Fan photos show how close F2 driver came to disaster in Barcelona
Posted By: James Allen  |  17 May 2018   |  9:07 pm GMT  |  195 comments

Photos sent in by a spectator at the Spanish Grand Prix weekend in Barcelona, have shed light on how close F2 driver Tadasuke Makino came to a serious injury or worse in his accident with fellow competitor Nirei Fukuzumi during Sunday’s sprint race.

Makino has said the halo device – which has proved a controversial addition to F1 and F2 cars for this year because of the way it obscures fans’ view of the drivers and its overall aesthetics – saved his life in his accident.

These images would appear to bear this out.

The accident is reminiscent of that between Romain Grosjean and Fernando Alonso at the first corner at Spa in 2012. But this F2 incident shows that the car climbing on top of the other would probably have hit Makino’s head without the halo.

Proponents of the halo will see this as a vindication of their argument that it was only a matter of time before a car, a wheel or a large object made contact with a driver’s head with fatal consequences.

“The first time I tested this car I didn’t think the halo was good, because it’s difficult to see anything, but today the halo helped me,” said Makino.

“It’s really important. I understand how the halo works now.

“I don’t know what happened, but without the halo I think the tyre would have hit my helmet.”

The incident and these images are likely to come up at the F1 and F2 drivers’ briefings in Monaco next weekend.

What do you think of this incident and its consequences? Leave your comment in the section below

Featured Innovation
technical innovation from tata COMMUNICATIONS
Share This:
Posted by:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!
Tom Ellsworth

The comments about open wheel racing being better off as a dangerous sport and comparing it to tight rope walking are wrong-headed at best.

Do we forget the death of Senna? The angle of impact of the tire and suspension member certainly would’ve been changed by a halo.

Do we forget Justin Wilson? The force of the flying nose cone from Sage Karan’s car hitting Wilson’s helmet was so great it ricocheted 12 metres (40 feet) vertically into the air. Wilson was extricated from his car and airlifted to Lehigh Valley Hospital in Allentown in a coma and died the following day.

Drivers will always push the limit and take risks. Senna himself said that if you don’t go for a gap and take a risk of some type, you were not really a racing driver (The famous Jackie Stewart interview).

Jackie Stewart himself campaigned for safer circuits not less safe circuits or less safe racing.

I want drivers to be as bold as possible and let the great ones stand out from the rest. I want as much safety in the sport as possible as I watch them do it.

Thanks – E.


the antifans will always oppose the halo nor matter how ridiculous they come across.


I think this incident, & others like it, are the result of an individual persons perception of where their line is (or how far they can push their luck if you prefer), & their expectation of other peoples acceptance of their limit.

For an example, Michael would interlock wheels with Coulthard & be ok with it, whereas Coulthard believed it was dangerous.

Therefore i believe this is something that will continue to occur, especially in the lower formula with less experienced drivers.

As to the consequences of this incident, well I think it renders the last two years of comment from Sebee completely null & void.

Also, although the Halo makes driver identification more difficult, I don’t accept that it can’t be done.

It is not essential to see the entire helmet, as they are all different colours, plus the cars are numbered, the Roll Hoop cameras are different, the drivers lines are different, & the live timing & big screens show the order of the race.

………… you just know the first Sauber-Romeo to go past is Le Clerc.

Nic Maennling

Let’s all calm down. After that collision he now understands how the halo works ?! Nonsense. It will always be about ifs and buts. Not enough evidence has been amassed to prove anything at all. Let’s see what happens next time which we hope will never happen. It looks like one driver lost his mobile.


As a public service announcement, virtually all of Sebee’s statistical analysis below is invalid/incorrect, and his conclusion that driving an F1 car on track is safer than driving on public roads is ludicrous.
Either he knows this and is being deliberately misleading, or he does not know this and should refrain from doing data analysis in public places.


How about some data to back up your statement Mr. Public Service Announcement?


Based on past experience data is not how you make your decisions. Instead you come up with your conclusion first, sift through the available information in quest of a fact that doesn’t on the face of it directly contradict your theory, and then shout about the big secret/conspiracy you have uncovered. If you are confronted with evidence to the contrary you either dismiss it (That doesn’t count because :insert excuse here: ), or just ignore it with the standard fall back of “Well I am entitled to my opinion”.
That is not the way facts work, and so my announcement was aimed at those who base their decisions on reason. And there is no reasonable way to reach the conclusion that it is safer racing a F1 car than driving on the public roadways.


