Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam43
They had a priority to introduce something that solved a problem. They also introduced a deadline. To do this they have introduced this. You could argue they could have developed something else, but, at least at one point, it looks like it wouldn’t be ready for the deadline. Now they can hone this, and look at other solutions to improve on this.
Please understand I’m not saying anything is actually needed. However, rather than just be glib I am attempting to understand a situation.
I wanted a house with a garage. At first I couldn’t afford one, so I moved in somewhere without a garage. I did not chose to get cold and wet every night until I could afford a house with a garage.
I don’t agree with this, but I can see how we have got here.
|
The issue as I see it is the imposition of a deadline, without thorough evaluation of the device before committing to it. IndyCar rejected the Halo because of banked ovals like Texas and have opted for the windshield, which is currently under evaluation. However, IndyCar have not committed to using it.