F1 can speed up now that the controversial 'Halo' safety feature is attached to the cars. That is the view of Alex Wurz, the president of the Grand Prix Drivers' Association. Like many, the Austrian admits that Halo is not appealing "visually".
But he backs the move to make it mandatory. "It's not possible with today's society and legal situation for a body like the FIA to ignore safety developments just because some don't like it aesthetically," he told Der Standard newspaper. "Society has changed and a global industry must do everything humanly possible to prevent people from getting hurt or killed."
And the former F1 driver thinks it is possible unhappy fans will quickly forget about Halo anyway. "If the sport is really exciting on the track, with several winners and a close field, 99.9pc of the spectators won't care if there's a Halo or not," said Wurz.
He said that with Halo on the cars, F1 and the FIA can also push the throttle on making the cars even more spectacular. "If we make sure the cars are safe, in the future we can fly through Monaco at 400 or 450kph, and not need a red flag when it rains," said Wurz. (GMM)
I thought the Halo was introduced to make CURRENT cars safer. Where does the idea come from that the cars are now safe enough for future performance increases?
That's an interesting thought, that would mean that the FIA already has a plan and a strategy, so what is Ross Brawn than still doing. On the other hand, isn't JT's approach to do nothing and let the teams and rights holder sort it out? But I think you are right, a hidden agenda, now let's see whose.
Would you like to stay up to date with the latest Lewis Hamilton and Formula 1 news from GPtoday? Activate free push notifications and be the first to know!
6
Grand Prix of Belgium
C. Sainz jr
Major Tom
Posts: 152
More spectacular, more noisy - no, irrelevant for the vast majority of fans who watch on TV. More competitive is what we want.