This accident was caused because the cars are open wheel. If the cars were not open wheel, like say Formula E cars, then this accident would have never happened in the manor it did, and no contact near any drivers head would have occurred.

Open wheel cars are dangerous, plus, we know they make bad race cars because of the turbulent air issue. But mostly because of safety, perhaps it is time that the FIA considered ending senselessly dangerous open wheel racing.

I think the best solution is for F1 to adopt the TCR formula for 2021. They’re much safer, and they have tons of road relevance!!


Ha! Good one.


The “best” drivers in the world, driving the safest cars in the world, on the safest circuits in the world, promoting road safety, all sponsored by Martini and Hieniken.

This really is a joke being played on the fans.


You want alcohol sponsorship banned now Twitch?


I’m pointing out the absurdity of it…..where did you see me mention banning alcohol sponsorship?

Are you saying you support drinking and driving (see how easy it is to jump to ludicrous conclusions)?


Those who’re against the Halo are probably fans of war movies, death and destructions.


Personally, I’m fond of Die Hard.


Not I. My favourite genre happens to be comedy.


Those who support the halo are probably fans of Dora the Explorer, living in a bubble, and trying to save everything.

Damn, this game is easier than I thought. Ok your turn again.


Twitch, is it worth watching a few drivers die, to preserve the aesthetic purity of the cars?


Tim, please grant me the benefit of the doubt that actually seeing people die and/or get injured is NOT what I want to see.

However, as has been mentioned below, I am not in favour of diluting the challenge that is racing an open wheel, open cockpit race car.

Imagine for a second, a tight rope walker. Walks spans between skyscrapers, across the Grand Canyon….amazing stuff. Now, what if, instead of across massive gaps, the walker set his rop up 3 feet off the group with foam mats underneath.

Yes, he’s still tightrope walking, yes it still takes skill to balance on the rope….but watching it as a spectator, it’s not quite the same. Why? Because that element of danger is missing.

No one wants to see the tightrope walker fail and die (at least most don’t). We want to see him literally tip toe along the line that separates life from death.

And again, as has been mentioned…it’s not like driving an open cockpit open wheeled race car is a mandatory function that society relies on to function. All of these drivers volunteer for this, and they could all walk away at any second – even if they still want to race, but in safer cars, there is all kinds of different series out there to compete in.

The problem is again elite people wanting to burn the candle at both ends. Top drivers want to be in F1 because of the glamor and hoopla. They want all the status that comes with being an F1 driver or champion – yet they don’t want to deal with the very factors that make F1 racing, or winning an F1 championship, special.

Danny Pedrosa would probably crash a hell of a lot less if his bike had training wheels on it – but adding wheels to a motorcycle to make it safer changes the core of the challenge. Same as closing in the cockpit of an F1 car. Dealing with the danger is part of the challenge of F1. Every safety feature that gets added, dilutes the challange.

Ask yourself, really, just for a fun thinking exercise…is there a limit on how safe an F1 car should be? At what point does safety ruin F1 for you? It’ll be different for all of us, but everyone will have a line somewhere? Is the goal to make it so that any person could competitively drive an F1 car with zero risk of injury? So just for discussion, try to determine where your own line for “enough is enough with safety” might be.

Again, we (I) don’t want to see people die or get hurt. We want to see them flirt with death, and win!!


Twitch, I’m not accusing you of wanting to see people die, I’m asking you if you are willing to risk that happening just to make the cars look prettier.

I don’t see how the halo dilutes the challenge of driving an open wheel open cockpit race car, it doesn’t make it easier to drive those cars on the limit, which is of course what the challenge is.

Your tightrope walker analogy doesn’t work, in the grand canyon example the danger is the whole point of the exercise, in F1 it is not. For it to work there would have to be 20 people taking it in turns to run across the tightrope, and the fastest time wins. In that scenario the height of the wire wouldn’t matter, as that’s not the point of it. F1 is a race, it isn’t a test of bravery, it’s a test of speed. Being crowned the fastest and the best is what makes becoming an F1 champion special, it has nothing to do with the risks involved. Safety don’t dilute the challenge, because that’s not what the challenge is!

