4 ms·

How does a 2013 model Mercedes Benz with a five star ANCAP safety rating (the highest rating you can get) scoring 35.51 points scored out of 37 (an Australian c

How does a 2013 model Mercedes Benz with a five star ANCAP safety rating (the highest rating you can get) scoring 35.51 points scored out of 37 (an Australian car safety rating for reference) with more airbags than wheels (8 airbags for those of you playing at home including a curtain airbag that drops in-front of the passenger and driver protecting the head and upper-body from impacting anything) crash into a tree without there even being another vehicle involved? The car has stability control, traction control, ABS, EBD, brake assist and three-point pre-tensioning seatbelts. If you've ever driven a modern BMW, Mercedes or any other premium European vehicle than you'd know it's impossible to crash these things unless you honestly wanted to crash them. I am pretty sure it has been standard on most cars in this price bracket for a while now to respond to impacts by shutting off fuel, disconnecting battery terminals and unlocking doors. It varies from model to model, but most premium cars react to emergencies by cutting off as many points of danger as possible. Something doesn't add up here. Was he drunk? Was he poisoned with a cocktail of drugs that perhaps made him lose concentration and crash into a tree? A new 2013 Mercedes don't just malfunction and crash killing its occupants so easily. They build these cars to withstand a lot of impact, this isn't the movies, new cars don't just crash and explode on impact. You hear of gruesome accidents everyday in vehicles, but you rarely hear of them exploding, mangling in a ball of metal and plastic yes, but rarely exploding. Is there CCTV footage of the minutes before he crashed showing perhaps what happened? Perhaps a recreation of the accident might help shed some light on what really happened. A computer simulation I am sure would be more than enough, coupled with CCTV footage and you should have a pretty close to accurate simulation of how it all went down and how the car would fare. If the FBI were interviewing close friends and family, someone needs to come out at least dispelling the suggestion he went crazy or was suffering from paranoia. Because at present, there's nothing to suggest foul play other than speculation. And as usual, we all point fingers and call someone crazy when they claim the FBI is watching them and after all of this PRISM controversy, claims like that don't sound as crazy as they once did...

