It has been a controversial week, with the FIA confirming that the Halo head protection system will be pushed out onto the cars in 2018. The plan has sparked a lot of discussion from fans and figures within the Formula One paddock, not all good.
The decision was made at a Strategy Group meeting on Wednesday, just a few days after the second anniversary of Jules Bianchi’s passing in 2015 from injuries sustained from the 2014 Japanese Grand Prix. A statement from the FIA describes both the “unanimous agreement of the Strategy Group, in July 2016” and “the repeated support from the drivers”.
However, it has been revealed that only one team was supporting the introduction of the Halo system in 2018 when it was discussed in the meeting on Wednesday. This team is expected to have been either Mercedes, who pioneered the Halo concept, or Ferrari, who has does vigorous testing with the device.
One team is far from “unanimous agreement”. In fact, many drivers and teams have been openly expressing their lack of support for the proposed head protection systems. Romain Grosjean has been extremely vocal about the systems in the past.
Without the support needed to implement the Halo in 2018, it is believed that the FIA vetoed the rest of the group, opting to introduce the system in 2018. Why would the FIA push for such a change, despite the backlash?
The answer could be a legality concern, rather than solely a safety concern. The death of Jules Bianchi resulted in a formal investigation, in which the FIA’s panel pointed out a number of safety changes that may have been able to prevent or limit the accident at Suzuka. Now that the issues have been brought to attention, it is believed that the FIA could face negligence charges if there were to be another fatal accident in Formula One.
It is also believed that the FIA could be under pressure to implement the change, with the Bianchi family having filed a lawsuit against the FIA, among other parties, for the “avoidable” death of Jules. The lawsuit was filed in May of last year.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other agency, organization, employer or company. Assumptions made in any analysis contained within this article are not reflective of the position of any entity other than the author.