Is there a limit on how safe an F1 car should be? Of course, if they slowed them down to a crawl or made them remote controlled from the pits, then I would stop watching, but there’s no way that would ever happen, and the halo doesn’t put us anywhere nearer that point than we were before. As long as F1 remains at roughly the speeds seen today then the risk can not possibly be removed. Having cars travelling at over 200mph inevitably leads to the risk of unsurviveable impacts occuring, there is simply no way of removing that risk completely, and we are far far from that point now, the drivers continue to ‘flirt with death’ everytime they leave the pits.

If the halo crosses your ‘line in the sand’ of what is acceptable, then you have a decision to make. There is no way the FIA could possibly backtrack on a safety issue like this, so it is here to stay. For me it doesn’t affect the racing at all, so it doesn’t bother me at all.


Sorry but that makes no sense. I think most of us watch f1 to see a talented human performing at the top of their sport. Not how close to death they are.

Based on this thinking we should get rid of fire suites so we can enjoy the thrill of knowing a driver could burn in an instant, or get rid of the roll hoop just so we know a car landing upside down could land on a driver’s head.

Fulveo Ballabeo

Excellent post!


If you leave the cockpits open then the question you have to ask is whether the drivers think that it’s worth racing such cars. And obviously that’s a question for each driver to answer on an individual basis.


Luke, the drivers were asked their opinion, and were overwhelmingly in favour.

Fulveo Ballabeo

Exactly! Keep preaching the truth, LukeC.


What’s up with my stars lol o.0 Must have been a wrong email address.

Fulveo Ballabeo

Or…wait for it…open cockpit F1 racing


I find it ironic that this safety push is starting at the pinnacle of motorsport where the elite of the world are suppose to be. Their level of driving should mitigate or reduce the risk of danger significantly. Possibly since the absolute elite don’t always make it and those with deep pockets do? Yet at the entry level of karting there is nothing being done as far as I know and there is no safety in terms of seat belts, monocoque, halo etc… Karting is also the entry point where skill levels will vary significantly and should be more prone to accidents, injuries. The driver are the most exposed with no seat belts or protection from impact if they are launched or a kart mounts them. I guess the real question is at WHAT POINT DO GO-KARTS BECOME BUMPER KARTS? And are we seeing drivers driving like they are in Bumper karts as a result? The FIA is all about safety yet I do not hear anything being developed to prevent a Billy Monger incident in the future with a crash structure mandatory in front of the drivers legs. Maybe if Billy filed litigation against the FIA like Bianchi did it would be their new safety push.


Has the FIA started designing a halo for karts yet? Or is there not enough money in karting for the FIA to give a hoot?


I love how everyone is talking about the cat that got hit…..but there’s no comments regarding the cat that did the hitting.

Go watch the full replays, instead of looking at a couple cell phone shots.

Ask yourself, would the car who did the hitting have made that big of a bone-head mistake had he grown up in an era where driving a car was actually dangerous?

Halo is exactly what F1 needs. The safer the cars get, the less regard for safety the drivers can take. That will lead to more spectacular crashes, which means a more exciting intro video, which will grow viewership.

Go the nascar route. Turn F1 cars into rolling tanks, hope for the “big one” every race.

Anyone notice how the last couple rounds, he commentary team on Sky has been literally begging for a safety car to spice up the action. Safer cars, more safety cars, more action. Cha-Ching$$$$


As a volunteer fire-fighter i have seen people being dead because of an air bag or safety belt. But way more often you see people surviving because of them. Like 5 people in a car, 4 with a belt surviving, the fifth without is catapulted through the window and dead. Driver drowned because he couldn’t open the belt (or was unconscious).

What we need to end the discussion: free F1 cars and free usage of race tracks for EVERYONE. So we have a bigger number of accidents for statistics to see how useful the HALO is.

I bet if the HALO haters would have lived 100 years earlier they would have said: ‘Remove these damn helmet from the drivers. After an accident people want to see their blood and sweet covered faces showing tears and fears… ‘


@ Seifenkistler….Why is it than everyone who puts forward an alternative viewpoint these days is automatically labelled as ‘a hater’. That is quite ridiculous and does nothing except up the ante re rhetoric. People do have differing opinions and they should be able to view those without being belittled. Consider this…what is the opposite of ‘hate’ ? In my book it is ‘love’ Therefore arfe all people who support the Halo ‘lovers’. That is as silly as the opposite. No one, except sickos, want to see drivers dying on the track but if there is another solution that satisfies the safety and the aesthetic principles why not pursue that as the best alternative to nothing. The fact that the ‘screen’ made one driver feel queasy was, IMO, not a good enough reason to abandon the concept.


