Halo to be employed in 2018
F1 STRATEGY GROUP: OPTED FOR DEVICE DESPITE OPPOSITION FROM NINE OUT OF 10 TEAMS
Despite the testing we have not really been informed whether the driver can get out of a car fitted with the halo as quickly as one without. That announcement was actually issued by the FIA, despite nine out of 10 teams not in favour of the halo.
There is uncertainty about what sort of impact it is designed to prevent.
The so called “halo” debate has rattled on for a considerable time. It was one of several options that would be employed to increase driver safety.
The device appeared during free practice sessions last year to very mixed reactions by drivers, teams and fans, with most not in favour.
The alternative aero shield was shown prior to the British Grand Prix.
Once more not all were in favour but many agreed aesthetically it was a big improvement over the “monkey bars”.
There were some problems with the screen, but nothing development work could not resolve.
Or so I thought until the latest meeting of the F1 Strategy Group when it was announced that the halo will be the device to be employed in 2018.
That announcement was actually issued by the FIA, despite nine out of 10 teams not in favour of the halo.
It appears that representation from FOM were also in favour, so this one puzzles me.
If you have just bought a multi-million sport that requires an extensive facelift, why get behind the motion to make the stars of the show, the drivers, even less noticeable than they are now?
Liberty Media are spending a lot of dollars on bringing F1 closer to the people, with the London event a good example.
So what is the objective of their positive vote?
Perhaps they wish to be seen as supporting the FIA president’s safety campaign, setting a good example to the global audience.
Jean Todt is passionate about reducing deaths due to automobile accidents, but I do not believe one can simply apply his campaign to F1 and expect the world to be grateful.
I still have issues with all inferences that F1 has relevance to road cars leading to better and safer vehicles, the primary reason why the manufacturers are in the sport. I doubt that. The automotive giants are using F1 as a research tool, we are told.
I suppose to a degree that is true, but most have research fa- cilities that obviate the need to go racing in a quest for better, safer and more environmentally-friendly future road transport.
If it is the objective, why not invest more on Formula E?
After all, we are continually informed that electric vehicles are the future.
I am extremely happy to see manufacturers involved in motorsport and would like to see more.
It adds credibility and status with top teams receiving great benefits from victories on the circuits of the world – just ask the companies’ marketing departments.
It is such a powerful means of reaching motoring enthusiasts and potential clients that Ferrari used F1 as its main form of advertising for many years.
So what is the logical reasoning that we need to apply the same form of safety standards to an F1 car?
Over the years a Grand Prix car has gone from a tubular chassis with aluminium panels to the modern miracle of composite fibre safety cells which reduced the death or serious injury situation dramatically.
Fernando Alonso’s terrifying accident in Melbourne last year is an example of the phenomenal progress in safety standards.
The halo is specifically to protect the driver’s head, but is it up to the job?
Many of the experts and engineers in the field are not convinced as to exactly what sort of impact it is designed to prevent.
Many proponents suggest that drivers such as Henry Surtees and others would have survived if the halo had been utilised, but the men in the know do not agree.
Why is the halo only applied to F1 and no other open wheel formula? Surtees competed in F2 and it is not being enforced in that series or many others in this category.
Drivers strive for a seat in an F1 car and spend years in single seaters with nothing more than that objective in mind.
They are aware of the dangers, but the whole of motorsport carries an element of risk and drivers chose to compete.
Despite the testing we have not really been informed whether the driver can get out of a car fitted with the halo as quickly as one without.