Autosport Plus

The findings that make halo criticism irrelevant

Charles Leclerc being hit by a flying Fernando Alonso at the Belgian Grand Prix ended some of the debate surrounding the halo. Here's why the FIA's findings prove it was right to implement the device and dissenting voices have been made irrelevant

The revelation that Charles Leclerc's visor would have been hit by Fernando Alonso's front-wing endplate in their Belgian Grand Prix crash without the halo's intervention has provided proof of exactly why the FIA was right to push against critics and implement the cockpit protection system.

Although the results of the investigation into the Spa crash cannot rule definitively on what injuries Leclerc may have suffered from such a visor strike, the fact we are left speculating over how bad it could have been speaks volumes about the current safety climate.

Share Or Save This Story

Author Jonathan Noble

Jonathan Noble is Motorsport.com’s Formula 1 editor. Having graduated from University of Sussex Jonathan worked for sports news agency Collings Sports reporting on F1, F3, touring cars and other sports, with articles appearing in The Daily Telegraph, The Independent, Reuters, Autosport and other publications. In 1999 he moved to Haymarket Publishing to become a senior editor at Autosport Special Projects, and one year later he became Autosport’s grand prix editor. In 2015 he moved to Motorsport Network, becoming the F1 editor for Motorsport.com. He is also a member of the Guild of Motoring Writers, and sits on the FIA Media Council.