Sorry. I wrote HALO-haters because there seem to be people who really hate it. Of cause not everyone who didn’t like the HALO is a ‘hater’.

As a person who never had English classes at school I was learning an early Trumpish-like language and not Oxford English from the kids of the nearby US garrison.

Sorry if my fight with the English language is using a brutal bastard sword and not the fine and elegant foil.

My English uses to be better once I start to think in English. But that happens very rarely, because it needs 3 hours English in a row for me.

Fulveo Ballabeo

I’d take that bet. No one wants to see anyone injured or killed. The halo haters hate halo because they love open cockpit F1 racing. And the halo monstrosity stole their passion from them. For no reason.

Helmets, HANS, Safer, etc. are fantastic safety gamechangers. None of which altered F1’a core open cockpit DNA like halo does.

Open cockpit is a known quantity when a driver enters it. If a driver doesn’t want open cockpit, no problem. There are plenty of other series with roofs and rollcages. So no reason to bastardize open cockpit F1 racing with halo.


Sorry but you’re misrepresenting the anti-halo argument. The argument is simply that f1 is an open cockpit formula and f1 drivers being adults should be given the freedom to do a risk vs reward analysis and then proceed accordingly.

No one is arguing for the removal of helmets and seat belts, but the reality is that safety, like everything in life, needs to be handled with finesse. In other words, the measures should be implemented within reason and within the framework dictated by the DNA of the sport. Otherwise where do you draw the line? You might as well limit the cars to 200 bhp and only allow them to race down a straight aircraft runway one at a time and in perfectly sunny conditions. That would make it even safer, but I think you’ll agree that something would be lost as a consequence. Same with the halo, it might make it a tiny bit safer in 0.00001 percent of accidents, but something is lost as a result, and that something that is lost has a value that far exceeds the benefits offered by halo.


Luke, the ‘throttle works both ways’ argument has been rolled out every time any safety innovation has been introduced to F1.


That’s because there is some validity to it.

But that’s not really the point. As I’ve said earlier, safety, PUs, track design, aesthetics of the cars, all need to be handled with finesse. Unfortunately f1 has been guilty of havy handedness on all four counts.

It’s akin to a composer who composes a song that’s loud and fast at the start, in the middle, at the end, and at every second in between. It just doesn’t work.

A good composer, in contrast, composes with finesse. He understands that to create an impact on the listener there will need to be louder parts, quieter parts, he will vary the tempo, even change the time signatures where necessary in order to make it as dynamic and as moving as possible. And of course he will be selective and leave our certain ideas that don’t suit his purpose. F1 would do well to learn from that instead of just going to the max with everything and incorporating every idea under the sun into a hodge-podge of conflicting elements that we have the privilege of paying to enjoy today.


Luke, the design of the halo will be finessed over time, but it’s worth remembering that F1 isn’t a beauty contest. Your song analogy falls down because music is judged purely on its beauty, F1 is a speed competition.

Your accusation that the FIA rushed into the halo is unfair. After the fatal accidents of Henry Surtees and others, a need for driver’s head protection was identified. Many different proposals were analysed and tested before the halo was selected, it was tested extensively tested on the cars before its introduction, this whole process took around three years.


After a bit of thought, here’s my take on this argument. Bear in mind that I am not an engineer and I am willing to stand corrected if necessary.
1. The halo, & subsequent next generation replacements, remain mandatory on all junior levels of open wheel single seat race cars up to & including F2. Think of them as students or journeyman trades.
2. The internal chassis support structures for the halo are mandatory in all F1 chassis. The halo itself it not mandatory. Driver decides as a personal preference. Drivers who opt not to mount the halo to its internal support structures are required to carry it equivalent weight within the chassis somewhere behind the headrest; i.e. at about the same height, albeit a bit further back. I understand that this will affect the point of CoG somewhat, perhaps advantageously or perhaps not. I’m not an engineer, remember.

