A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cyclists cocks up inside overtake



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #9  
Old May 12th 17, 09:11 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,757
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.