6 ms·
Hence the "arms race" of ever huger cars, yes. And, if you value your life, don't even think about cycling or going by foot with such cars around...
by rob74 2y ago
Hence the "arms race" of ever huger cars, yes. And, if you value your life, don't even think about cycling or going by foot with such cars around...
- chongli 2y agoYes. Anyone who has worked on conservation of momentum problems in high school physics should recognize this. Even at low collision speeds if there is a large disparity in mass between the vehicles then the lighter one experiences a lot of acceleration. For an extreme case think of a low speed collision between a bowling ball and a ping pong ball.
- HPsquared 2y agoIt boils down to "delta-V". In a mismatched collision, the smaller vehicle needs to withstand a higher delta-V than the larger vehicle. Also, in many cases the bumper heights are mismatched so the larger vehicle's strong structure runs into higher, weaker parts of the small vehicle, further exacerbating the problem.
- lupusreal 2y agoThere are several things you can do to dramatically reduce your risk. Cycle during the day, while sober, with bright colors, with a helmet, and avoiding multi-lane roads. If you do these things you've statistical eliminated most of the risk. > victim blaming It's an exercise in reducing risk, not assigning blame. > the law says I can cycle on those roads The law can't bring you back to life, but if you want to take the risk that's your decision.
- ummonk 2y agoIf the risk is 100x and you eliminate 90% of it, then statistically eliminating most of the risk still doesn't make it all that great a choice.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y ago> If the risk is 100x Where does this number come from?
- lupusreal 2y agoIf you do as I suggest then you eliminate a lot more than 90% of the risk. 62% of cyclist fatalities weren't wearing a helmet, so that alone is a huge thing you can do to improve your odds. 22% are drunk. 50% are on major roads. https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/bicyclists https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/bicyc... I knew I would get responses about "why don't cars just..." e.g. why should I change, they're the ones who suck. I'm not suggesting or opposing public policy changes here. I'm giving practical advice which makes cycling much safer than the statistical average. If you do all of what I say, it's a reasonably safe and healthy pastime.
- throw310822 2y agoWhy don't you paint your car fluo yellow and put a big fluffy bumper around it? Since it's your car that does the killing in an accident, not the cyclist. Right?
- HPsquared 2y agoWith electric bikes there is the possibility of adding safety gear to bicycles since the extra drag can be offset by motor power. Even just the simple example of allowing the rider to wear better, motorcycle-style protective gear would be a massive improvement - since they aren't pedalling so hard. Such gear could be actively heated/cooled as well.
- itishappy 2y ago"You" is singular as a cyclist. Wearing appropriate gear can drastically improve your (again, singular) safety. "You" is plural for motorists. A single motorist deciding to own and operate a soft-and-safe-mobile will not affect your (singular or plural are interchangeable here) risk appreciably. It doesn't mean you're wrong, and you (singular) can pick your battles, but I think I'd prefer to be alive than correct.
- rafram 2y agoPeople who bike for transportation, not just fun, sometimes need to bike at night, on less bike-friendly roads, or without high-visibility clothing. It doesn’t seem to me that the sentence for that should be death.
- hulitu 2y ago> or without high-visibility clothing. Please, try to get some high-visibility clothing. The difference in visibility is between hundreds of meters with high-visibility clothing and meters without. > It doesn’t seem to me that the sentence for that should be death. Maybe not death but severe injuries. Being visiblevin the night is a game changer.
- potato3732842 2y agoAt the very least wrap your bike frame in reflective tape ("DOT C2 tape" is what you want to punch into Amazon if you're in the US).
- rafram 2y agoNot really an option for people who mainly ride bikeshare bikes (e.g. me). But those have pretty good lights, at least.
- FooBarBizBazz 2y agoWe need to think more game theoretically. Since our courageous cyclist must already have a deathwish to be on the same roads as these vehicles, he should go all in with a vest packed with C4 and ball bearings so that, in the event of a crash (which will cripple him anyway), at least he takes out Starbucks Mom on his way to Paradise.
- itishappy 2y agoI would wear the hell out of a helmet shaped like a nitro crate from CTR. https://crashbandicoot.fandom.com/wiki/Nitro_Crate https://crashbandicoot.fandom.com/wiki/Nitro_Crate
- resource_waste 2y agoI'd rather be in a small car and hit a tree/electrical pole than in a massive vehicle.
- K0balt 2y agoInteresting to hear the rationale in this choice ?
- echoangle 2y agoSince the heavier vehicle has higher momentum, it would decelerate slower when hitting a semi-static-object, which decreases the forces on your body. The smaller vehicle would stop much quicker and you would jerk forward. So a heavier vehicle at the same speed would probably be better, all else being equal. And that's neglecting the additional material a larger vehicle typically has that deforms over longer distance than with a shorter car.
- resource_waste 2y ago>it would decelerate slower when hitting a semi-static-object You just changed the problem.
- echoangle 2y agoDid I? Trees and electrical poles aren’t completely rigid, right?
- 2y ago
- postalrat 2y agoWhich is why I'd like a wedge car made to go under a large car in a front end collision. https://i.imgur.com/xHWAeR4.png https://i.imgur.com/xHWAeR4.png