This creates a scenario akin to that era of professional ice hockey when helmets became mandatory in the junior leagues but were player’s choice in the NHL. Younger players tended to choose to wear helmets. They had less years behind them without the helmet, so adapted more easily. The older pros continued to play with their heads exposed. All of the arguments I’ve read on JAonF1 and other sites express the same old story we had regarding hockey helmets back in the last century.
They are ugly. True.
They impair vision to some degree. True, especially for the older guys.
If you are a spectator, it’s harder to tell 1 player from another on a given team if you can’t see his name or number from your sight line. True in hockey. Less so in F1 because each driver can have a unique helmet colour scheme.
Alas, the NHL took that choice away from the players some years ago.
Can we not tweek the rules somewhat for 2019 onwards to leave this up to the driver’s choice. Hamilton, Vettel, Alonso, Kimi if he continues, would probably say no to the halo. The new drivers I’m betting would say yes, I’ll keep it.


Anyone catch Danny Pedrosa’s high side at the last motogp round at Jerez? Watch it in slow mo, and watch his face bounce off the pavement. Poor Danny, with his light weight, he high sides more often than anyone on the grid. He should definitely have a Halo installed on his bike.

Tornillo Amarillo

Hope nobody dies even WITH a halo (what if a wheel comes down vertical, maybe there is a non-protected spot there and it could happen).

What some people could say if somebody dies with the halo if already some people are against the halo when protecting the driver!


Like all the safety features that have been added over the years the Halo reduces the risk it doesn’t it eliminate it completely.


I am no nanny state fan. However, in a race a couple of years ago a young fella sheared a brake pad in braking zone into a hairpin, spun, launched up off the kerb and hit my car with his gearbox about 6″ behind my head. Wheel bounced off side of cockpit. Makes you think.


No way of knowing how hard his head would have been hit by the tyre, bit obvious it would have been hit, but I assume the car on top was heading towards the outside of the corner, that if it caught it in the wrong place would have hit the driver’s head. Might have been anything from a mild knock to death, no way of knowing. The tyre marks in the car and halo clearly showed it stopped intrusion to the cockpit head area.

But if I put it bluntly – how would you feel if it was your son coming home in a box? What if you were Mr and Mrs Makino arranging a funeral this week? Nothing is worth that pain, when it could have been prevented, even by a god ugly device. Roll on the shield, but live with the halo for now.


The parents could spare their pain if they never put their kid in car racing.

You’ve painted the perfect example here.

Rich ass parents put their kid into motoracing, because it’s “cool”, because it’s a status thing to say “my kid competes in F2,” yet, they are completely unable and unwilling to deal with the consequences of their choice to allow their son to go motor racing.

I want my kid to be the best snowboarder in the world, but I don’t want to see him get hurt. Therefor, we should flatten all the mountains, to make sure far fewer people get hurt snowboarding. Then, when my kid wins Olympic gold, I can cash in off his success. See, everyone wins 🙂

Fulveo Ballabeo

Exactly! Well said.


Hi James, would it be possible to include a photo of the tyre marks on Makino’s car? That would show where the impact actually was, and help with interpreting the other photos.


Yes I have them somewhere


Wow, some of these comments are a little chillilng, almost seems injury to the driver would have been a preferable outcome for many posters.


There would not have been injury. His helmet Hans and high sides were sufficient for the task here.


You can take a halo apply it to Schumacher’s car in Abu Dhabi. Räikkönen’s car in Austria, Alonso’s car in Belgium or Brundle’s car at Oulton Park and make the same argument that judeging by the scuffs it saved their lives. When in fact without the halo the roll hoop tends to do enough to prevent anything from happening. To say the halo saved his life is conjecture at best.


That tyre hit forward of the roll hoop. Now, replay the incident as if the halo were not there.


One video from very far away and a few pictures are hardly relevant evidence.

It will never be known what would have happened in Spain without the halo, and anyone should be wary about any suggestion that halo is either useful OR useless with this as evidence.

It is however quite natural that FIA and their advocates are spreading the knowledge of this as much as possible, which is not a negative thing itself.

From what i can see in this crash scene, both the roll bar and the side protections did well what they are supposed to do when it comes to create a protection for the driver. Similar dynamics occurred in at least three other similar cases, without the halo.

* Crash between Rosberg and Karthikeyan in Abu Dhabi 2012: both drivers were unarmed.

