|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Cyclists cocks up inside overtake
On 12/05/2017 08:07, TMS320 wrote:
On 11/05/17 22:19, MrCheerful wrote: On 11/05/2017 20:17, TMS320 wrote: On 11/05/17 11:30, MrCheerful wrote: On 11/05/2017 10:10, TMS320 wrote: On 10/05/17 21:30, JNugent wrote: On 10/05/2017 20:35, TMS320 wrote: On 10/05/17 05:43, wrote: http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/drive...5jsGlRAE01C.01 It's a road with a 40mph limit. No way did that RR crash into the bus at less than 40mph. One hopes the injury, damage and the air bag recorder are sufficient evidence to give the driver enough points to keep him away from other road users for a while. I wouldn't be so sure. It's not often that a vehicle will be driven into a stationary obstruction at 40mph in an urban environment, and in any case, body damage on modern vehicles can be very deceptive. It's not difficult to see the difference between skin damage and structural damage. As you know, rumpling panels are designed for absorbing shock and directing energy away from vehicle occupants. Indeed. This one clearly didn't. The driver only had minor injuries, I think that shows how incredibly safe modern vehicles are. The apparent severity of the crash would have killed or maimed for life someone in a car from just 20 or so years ago. The mid-90's were not primitive times in automotive times. There is no straightforward way of knowing the difference. My point main point that the structural damage (implying there was far more energy than the crumple zones could cope with) is not from a collision of less than 40mph. No, that is not the implication of that which you wrote. I suggest you read the paragraph at the top. The vehicle DID absorb the energy of the crash, whatever speed that occurred at. The driver suffered minor injuries only, that is a testament to the safety features of modern cars. Effectively the bus is the immovable object, rather as the concrete block is in safety test crashes. Watch the ncap test of a range rover, that test is at 39mph, the damage is pretty close to the damaged vehicle pictures, except that the bus is much higher than the concrete block and so hit the bonnet much more, there is also the lack of bounceup of the vehicle (compared to hitting a concrete block) and that would increase the frontal damage. Still, remember to keep this on topic, a cyclist riding into the back of a bus at 20mph will have no safety equipment (in comparison) and many cyclists have died as a result of riding into the back of stationary vehicles. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How to overtake a pair of cyclists | Alycidon | UK | 10 | January 22nd 16 11:07 AM |
Good Idea: Penalties for Motorists Trying To Overtake Cyclists | Bret Cahill[_4_] | UK | 3 | May 12th 14 07:21 PM |
Why do some cyclists overtake on the left? | John Benn | UK | 58 | August 22nd 12 01:35 AM |
Idea to warn cyclists against trying to pass on the inside. of lorries | Mr. Benn[_9_] | UK | 21 | April 30th 12 01:13 AM |
up the inside of a lorry at a junction, when will cyclists learn? | Mrcheerful[_2_] | UK | 59 | February 18th 11 06:44 PM |