The FIA ​​justifies its choice of Halo

While the choice of Halo as a mandatory cockpit protection system from 2018 by the FIA was massively criticized, the Federation responded with a press conference explaining the reasons leading to the establishment of the Halo.

In its presentation, the FIA ​​takes the cases of several accidents in recent years: the fatal accidents of Henry Surtees in 2009 and Justin Wilson in 2015, both hit in the head by a tire or large debris.

« The Halo was initially designed following these two accidents, explains Laurent Mekies responsible for safety at the FIA. At the beginning, it was designated following the Surtees accident in 2009, then we slightly changed its geometry following Justin Wilson's accident in 2015. And since the Halo is made for that, it would obviously have changed the consequences of these accidents. »

The FIA ​​takes two other examples of smaller objects such as the spring from Felipe Massa's accident, or a piece of debris that pierced Max Chilton's helmet at the 2013 German Grand Prix.

« Then there is the case of smaller objects. We know that having the Halo provides additional protection even if it is not a window so there is not 100% safety but it is still safer than now."

In addition to these cases of external objects coming into contact with the head, the FIA ​​analyzed other cases such as contact and overlapping of cars like the start of the 2015 Austrian Grand Prix between Raikkonen and Alonso.

Concerning accidents where cars come into contact with hard parts of the surrounding environment, the vast majority of scenarios studied see a benefit from the introduction of the Halo, particularly in the case of the Maria de Villota accident. Concerning Jules Bianchi's accident, the conclusions remain neutral on a possible effect of the Halo.

>>> Video of the entire press conference <<