Formula One's drivers appear to be divided on the potential implementation of Halo for 2017, an issue being voted on by the Strategy Group on Thursday. Below is a round up of all the reaction of those in favour (including Sebastian Vettel, Daniel Ricciardo and Felipe Massa) and those still with reservations (including Nico Hulkenberg and Jolyon Palmer).
The presentation referred to by several was the one given by the FIA in Budapest on Halo, which highlighted the fact a driver would be 17 percent more likely to survive previous incidents with a Halo installed on the car.
Nico Hulkenberg: "Yeah, I think there are some mixed opinions amongst the drivers. Some favour it, some don't favour it. Obviously the aesthetics are no so good, it doesn't look very attractive. Yes, in some cases it would have been probably better and saved lives but as it is I think F1 is pretty safe and we also have to keep an element of danger there to keep it exciting, keep it spectacular. It's not in our hands what's going to happen with it. Today there is a meeting about Halo and we'll wait and hear from that."
Pascal Wehrlein: "I'm for the Halo, especially after the presentation we had in Budapest last weekend. Maybe it doesn't look so nice but it can save our lives - 17 percent [safer] so I'm clearly forward."
Felipe Nasr: "I'm in favour as well. It doesn't look great as everybody has said, but on the other hand it's safety that is the priority. I will be in favour. I believe for now, with what we have, it's something better - in the priority list of safety it can be improved. But we have to consider that if it comes in we will have to get used to it because it looks very different."
Daniel Ricciardo: "I think what people from the outside need to understand is that when we say it will make it safer, it will, but that doesn't mean the risks we take our any less. It won't change our approach to a corner. For me, as much as I understand it, it's to help [prevent] the freak accident, or if something comes flying in the air to stop it hitting us in the head as happened last year with some incidents in Indycar.
"I would say it's purely to get rid of that risk and I think it will do a good job. But for us getting behind the wheel and going flat out in Eau Rouge or something will not change if we've got Halo on or not. That's what people from the outside who are against it need to understand; we're still race car drivers it's just trying to eliminate that freak accident side of it."
Nico Rosberg: "It is very clear -- the large majority are definitely for the halo. Very large majority. We had the presentation from the FIA. And you can only be for it. I understand people who will see that ... critics, people who have something against the Halo, I understand that the purist and things like that, but nevertheless it is the right thing to do."
Asked if he had totally ruled out Aeroscreen as alternative, he said: Yes, totally ruled out. Long term it is an option but for next year it is totally ruled out. It is always a development, isn't it? For now the best solution is Halo. But definitely they know that long term there is further development that can be done to make it even better. For example, adding a screen to it and things like that.
"The best solution for now is already found. It is the Halo."
Kevin Magnussen: "There is no argument to say it's not safer to have the Halo. After learning about it and seeing the presentation about it in Hungary, it's clearly a step forward in terms of safety but we can continue to make it safer. We can make [the cars] a maximum of 100bhp and for sure that'll be safer but that's not really Formula One. You can easily take out the DNA of the sport, that's what I'm more worried about that safety."
Romain Grosjean: "I don't want to stop safety in Formula One and it's great, but if we're racing drivers then we make a choice to come into a dangerous sport and I'm not at all in favour of the Halo. I think it goes against the DNA in Formula One, against what I've seen as a kid or since it started in 1950.
"On top of that there has been a few downsides. We don't know what it's going to be like when it's raining; we don't know what it's going to be like on a track like Spa-Francorchamps where you're up and down; we don't know what it's going to be like in Singapore with the lights and the Halo; we've already got issues with the weight; and it's ugly. If it comes, fine. But again if I had to vote I would vote against."
Felipe Massa: "I think it's very difficult to give the right answer, so I think that the right answer if it's better for the safety I am totally in favour. If you really can save a life and can improve the safety in different types of accidents and if the Halo can do that, yeah we need the Halo.
"If there is still some doubt, maybe it is better to be sure but I am in favour so I think we had some explanation at the last race about the Halo at the drivers briefing, they were explaining all these different types of accidents that they were analysing all the different things and it seems to be trusting. But as I said it's important that if they change something you do a step forward, this is what we want."
Maybe if you cannot save a life or save the driver in a big accident it would be not nice but as I said let's wait and see what's going to happen, in my opinion its positive that we need to try and improve the safety all the time."
Jolyon Palmer: "I'm still against it. It was good that we had the presentation, it was interesting. I don't think it really changes that much for me, really. It was confirmed that it wouldn't have helped Felipe Massa, it wouldn't have helped Jules Bianchi, it would have helped Justin Wilson and it would have helped Henry Surtees.
"We don't have those incidents in Formula One because we are not racing on ovals. Brands GP kind of might as well be an oval, you've got very high-speed corners out the back and three meter run-offs, of course everything bounces back on. I think at Silverstone, with Copse, there's so much run-off, we don't have debris flying all over the track like they do, so I think it's a similar thing to what I said before really, where IndyCar, I can see the point because you are doing oval racing.
"I don't think it would have saved a life in F1 for certainly over 20 years, or even prevented an injury, and there are other down sides that were brought up, like visibility. I've never tried it but I know a couple of the drivers that have, have said that visibility straightforward is fine but starting to go up and down, imagine Eau Rouge, and you've got something blocking your view there, maybe actually you could have more complications.
"It could end up we improve the safety by having the Halo, which reduces from already I think we have to say it's quite a small chance of an incident happening like that, but instead of doing that we have worse visibility every race, every time we go in the car, so I think there is a trade-off for me I prefer without."
"Everyone I speak to, well most people I speak to are actually against it but I think a lot of people don't really voice it so much ion the press. I think there is probably a bit of a divide, maybe some of the older guys prefer it, the younger guys don't."
Daniil Kvyat: "I think there are some people that are a bit old school who think there is enough safety in F1 and they say if you don't like it go to touring cars but some people say we want as much safety as possible. I personally think it is enough [currently].
"We don't have any right to call in the place to make a decision it is up to other people. I think they should speak to the drivers but it is up to them really. We can only express are feeling and opinions on this case."