Brawn uncut: how Mercedes became a contender

Mercedes started the 2013 Formula 1 season in apparent turmoil. It had failed to live up to expectations in any of its first three seasons back as a works team, its long-time motorsport chief Norbert Haug was out and rumours swirled that team boss Ross Brawn soon would be too.

And all that was happening just as the spotlight on Mercedes grew every larger following Lewis Hamilton's decision to quit McLaren for F1's other silver squad.

Painful levels of tyre degradation and a testing scandal heaped more pressure on Mercedes, and yet at the halfway point of F1 2013, it is Red Bull's closest rival and has won two of the last three grands prix.

Team boss Brawn sat down with AUTOSPORT for an exclusive interview about Mercedes' journey out of the mire.

AUTOSPORT: Thinking back to Japan last year, Lewis Hamilton had just signed for Mercedes but the team's form was very poor. Were you nervous then?

Ross Brawn: Of course. You have an approach and a philosophy and we concluded that there was not much to be gained from last year. We were in fifth place, we didn't think there was much chance of going down, and we wanted to make sure that we technically achieved the most from the latter part of last season [rather than on track].

Probably, looking back on it, there were some decisions that we could've made that could've improved the points scoring ability.

But I really wanted people focused on the new car and people to get the best understanding we could of the existing car. We didn't understand the Coanda exhaust very well. We knew what it does and how it works, but we didn't understand all the subtleties and nuances. There were things we wanted to do with the car that we needed to build.

The 2012 season was tough for the team © LAT

It's so difficult with the present formula to learn anything. You turn up on a Friday and the track's still green and rubbering up. You get one session on a Saturday morning. You do end up almost using the races to understand what's going on.

So it was a bit painful. And maybe when we look back we'll see ways that we could have ma.de it less painful.

AS: Were there tangible benefits from what you chose to do back then?

RB: If you take the Coanda exhaust, we took it off in Brazil because we wanted to get a reference point with and without.

When it was clear that it was giving us additional problems in terms of heating the tyres up and other issues, the easiest thing to do would have been to take it off. As soon as you do that, the pressure goes off sorting it out.

So I knew if I relaxed on that and said 'let's just take it off', we probably would have had better results, but we wouldn't have persevered and found all the tools we needed to understand how the Coanda works and develop it and all the subtleties. They got done because we persevered.

Those are the type of things that I think in the end paid off. That's typical of what was going on in the latter part of last year.

AS: But were you in a difficult position with so much focus on Hamilton's arrival and results getting worse?

RB: Within the team I have to say everyone knew why we were doing what we were doing. Outside of the team, it becomes more difficult.

Sponsors were becoming anxious, our board became anxious. Those are probably the pressures I should've anticipated a bit more, that balance of results against learning, and results against where you want to be in six months' time.

AS: Then there were the management changes over the winter. Were things calmer within the team than they seemed from outside?

RB: I think they always are within the team. There was a bit of a volatile period and changes were happening, and we had to make sure we didn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. And I don't think we have.

We've now got a technical organisation with another year of maturity. Geoff [Willis] has been working on the 2014 car almost as a separate project. What I see is that the current car is still progressing well and the new car is making similar progress.

So I'm pleased with how we're functioning this season, it's a lot stronger than last year, when attacking this level of activity would have compromised things a lot more.

AS: Toto Wolff's arrival seemed like it was prompted by the Mercedes board, and yet he's based with the team in Brackley, which Norbert Haug wasn't...

RB: From my position, there was less direct activity from the board compared to what I had previously been involved in. That could be good or could be bad.

Hamilton's arrival has been a boost for Mercedes © LAT

The fact Toto is based at Brackley just makes it much easier to get the message across and get communication. He can see with his own eyes what's going on. It's a different arrangement and one that suits me more and suits the team more.

But I don't want to be critical in any way of Norbert. He was the person who got this together. Norbert was instrumental and supported us very strongly in all the things we needed last year and the year before.

So it's unfortunate that he's not stayed involved for the successes, but he was part of the architecture of that success.

AS. How big a motivational force is Hamilton with his fiery nature and heart-on-sleeve approach?

RB: I think it is a motivator, purely for the fact that we've got a reference. I've always been a fan of Nico [Rosberg] and I fought hard to get his contract renewal and feel vindicated now Lewis is in the team because people are saying how good Nico is, and that's what we always felt.

But also Lewis brings a great reference to the team and is a great driver, someone whose raw ability you know is at the very top. We will not be lacking in achieving our ambitions and objectives because of drivers. We'd only be lacking because we haven't built a strong enough car or because we haven't operated as a team strongly enough. So it's great.

I think it was a little unfortunate with Michael [Schumacher] because we didn't have these references. Michael had a tough time sometimes with Nico. Was that because Michael wasn't as good as he was? Or because Nico was better than people gave him credit for? I think everyone recognises now that Nico was better than people gave him credit for.

AS. Does Hamilton require managing at a higher level than other drivers?

RB: No, I find him pretty straightforward. Every driver is an individual and you have to tune your approach to suit the individual. I'm not going into details of the differences, but it's nothing unusual.

He has his approach, and it's an approach that works very well with the team and with the people we've put to work with him.

He's got the raw ability, he's got the talent, and everything else he does is certainly of a standard where he'll be able to get the results when we've got the car.

AS: You clearly have the fastest car on a single lap, but tyre form remains variable in races...

RB: It's almost like the Coanda exhaust, the fact we struggled with it really forced us to get our heads down and understand what was going on. When Paddy [Lowe] joined us he was very impressed with the level of understanding that we had of the car and the tools and simulation.

The W04 has been on pole seven times © LAT

We've got to do the same with the tyres, and when we come out the other side, that experience will make us a much stronger team.

Those teams that are not having problems while other teams struggle, do they understand why? If they don't, then they're in danger of tripping over something they don't understand. Whereas we'll probably have a better understanding and the pain will be worth the gain that we'll make.

AS: Is how the car behaves with the tyres in the design's basic DNA?

RB: It is, because Formula 1 doesn't allow you enough scope to perfectly scan every solution on suspension geometry, every solution on suspension compliance, every philosophy of suspension. We haven't had that opportunity, particular these days with very little testing. You don't get the opportunity to go away for a week and see how the tyres are performing and really investigate what are the sore points or nerves you touch that make the difference.

The only way you can get there is through simulations and modelling. When those tools and facilities are built, then when things change you're in a better position to react, because you've built the means to understand what's going on.

Maybe I'm wrong and in a few years' time other teams will say 'we knew exactly what was going on'. I'm not sure because if that was the case why can't they get it in qualifying and why do they get it in the race? I'm not certain that any teams really have an absolute understanding of what's going on.

AS: With the car you've got now, the drivers and the current form, would you be disappointed if you didn't give this championship a good push to the end?

RB: We will do. There's some good things coming on the car in the next few races that I think are going to be a reasonable step. We've got the two low-drag races coming up and our low-drag package looks pretty respectable.

There'll be a point where, as with all teams, we'll be making a decision whether we carry on pushing with this car.

There are a couple of different elements: what is exclusive to this car and what are things that you can do which are going to carry over into next year? Clearly any understanding of the tyres is going to be a benefit next year. But if we attempt to design a new front wing, that's got a limited life. That would be much less of a priority.

I think for the rest of the season we'll have to take a balanced approach over what's needed this year and what's needed for this year and next year.

But I think we'll have a much more respectable second half. We're scored more points already than we did last year, and we're just over halfway through. I think we've got a strong enough organisation to ensure we won't let it slip.