1987 replies to this topic

[Marklar]

Chris Medland‏ @ChrisMedlandF1  3m3 minutes ago

More

FIA confirms Halo will be introduced in 2018 after Strategy Group meeting today #F1

 

Edit: add previous report

When the matter was discussed at the meeting in Geneva, it is believed the Shield was put on the backburner for now as it was felt significant further investigation was required.

Sources say nine out of 10 teams voted against the Halo, but the FIA said it would become part of the regulations for 2018 on safety grounds.

It still requires final ratification by the World Motor Sport Council but this can be completed by e-vote if necessary.

 

 

https://www.motorspo...ecision-932802/

Edited by Marklar, 19 July 2017 - 17:56.

[Jordan44]

Tragic.

 

Sign my petition against this here

Edited by Jordan44, 19 July 2017 - 21:29.

[superden]

How embarrassing.

[P0inters]

What was the point of the vote then ? Ridiculous .

[Widefoot2]

Dear Indycar, now's a good time to look at a European expansion...

[Wes350]

Tragic.

 

+1

The Halo is not like Safety Belts - HANS, Helmets, etc...

It is no secret that a closed cockpit is safer than an open one.

Putting a roof over the drivers head is not some new safety technique that has suddenly been discovered!

Tin tops and formula cars have been around for years and it has been accepted that driving formula cars carries more inherent risk.

An open cockpit is more risky, and a head strike would be the source of the most serious type of injury. This should not be a new realization!

Open-wheel, open-cockpit, is what sets formula cars apart from other racing series. There is additional risk that comes with that. And it is the acceptance of that risk that sets the Formula drivers apart from those who race in other series.

There are plenty of series that have the drivers fully protected if a driver feels too unsafe.

 

.

[P123]

F1 now officially has a 'face for radio'.

[Silverstone96]

Dear Indycar, now's a good time to look at a European expansion...

Indycar will almost certainly have cockpit protection (shield) in 2018

[cravenciak]

Looks like a thong. I can't believe it would protect driver's head from a flying 150km/h wheel.

[Winterapfel]

Will Halo be a standardized item? Or a great way for some teams to find aero gains?

[loki]

Indycar will almost certainly have cockpit protection (shield) in 2018

 

The new Indycar won't have a shield.  

 

[MoP]

Geat way to kick F1 in the nuts Jean Todt, it was just recovering from merc dominance, ridiculous looking cars and quiet engines. Really looking forward to seeing the new cars then, NOT. I mean really, then why even talk about shark fins and t- wings if Halo overshadows all of it. I mad right now!  

[MastaKink]

Good God I hate these guys more than FIFA.

 

Aye, we'll take the ugliest option that doesn't really help with debris like Massa's accident and only 1 out of 10 teams want in the first place.

 

Great call (By the lawyers no doubt).

 

[Marklar]

Neither the teams. fans and most drivers want it, yet it gets introduced. Says it all.

 

What's even worse: It comes across as another knee jerk as they are pushing this now on safety grounds through after they abonded it just earlier this year. But the option turned - oh wonder - not out to be ready for next year, so let's go back to what we discarded earlier this year. This can't be a great solution, right? Apparently the FIA is doing this thanks to insurance stuff btw. They proved that halo in theory increases the chances to survive a (very) tiny bit and if a incident had happened in the future without halo they would have got issues in a lawsuit as they didnt introduced something which perhaps could have prevented it despite it being available, so it's not even really fully based on safety in the end.

 

I know that the safety fanatics will crucify me now but me imagine 20 cars to have this thing on them and driving through a track might well be the worst rule change I saw in the 20 years since I'm following F1.

Edited by Marklar, 19 July 2017 - 18:10.

[PedroDiCasttro]

This can only be a joke... a very bad joke. 

[Diablobb81]

Idiots.

[ArchieTech]

Dear Indycar, now's a good time to look at a European expansion...

Especially as Silverstone might have a Grand Prix sized vacancy in its schedule...

[SenorSjon]

With FOM and teams having 12 votes and FIA the other 6, how could they push this through? I expect Liberty to throw a spanner in this.

[JonnyJ]

Just when the cars were heading in the right direction...

Like the cock noses of 2014 we'll "get used to it" but there's no hiding from the fact they look terrible and like a half baked solution.

[RedBaron]

Won't happen.

[andrewf1]

What's the point of a strategy group meeting if 9 out of 10 teams reject the proposal and the FIA does what it wants anyway?

[Marklar]

With FOM and teams having 12 votes and FIA the other 6, how could they push this through? I expect Liberty to throw a spanner in this.

Jean Todt has a right which allows him to push any rule change through on safety grounds. He is for the first time using it and nobody will be able to prevent this.

[ArchieTech]

Neither the teams. fans and most drivers want it, yet it gets introduced. Says it all.

 

What's even worse: It comes across as another knee jerk as they are pushing this now on safety grounds through after they abonded it just earlier this year. But the option turned - oh wonder - not out to be ready for next year, so let's go back to what we discarded earlier this year. This can't be a great solution, right? Apparently the FIA is doing this thanks to insurance stuff btw. They proved that halo in theory increases the chances to survive a (very) tiny bit and if a incident had happened in the future without halo they would have got issues in a lawsuit as they didnt introduced something which perhaps could have prevented it despite it being available, so it's not even really fully based on safety in the end.