* Grosjean and Alonso at Spa 2012 no halo and no injury.

* Raikkonen and Alonso in Austria 2015: no halo and the Mclaren literally topped the Ferrari cockpit, with no injured.

Is that proof that halo is useless? Of course not.


The only reason I notice the halo now is that it’s difficult to see the driver’s helmet colour. Ooh err missus.

Some form of driver identification by coloured wings, etc (as has been done before) is needed that’s more obvious than a relatively small and muted colour racing number we have now.


Pretty big crash if both drivers were “unarmed”. 😀


Lol,”no harm”, not “no arm” 😀


Indeed you are correct, it’s not proof. Those were different crashes.


A few points – we all wish for no deaths and injuries in any sport however:

1 – F1 is well and truly safe enough – and has been for years. In fact the continued efforts to make F1 safer in fact has made it more unsafe. Example is all the tarmac runoff areas results in drivers trying moves they never would have tried years ago – too much of a safety net.

2 – Drivers need to start taking massive pay cuts. 20-30m per year pays are a joke when there is little to no risk of anything. You cant have it both ways – very little risk with big payouts – wheres the skill if you can make all the errors in the world and get away without any sort of penalty?

3 – Very easy for the powers that be in F1 to see a few accidents, talk to a few engineers and expect the teams to implement, test and pay for the safety features. Maybe pay a bit more attention to race control – example with not bringing out a safely car when a car has run into the barrier on the outside of a fast corner in the torrential rain – Jules Bianchi anyone?


Only a few drivers get salaries that are really big. A lot of drivers get between $1m-$4m, which is not that much for what they do.

Also, you seem to forget Jules Bianchi. Or even Massa and the accident he had. F1 is still very dangerous. Might not see that big of a deal from your armchair, but the travels, the training, the long days doing promo, the expectations. Also, everybody seems to forget how all these drivers got here and what it took since they were kids.

I don’t know of any driver that at 18yo decided to be an F1 driver and made it. All these drivers made their choice when they were 7yo or something. Their families put a lot of investment in their choice. Maybe you some research how much it costs to run a kart for 1 year in a championship. All these drivers and their families have made that choice knowing that it might not lead to anything. So getting here 20 years later and getting these sort of salaries is not unfair imo.

Yes, I know some have sponsors, but it still takes lots of begging and convincing and you still need to win other championships and be at the top of your game.


This is so rediculous. If i decides what I wanted my occupation to be when I was 7, I should receive 1-4m per year?? Because I tried hard from a young age? Seriously, wtf.

The long days working out and doing promo….dude, have you ever worked a full day of manual labor in your life? You haven’t got the slightest clue what hard work is. The Chinese imagery workers who build circuits in the Middle East know what hard work is…the rich jack asses who drive on these circuits don’t have a fucking clue.

How is getting 1-4m per year to drive a car on 20 weekends a year worth 1-4m? By that logic, teachers should be making 10m per year, heart surgeons about 1-2 billion per year.

The value you place on a person who can drive a car in a circle very fast is completely out of whack.


Twitch. F1 drivers earn what they are worth. Ferrari pay Sebastian 50m a year because they think he is worth that much. F1 drivers salaries aren’t based on the level of risk involved, or the number of hours they work, they are based on the fact that they have a skill set that very few people on the planet possess. If you look at other sports, the film and music industries and big business you will see similarly high amounts paid to people who can do what most of us cannot.

It is not Bogdan’s value of people who can drive in a circle that matters, or even yours, it is how the teams value them that matters.

If you had an F1 team, how much would you offer as a salary? And who do you think you would get for that?


Tim, F1 drivers, along with pretty much most pro athletes, receive higher than average salaries (most make in the 6 figure range at minimum, which is far above average) partially because of the danger and risk involved. Not all sports are as dangerous as F1, but even in soccer, part of the players’s salary is to compensate for potential injury that could give them grief later in life.

Are you arguing that no part of an F1 driver’s salary is to compensate for the danger, implying that there is no danger in F1? 😉


I’m really confused how anyone can look at the photos and then decide that the halo is safety overkill. It’s just probably saved that drivers life. That’s why it’s there, that’s why it’s a good thing.


