewhat of a throwback. Therefore, I do think that some of your more extreme statements deserve some verification or challenge.
Do you have any factual evidence of HANS causing an injury?
What is the G force of an average UK short oval impact. I presume rather less than that on a road circuit, as it is directly proportional to speed and crash distance.
What was the adverse affect on Panizzi?
Your "feelings" and "suspicions" that HANS is a flawed device are just that, so they may come across as scaremongering.

Originally Posted by ss-collins

The makers of HANS have gone to great efforts to show the benefits of the system for obvious reasons.

That sounds cynical at best. If you look at the other restraint systems, they all reiterate the benefits, but none show any research data to back up their claim.
As I understand it, the inventor of HANS originally conceived the idea after the serious injury (or death) of a close friend in a racing accident, and wanted no more than to prevent another fatality in similar cicumstances. He was were struggling to get a wide market for the device until Daimler-Chrysler funded research to help prove the idea. I guess that the FIA must have seen the benefits, otherwise I doubt that they would have mandated it for F1. (Didn't Champcars beat them to it?).

Originally Posted by ss-collins

all I'm saying is that HANS might not be as good as its made out to be

Does that mean that you might be saying that it is as good, or are you claiming that you have evidence to prove that it isn't?
Trust that you publish your article on here Sam, as I'd hate to miss it.

Al, if bubblewrap was fireproof, I'd be using it now

[chezza]

That is very true DSM but in your single seater you look in front of you and in your mirrors to see behind you. How often do you turn your head to look in the blind spot behind you??? With the HANS this movement is restricted and in rallying (this is a "HANS thread" not a HANS in circuit racing only thread for who ever said that rallying wasnt important here) that movement is very important. However this movement is also important in circuit racing...you spin off, you want to re-join, you drive to the edge of the track to get back on, you try to turn your head to get a good look at the on coming traffic...only you can't turn your head enough to be able to see the whole circuit clearly. That cannot be safe...you may not see sombody who is offline coming into the corner and hit them...One HANS caused accident. This is what a vee driver experienced, although luckily without the accident.

There is plenty of evidence for HANS...it is a safety device - they want you to think that it is safe! If it was your company that designed it would you make the against evidence readily available?! Please note I am not saying it is unsafe at all...just that its not perfect.

Thanks Sam, it was the occurance with Panizzi that I was thinking about earlier.

I doubt that the article would be published on here...it will be in Racecar Engineering...and with the copywrite I doubt it would be possible to put it here.

[johnw]

Originally Posted by chezza

.....There is plenty of evidence for HANS...it is a safety device - they want you to think that it is safe! If it was your company that designed it would you make the against evidence readily available?! Please note I am not saying it is unsafe at all...just that its not perfect.....

This is doublespeak, and IMO totally unfair. You infer that there is evidence against the HANS which is being witheld, and then go on to refute it.
I cannot find anything on the HANS site that claims it is perfect, but would be interested to know what you have found that is.

[ss_collins]

Racecar Engineering will publish the article later this year (on rally safety). But it will not be published online here. Because I say so - I might put it on the mag's site around christmas.

Chezza hit the nail on the head really with her post. You'll have to buy RCE when its in or keep an eye on this forum to see the research results, I doubt it will say hans is wrong but I think (though don't know for sure) that it will suggest that there are other more cost effective safety measures for closed wheel tin tops than Hans, that should take priority. Unfortunatley single seaters do not feature in the work. However as a single seater driver I am as discussed on another thread not very keen on Hans in that scene either.

I also get the impression that more drivers have been 'saved' by Hans than were killed by bsf before its invention

[dtype38]

At the end of last year I watched a tv programme called "Accidents that changed motor racing" (or words to that effect). I had been considering buying a HANS device so I paid very, very close attention to the section about basal scull fracture and the type of accidents that cause it. These were the accidents which lead directly to the introduction of the HANS device. I placed my order for one before my next race.

I've now worn the device for two track race meetings in my open sports car, and can confirm to anyone that doesn't have one that they are cumbersome getting in and out, and once in the car, restrict lateral vision. Being new to it I think I probably am at increased risk of having an accident trying to rejoin the track after a spin. I also think the device really isn't going to make it as easy to get out of the car in a hurry. But........ we have to weigh up the pros and cons to these things, and no safety device is without cons!

My roll cage restricts my vision and makes it harder to get out of my car. My 5-point harness and racing seat greatly restrict my movement and make turning my head far enough to see my blind spots virtually impossible. And, of course, my crash helmet restricts my field of vision, not to mention making me virtually deaf. Would I go out on track without any of these things because they have limitations? Of course not!

I think it will always be possible to envisage, or even point to actual events, where a safety device was more hinderance than help. I've no doubt that, at some time, a plumbed in fire extinguisher has fired accidentally and caused an accident! So every time one is introduced they will have thier critics, and rightly so because these things should not be introduced lightly or without the most strenuous of scrutiny by those who may be required to use them. But if the evidence availabe says that introducing a device which will do considerably more good than harm, it is right to introduce it. Voluntary introduction is always preferable, but if the evidence is compelling enough (like with crash helmets) then it has to be mandatory.

This is NOT to say, however, that the HANS device, or any other safety device, can't be improved upon. But to do that it has to be tested, evaluated, get customer feedback, have accident statistics and evidence compiled, etc.,etc, and that can only happen if its actually used in large numbers.

As for my own device? Well, I'll be keeping it on, doing some practicing getting out of my car quickly, and.... should I happen to visit the scenery.... I'll be being much more careful about the place and angle I rejoin the track.

Oh, and if YOU know how to restrict forward head movement like a HANS device while allowing total freedom of rotational movement, I suggest you get down to the patent office right away!

[Woolley]

Originally Posted by ss_collins

as an aside its worth noting that MSA standards for overalls for Rallying are lower than for racing!!! WHY!!!??

Probably because in a racing car you're 30-60 secs from the arrival of an extinguisher, whereas in rallying it's more like 30 mins. You're overalls will protect you while you rush out of the car, and if you can't... Well, Henri Toivenan and Sergio Cresta spring to mind. For this reason, I actually find myself agreeing that the benefits in a rally car are more offset than in a race car. The accidents are more variable and the risk of being hindered exiting a burning car are more of a consideration. You have to balance the chance of dying during the acident against the chance of dying from the aftermath, and I'd hazard a guess that it's close enough to make your own decision. For the co-driver, especially in a WRC, the argument that it affects his vision is a pointless one. The co-driver these days is sat on the floor with highly limited vision because to the designer, he's considered moveable weight. Of course this arrangement is one that Phil Mills is grateful for following the Germany shunt.

In a race car, the arguments are more clear cut, especially in a heavier saloon with lots of momentum. View is already heavily restricted by helmets, seats with ears, padded cockpit sides, roll cages, etc., it's strectching my credulity to imagine that the HANS makes it much worse.

[R59]

One of the points JohnW raised - the G-force on a short oval impact....
I wouldn't think it would be that great, as the cars are quick, but they're not exactly doing close on 200mph around a concrete banked oval.

I chose to use a HANS this season because of my new car. Considering the power that it has, and it's capabilities. I didn't want to become a statistic through being stubborn.

I have no idea about the suitability of the HANS for rallying, which cannot be compared to circuit, or even oval racing, in any way shape or form. But I'm sure that the relevant authorities have looked at it, and formed their opinion based on considerable research.

There will no doubt be more research.

A bit like the argument between open face helments and full face, when in a closed cockpit car.

I shall continue to wear my suit, hat, HANS, and belts, until such a time that it's shown that it's shown that I shouldn't.

Rob.