snowwrestler 13y ago
This is how conspiracy theories are promulgated: propose an preposterous alternate reality and then find real facts wanting in comparison. In this case the alternate reality is that it is "impossible" to crash recent model year Mercedes unless you intend to. This is obviously preposterous since it's not hard to find reports of such crashes with 5 minutes on Google.
- DigitalSea 13y ago
  It's not impossible to crash any car, the alternate reality here is that a brand new car with more safety features than a padded cell crashed by itself at 4:30am in the morning into a tree and exploded on impact. The point is these cars are built to try and avoid these kind of accidents at all cost, the plethora of safety features cars like these have makes it a lot more difficult than say an early 00's vehicle crashing into a tree to hurt anyone inside. Not impossible, but certainly reduces the odds a bit. This article here details the kinds of testing Mercedes put the car through: http://blogs.automotive.com/2013-mercedes-benz-c-class-and-m-class-earn-5-star-federal-safety-ratings-131883.html http://blogs.automotive.com/2013-mercedes-benz-c-class-and-m... - 200 high-speed in-house crashes sounds like a lot of testing for a car and apparently it faired well in all of them. You can see a video of the car being testing here as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvw_VLcUUwU&feature=youtu.be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvw_VLcUUwU&feature=youtu.be - while Hasting's didn't crash in a controlled environment, you see a picture painted of a car capable of withstanding a lot of impact. I know it's common for cars to slice down the middle and kill their occupants, but exploding and incinerating Hastings inside to the point they have to identify him by his dental records at least warrants a closer look. I'm not saying foul play is to blame here, but some questions need to be answered. As is common in unexplained plane crashes, the debris should be tested for explosive residue just as a precaution. Another interesting question is why was the engine found over 100 feet away from the car? When a car crashes isn't an engine pushed back into the cabin, not thrown forwards?
  - cloverich 13y ago
    So I know almost nothing of the circumstances of the crash, but I think there is more to consider. For instance, how fast was he going? My 2006 accord is much safer than some car from the 1950's. But also, I get 260-hp out of a 3 liter engine, and its faster than a Mustang GT from the 90's. If you hit a tree going 90mph, there's little a bunch of airbags will do for you. People dying, things exploding, parts flying - how strange that is really depends on the circumstances of the crash I'd argue.
    - bicknergseng 13y ago
protomyth 13y ago
Any number of normal scenarios. An animal on the road is one common one. I have seen a lot of people overcorrect to miss a dog, duck, or other animal on the road. Almost lost an aunt that way (she actually ended up wedged between two trees, a bit to one side and she would have been a goner).
icandownvote 13y ago
Lets cool our heads a bit. It's not that "impossible" to crash a modern car with ABS, EBD, TC and ST. I'm a living-breathing evidence to the fact that none of these technologies can do anything if the car hits a paddle of water/sand going too fast around a bend. I'm not saying that this is exactly what happened but do we know that it didn't?
ScottBurson 13y ago
The engine came out of the car and was thrown some distance along the sidewalk. I don't know how fast you'd have to be going to make that happen, but I would guess 70 or 80 mph. One possibility suggested upthread is that he fell asleep while driving, and given that it was 4:30am I think we have to admit that that is entirely plausible. The weight of his leg could have pressed the accelerator, and in a car like that he could have been doing 70 pretty quickly. Of course it's not hard to come up with darker possibilities if you want to. He was drugged... his car was tampered with... whatever. I can't rule these out entirely, and under the circumstances I agree that skepticism and further investigation are warranted, but if I had to bet right now, I'd wager he just fell asleep.
tzs 13y ago
> How does a 2013 model Mercedes Benz with a five star ANCAP safety rating (the highest rating you can get) scoring 35.51 points scored out of 37 (an Australian car safety rating for reference) with more airbags than wheels (8 airbags for those of you playing at home including a curtain airbag that drops in-front of the passenger and driver protecting the head and upper-body from impacting anything) crash into a tree without there even being another vehicle involved? You are massively confused over what airbags do. They don't do anything at all to reduce the chances that one will drive one's car into a tree. They only come into play AFTER an accident has begun.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >You are massively confused over what airbags do. They don't do anything at all to reduce the chances that one will drive one's car into a tree. They only come into play AFTER an accident has begun. And you are massively confused about why he mentioned the airbags. Not to point to their assistance of driving a car into a tree, but as items in a large list, pointing to the ridiculous amount of safety measures built into the car.
jaredstenquist 13y ago
(former firefighter) I would look to local and state police for their reports. Any fatal accident with a possibility of foul play, or obvious foul play (DUI, etc) resulted in us assisting the State Police reconstruction team while they processed the scene, measuring and photographing everything to the millimeter, because once we cleaned it up, there was no going back. That said, I've also seen plenty of crazy vehicle accidents, including fires, many of which are hard to explain how they could have happened. For example, a car where the entire drivers side was smashed into the back seat from driving into a telephone pole. The driver's survival story? "Thank god i wasn't wearing a seatbelt and my car had a bench seat"... She moved over at the last second. Seatbelts don't always save lives...
- mapt 13y ago
  Of course they don't, but survival rates for wearing a seatbelt are much higher than survival rates for not wearing a seatbelt. Personally, I want a 5-point harness if I ever end up driving in a risky fashion.
  - jaredstenquist 13y ago
    Agreed. I certainly encourage seatbelt use as I saw far more people saved by using them than not. At one point we got to a streak of 8 or 9 rollovers with no injuries whatsoever. If the occupants were not wearing seat belts I can say for certain that streak would have ended earlier. On a positive note, the number of automobile fatalities each year has been on a steady decline. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in...
JshWright 13y ago
Cars crash. Expensive cars crash. Cars catch fire after they crash (certainly not in the majority of cases, but it does happen). I'm a Firefighter/EMT in a department that covers a reasonably affluent area. The vehicle Mr. Hastings was driving would not be unusual around here (and vehicles like it would not be unusual to see in the wrecks we respond to). Your suggestion that somehow being a late model Mercedes makes it impervious to collisions is just silly. I could run a report of our wrecks over the last year, but I'm sure there have been at least a dozen that involve late model cars like the one in question (from various manufacturers). Two of those included at least one fatality. None of them caught fire (but given the small sample size, that's not surprising, over the last decade I'd guess something like 1 in 50 wrecks I've seen involved a post-crash fire). Regarding the explosion... I've seen nothing that indicates to me that there was an explosion. People described a loud noise (crashes are loud), and a fire. The video of that fire is completely consistent with a post-crash vehicle fire.
smackfu 13y ago
Modern safety features are really good at helping you save a car from crashing if you realize what's happening and react in time. OTOH, they do absolutely nothing if you are inattentive for a moment at high speed, run off the road, and there is a tree in the way.

