3 ms·
And yet, with this solution, no repair is needed for either the truck or the infrastructure. The vehicle is able to be removed under its own power, the driver
by numbsafari 13y ago
And yet, with this solution, no repair is needed for either the truck or the infrastructure.
The vehicle is able to be removed under its own power, the driver is not injured, there is no debris.
If you are in a vehicle behind a truck that has damage to its top, you very likely will have damage to your vehicle from flying debris.
- joezydeco 13y agoOr a ten-ton beam falling on your car.
- gojomo 13y agoOh, I like the water-wall too. But a driver who misses the 1st two no-damage physical-contact warnings I've proposed -- and thus would hit the damaging third hard bar -- would quite possibly ignore the water-wall too. After all, the water wall seems primarily visual, and the driver has already missed numerous visual warnings. The contact protectors add collision-noise and vibration, which are rare enough that even a dozing/road-hypnotized driver is likely to take note. Comparative testing is of course justified.