Well it worked in this instance, but any view from the side shows that the driver’s helmet comes above the halo, in very basic design flaw. I am sure there must be a reason can James dig it out? It is the same on all F1 cars.


Saved his life? Please 🙄…following that stupid logic means we can say everyone’s life is saved when there is no driver, so why are we keeping drivers?

Still hate the halo, it makes marshmallows out of men. MotoGP, Isle of Man, Downhill Skiers all have balls of steel while F1 drivers are castrated girly-boys.


Well, if Makino had been allowed to be a man, as you would have it, he’d likely be a maimed man or worse.


Genuine question – if that’s really what you think why are you even watching it?

Fulveo Ballabeo

Good question. Genuine answer: I, for one, am not watching.

I’ve put up with cumulative slaps in the fans face: vacuum-cleaner PU’s, tipped noses, shark fins, T-wings, snowplow front wings, that farcical quake change.

Halo is the last straw. No more. I’m done. I’m out.I love open cockpit, open wheel racing. Halo has stolen that.

I’ll read JAonF1. I might even occasionally watch a 5-minute YouTube race recap. But I used to watch every practice/qualy/race, attend at least one event year, and buy merchandise. No more. As a customer, I’m voting with my wallet. Halo-ed F1 won’t be getting my time or my money.

Halo-ed F1 cars are atrocious – I can’t look at a still photograph of them. So I’m certainly not going to give halo-ed F1 five-minutes (much less five-plus hours) a weekend for practice/qualy/race.

Things that compete for my attention are, for the first time ever, displacing F1. I’m quickly becoming a highly engaged MotoGP fan, and will be attending my first event this year.

To be clear: I don’t wish injury or death on anyone. If drivers don’t want to race open cockpit, there’a already a solution: go race in different formula that has rollcages, roofs, etc. Don’t bastardize f1’s core DNA/differentiator: open cockpit, open wheel racing.

For the sake of the sport I love(d), perhaps there won’t be many like me?


Well said. Those are exactly my sentiments.

Fulveo Ballabeo

Oops…should read ‘that farcical qualy change”. Dang autocorrect!


By the halo’s logic we should also never leave the house because we might get run over by a car. However, we don’t live our lives that way. We make a risk vs reward analysis and we go about our business regardless of the potential risk.

Motorsport should be the same. Every singe driver who steps into the cockpit should make a risk vs reward analysis and then proceed accordingly.


Just stick to your manly men Sports then?


I’m not a fan but I genuinely don’t even notice the halo anymore…

Open question – would the aeroshield or an equivalent have prevented the potential accident in the pictures above? I’d say probably not.


The Red Bull aeroshield had pretty high sides, so maybe. It would depend, I’d guess, on the strength of the material.

The forward shield that Vettel tested wouldn’t have helped here.


Have you been to spec savers lately?

For me it’s just the opposite. The more I see the so called “halo” the more it irritates me. Get rid of it already.



And if you are genuiely more irritated every time you see it, I do feel very sorry for you and everyone around you, you’re in for a rough year.


I don’t watch F1. On the morning after I usually watch the 7 minute highlights and the post race interviews and that’s it. Watching the whole race from start to finish is no longer possible for me with current f1. In fact, when I need my f1 fix I watch a rerun of a classic race from the 90s or 2000s. Those races I can definitely watch from start to finish.


Andrew M, I have jumped on a stream of Australia and have looked at the recap youtube freebies. I admit it. But my stance of no revenue from me in hybrid era stands. Although my youtube views probably gave F1 perhpas 25 cents by now, regretfully.


Luke, you spend more time here moaning than you do watching the races?! That makes zero sense to me. Just move on….



it’s true. I watch the recap and the post race interviews, which takes up about an hour of my time. And that’s it. I think I would be inclined to watch if there was decent free-to-air coverage but there isn’t and I have no incentive to pay to listen to vacuum cleaner sounds and to look at a thong. If those things change, as well as a few more minor ones, I will subscribe and absorb every second just like the old times.

And I am still optimistic about 2021, but if it turns out to be more of the same I’ll be done altogether and probably won’t even bother with the recaps or JA on F1.


I’ll be honest, I don’t believe you, like I don’t believe Sebee’s grand proclamations that he hardly ever watches but still comes here after every race to comment. And even if I did, I think that’s a ridiculous stance to take.

Top Tags
SEARCH Innovation