snowwrestler 13y ago

This is how conspiracy theories are promulgated: propose an preposterous alternate reality and then find real facts wanting in comparison. In this case the alternate reality is that it is "impossible" to crash recent model year Mercedes unless you intend to. This is obviously preposterous since it's not hard to find reports of such crashes with 5 minutes on Google.

DigitalSea 13y ago
It's not impossible to crash any car, the alternate reality here is that a brand new car with more safety features than a padded cell crashed by itself at 4:30am in the morning into a tree and exploded on impact. The point is these cars are built to try and avoid these kind of accidents at all cost, the plethora of safety features cars like these have makes it a lot more difficult than say an early 00's vehicle crashing into a tree to hurt anyone inside. Not impossible, but certainly reduces the odds a bit. This article here details the kinds of testing Mercedes put the car through: http://blogs.automotive.com/2013-mercedes-benz-c-class-and-m-class-earn-5-star-federal-safety-ratings-131883.html http://blogs.automotive.com/2013-mercedes-benz-c-class-and-m... - 200 high-speed in-house crashes sounds like a lot of testing for a car and apparently it faired well in all of them. You can see a video of the car being testing here as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvw_VLcUUwU&feature=youtu.be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvw_VLcUUwU&feature=youtu.be - while Hasting's didn't crash in a controlled environment, you see a picture painted of a car capable of withstanding a lot of impact. I know it's common for cars to slice down the middle and kill their occupants, but exploding and incinerating Hastings inside to the point they have to identify him by his dental records at least warrants a closer look. I'm not saying foul play is to blame here, but some questions need to be answered. As is common in unexplained plane crashes, the debris should be tested for explosive residue just as a precaution. Another interesting question is why was the engine found over 100 feet away from the car? When a car crashes isn't an engine pushed back into the cabin, not thrown forwards?
- cloverich 13y ago
  So I know almost nothing of the circumstances of the crash, but I think there is more to consider. For instance, how fast was he going? My 2006 accord is much safer than some car from the 1950's. But also, I get 260-hp out of a 3 liter engine, and its faster than a Mustang GT from the 90's. If you hit a tree going 90mph, there's little a bunch of airbags will do for you. People dying, things exploding, parts flying - how strange that is really depends on the circumstances of the crash I'd argue.
  - bicknergseng 13y ago

protomyth 13y ago

Any number of normal scenarios. An animal on the road is one common one. I have seen a lot of people overcorrect to miss a dog, duck, or other animal on the road. Almost lost an aunt that way (she actually ended up wedged between two trees, a bit to one side and she would have been a goner).

icandownvote 13y ago

Lets cool our heads a bit. It's not that "impossible" to crash a modern car with ABS, EBD, TC and ST. I'm a living-breathing evidence to the fact that none of these technologies can do anything if the car hits a paddle of water/sand going too fast around a bend. I'm not saying that this is exactly what happened but do we know that it didn't?