 

I know that the safety fanatics will crucify me now but imagine 20 cars to have this thing on them and driving through a track might well be the worst rule changes I saw in the 20 years since I'm following F1.

But surely the same insurance argument holds for any sanitising change. Limit the top speed to 150mph, less chance of a fatality, 100mph, even less. Those are all possible, and you wouldn't need a test to prove them, but would ruin the sport so they aren't done... yet anyway.

[Ruusperi]

Jean Todt can watch F1 alone with Charlie.

There are plenty of open-wheel formula categories to choose from.

[thegamer23]

Is this an April's fool?

[Zava]

why not the red bull version then? the lesser bad of the two for sure.

[Fastcake]

It's hideous and a terrible idea.

 

Leave open cockpit racing as it is. There is a risk attached to it, but the only way of preventing accidents is to fundamentally change a core philosophy of the sport. I've got nothing against improving safety when it doesn't change the nature of the sport, as has been done for decades with the improvements in crash testing, barriers, track design, medical facilities, and all the rest. This though, will break one of the threads that links the modern day to the very first racers in the 19th century.

[Hyatt]

Ekelkotzerregend   

[phrank]

Historic mistake

[Silverstone96]

The new Indycar won't have a shield.

The series boss have already confirmed plans to push through protection to be added to this next year, i will look for link but they already said it will not be halo as that doesn't function well on an oval

[TomNokoe]

A significant part of F1 will be lost with this ruling.

[Marklar]

why not the red bull version then? the lesser bad of the two for sure.

The Red Bull screen turned out to have safety issues. The version tested by Ferrari is different from the one proposed by the FIA as it is not suitable to the current cars and wont be until 2019, hence why it will be halo. They could have waited of course another year, but well.....

[P0inters]

Surely all they'd need to avoid a lawsuit would be to make it optional . If it's available for the drivers to use and they don't use it ( which they wouldn't ) , the responsibility wouldn't lie on the FIA.

[RedBaron]

They can finally scrap the rule that stops driver changing their helmet designs race by race.

 

Because we won't be able to see the drivers anyway.

Edited by RedBaron, 19 July 2017 - 18:20.

[andrewf1]

I'm all for increased safety and don't really support the "F1 has always been open-cockpit, it shouldn't change etc." argument, but the Halo is just sh*t. Nobody wants it.

[Zava]

The Red Bull screen turned out to have safety issues. The version tested by Ferrari is different from the one proposed by the FIA as it is not suitable to the current cars and wont be until 2019, hence why it will be halo. They could have waited of course another year, but well.....

yeah I know they had manufacturing and deadline problems with the shield. could you elaborate on the safety issues of the RB screen? 

[Marklar]

 

Following the unanimous agreement of the Strategy Group, in July 2016, to introduce additional frontal protection for Formula One and the repeated support from the drivers, the FIA confirms the introduction of the Halo for 2018. With the support of the teams, certain features of its design will be further enhanced.

Having developed and evaluated a large number of devices over the past five years, it had become clear that the Halo presents the best overall safety performance.

http://www.fia.com/n...ld-championship

[Silverstone96]

I hate this decision and it makes me want to give up on f1 as for me it's not f1 anymore...but then after 25 years as a fan it's hard to just pull the plug on the drivers, teams, tracks and most importantly the stories.

I still love F1...but my god it's making it harder and harder to keep loving it...

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Won't happen.

Agree.

[Marklar]

yeah I know they had manufacturing and deadline problems with the shield. could you elaborate on the safety issues of the RB screen? 

IIRC a crash dummy smashed with his head into the screen and then Red Bull (and nobody else for that matter) couldnt be arsed anymore to develop it further. 

[Erik89]

Worst decision of the decade. And from an organization that just year-ish ago decided that the cars arent dangerously fast enough and they need to be much faster in the corners in 2017.

[ArchieTech]

Improving the show

A number of sporting measures aimed at improving the show were also debated and specific studies will be carried out to assess these.

I wonder if any of those measures are removal of the halo ;)

[Erik89]

I hope what will happen is that they will drive one race with the HALO, teams, Brundle, drivers and media making mockery of it and it'll be gone by Bahrain or China.

[Whatisvalis]

Awful.

[Quickshifter]

I mean seriously?

F1 is an open cockpit formula and safety is paramount but this is not the way to tackle this. This is the biggest self goal F1 has inflicted upon itself since its inception.

Usually one gets used to changes but just like that ridiculous eliminator qualifying fia will be forced to eat humble pie when there is widespread ridicule and criticism from everyone.

[MoP]

This can't be happening. That's game over man , game over!

[goingthedistance]

Ugh, this is not a good outcome. An ugly solution that supposedly brings very limited additional protection. 

[stewie]

Oh well, on the upside - for those of us who don't have Sky, we'd only have to see it for 1 year...

[SenorSjon]

Jean Todt has a right which allows him to push any rule change through on safety grounds. He is for the first time using it and nobody will be able to prevent this.

I know, but Todt ignores F1 most of the time unless he can enforce a stupid rule.

Theoretical: could F1 break away from FIA?

[Silverstone96]

And if f1 really needs this why are Moto gp not adopting a roof in bikes?

The fia have lost sight of what f1 DNA is...but it will be used in any way that furthers todt's push on road safety