Max Verstappen and Daniel Ricciardo give their thoughts on what they call an ‘ugly’ Halo design, and the reasons behind its full-scale introduction, while Scott Dixon comments on IndyCar’s Aeroscreen alternative, which has been inspired by jet fighter canopies.
Max Verstappen on the Halo: “The car is very ugly with it. I’ll keep saying that for the rest of the season, because I really don’t like it. It’s a shame really for Formula 1. It’s a bit safer, but at the end of the day, you can never make it 100% safe anyway.”
Daniel Ricciardo on the Halo: “It’s visually not the most pretty thing, but it’s fine. I think people will just get used to it. It’s there for a reason; it’s there for those freak accidents and for head injuries. What the fans and viewers need to not get confused or get misled by is that it doesn’t change anything what we do… racing, attacking, defending, how much you’re willing to put the car on the limit – the Halo doesn’t change any of that. Is it attractive? No. But were the F1 cars in 2009 attractive when they went to the big front wings and skinny rear wings? No, they thought they were ugly as hell. But after a few races your eyes just get used to looking at them. Yeah, they’re ugly, but they’re not as ugly as they were a few months ago. If there’s a crash and a part comes flying in the air, if it is going to land in front of you, it could save a death, that’s really all it is.”
Scott Dixon on the Aeroscreen: “The Halo wasn’t something that was feasible for us [in IndyCar], mostly because of the ovals sight-line. You’re in a looking up position, so you’d be looking directly at it. I think the Aeroscreen, with the backing of PPG [Industries], with what they’ve done in the past with fighter-jets, they’d already had a good concept and a good idea of what works and what doesn’t work.”