ScottBurson 13y ago

The engine came out of the car and was thrown some distance along the sidewalk. I don't know how fast you'd have to be going to make that happen, but I would guess 70 or 80 mph. One possibility suggested upthread is that he fell asleep while driving, and given that it was 4:30am I think we have to admit that that is entirely plausible. The weight of his leg could have pressed the accelerator, and in a car like that he could have been doing 70 pretty quickly. Of course it's not hard to come up with darker possibilities if you want to. He was drugged... his car was tampered with... whatever. I can't rule these out entirely, and under the circumstances I agree that skepticism and further investigation are warranted, but if I had to bet right now, I'd wager he just fell asleep.

tzs 13y ago

> How does a 2013 model Mercedes Benz with a five star ANCAP safety rating (the highest rating you can get) scoring 35.51 points scored out of 37 (an Australian car safety rating for reference) with more airbags than wheels (8 airbags for those of you playing at home including a curtain airbag that drops in-front of the passenger and driver protecting the head and upper-body from impacting anything) crash into a tree without there even being another vehicle involved? You are massively confused over what airbags do. They don't do anything at all to reduce the chances that one will drive one's car into a tree. They only come into play AFTER an accident has begun.

coldtea 13y ago
>You are massively confused over what airbags do. They don't do anything at all to reduce the chances that one will drive one's car into a tree. They only come into play AFTER an accident has begun. And you are massively confused about why he mentioned the airbags. Not to point to their assistance of driving a car into a tree, but as items in a large list, pointing to the ridiculous amount of safety measures built into the car.

jaredstenquist 13y ago

(former firefighter) I would look to local and state police for their reports. Any fatal accident with a possibility of foul play, or obvious foul play (DUI, etc) resulted in us assisting the State Police reconstruction team while they processed the scene, measuring and photographing everything to the millimeter, because once we cleaned it up, there was no going back. That said, I've also seen plenty of crazy vehicle accidents, including fires, many of which are hard to explain how they could have happened. For example, a car where the entire drivers side was smashed into the back seat from driving into a telephone pole. The driver's survival story? "Thank god i wasn't wearing a seatbelt and my car had a bench seat"... She moved over at the last second. Seatbelts don't always save lives...

mapt 13y ago
Of course they don't, but survival rates for wearing a seatbelt are much higher than survival rates for not wearing a seatbelt. Personally, I want a 5-point harness if I ever end up driving in a risky fashion.
- jaredstenquist 13y ago
  Agreed. I certainly encourage seatbelt use as I saw far more people saved by using them than not. At one point we got to a streak of 8 or 9 rollovers with no injuries whatsoever. If the occupants were not wearing seat belts I can say for certain that streak would have ended earlier. On a positive note, the number of automobile fatalities each year has been on a steady decline. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in_U.S._by_year http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_motor_vehicle_deaths_in...

JshWright 13y ago

Cars crash. Expensive cars crash. Cars catch fire after they crash (certainly not in the majority of cases, but it does happen). I'm a Firefighter/EMT in a department that covers a reasonably affluent area. The vehicle Mr. Hastings was driving would not be unusual around here (and vehicles like it would not be unusual to see in the wrecks we respond to). Your suggestion that somehow being a late model Mercedes makes it impervious to collisions is just silly. I could run a report of our wrecks over the last year, but I'm sure there have been at least a dozen that involve late model cars like the one in question (from various manufacturers). Two of those included at least one fatality. None of them caught fire (but given the small sample size, that's not surprising, over the last decade I'd guess something like 1 in 50 wrecks I've seen involved a post-crash fire). Regarding the explosion... I've seen nothing that indicates to me that there was an explosion. People described a loud noise (crashes are loud), and a fire. The video of that fire is completely consistent with a post-crash vehicle fire.

smackfu 13y ago

Modern safety features are really good at helping you save a car from crashing if you realize what's happening and react in time. OTOH, they do absolutely nothing if you are inattentive for a moment at high speed, run off the road, and there is a tree in the way.