Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

sciencedirect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 278 posts

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#31

Post by ramraj07 »

donw wrote: post #28
yboris wrote: post #14

Exactly on topic: a philosophy paper " Vehicles and Crashes: Why is this Moral Issue Overlooked? " by Douglas Husak. Author argues that because of the high crash incompatibility with other vehicles (and pedestrians), SUV driving is immoral - imposing an oversized amount of harm to others with no proportional safety for self. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23562447

The big problem -- pun intended -- is that vehicles are de facto required by law to be huge. Imagine if we had cars that were built like cars from the 80s -- smaller, lightweight, tons of visibility, minimal equipment -- but with modern engine technology and a few of the electronics that don't add much weight, but add a ton of functionality (like 360-degree cameras). I'll take the road noise, less interior comfort, a…

Uhm not seeing your point? Cars are made to keep who’s inside alive, and you can’t do that with paper thin walls that made the original mini.

No law makes an SUV a requirement though. That’s just people getting greedy while the roads are getting larger allowing them to see no difference driving large vehicles.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#32

Post by jackvalentine »

donw wrote: post #28
yboris wrote: post #14

Exactly on topic: a philosophy paper " Vehicles and Crashes: Why is this Moral Issue Overlooked? " by Douglas Husak. Author argues that because of the high crash incompatibility with other vehicles (and pedestrians), SUV driving is immoral - imposing an oversized amount of harm to others with no proportional safety for self. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23562447

The big problem -- pun intended -- is that vehicles are de facto required by law to be huge. Imagine if we had cars that were built like cars from the 80s -- smaller, lightweight, tons of visibility, minimal equipment -- but with modern engine technology and a few of the electronics that don't add much weight, but add a ton of functionality (like 360-degree cameras). I'll take the road noise, less interior comfort, a…

They're not required by law to be huge - they're required by law to be safe, which being larger ends up being a side effect.

Sure a 2022 Toyota Corolla is gigantic compared to a 1985 Corolla, but it's nothing compared to a 2022 F150. The best selling 'car' in North America. I know which one I'd prefer to be hit by.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#33

Post by DangitBobby »

ars wrote: post #22
yboris wrote: post #14

Exactly on topic: a philosophy paper " Vehicles and Crashes: Why is this Moral Issue Overlooked? " by Douglas Husak. Author argues that because of the high crash incompatibility with other vehicles (and pedestrians), SUV driving is immoral - imposing an oversized amount of harm to others with no proportional safety for self. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23562447

Let's say we magically got rid of all SUV's. Then Douglas would find the next largest car and say the same thing. You need to have some kind of line that distinguishes moral from immoral, if you can't do that, then your calculation is risk based, not morality.

Minimizing harm by not maximizing self interest is a moral decision. It's not defined by the ability to make it binary.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#34

Post by vihren »

ajuc wrote: post #26
mc32 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are three trends: bigger mass, larger sizes and taller vehicles. Which one of the above is the most consequential? I'm guessing height. at 2500 or 5000 lbs, neither is going to be pleasant when you bang in to it. size maybe there is more surface area to get hit by, but that's unlikely to be significant. mass does influence stopping distance though, so that could be, but at the same time we now have large disc b…

E=mV^2/2 60 km/h car will kill you either way, 1 km/h car won't kill you either way, but somewhere in between there's a velocity range where a SUV will kill you and a compact car won't - simply because of the mass difference. I'd argue it's the velocity range in which a lot of collisions happen (especially in city traffic).

Its the momentum that kills you p=mV, not the kinetic energy. So I would guess that mass ia much more important.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#35

Post by llbeansandrice »

ars wrote: post #22
yboris wrote: post #14

Exactly on topic: a philosophy paper " Vehicles and Crashes: Why is this Moral Issue Overlooked? " by Douglas Husak. Author argues that because of the high crash incompatibility with other vehicles (and pedestrians), SUV driving is immoral - imposing an oversized amount of harm to others with no proportional safety for self. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23562447

Let's say we magically got rid of all SUV's. Then Douglas would find the next largest car and say the same thing. You need to have some kind of line that distinguishes moral from immoral, if you can't do that, then your calculation is risk based, not morality.

I think a solid case can be made that almost all car driving is immoral. The solution isn’t individual like “buy a smaller car” is, but driving is objectively bad.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#36

Post by ramraj07 »

Honestly as an upper middle class or rich American it looks like one of the more dangerous things you could do is probably go out cycling in a road shared by these monster machines. If you crave physical activity so much there’s many other alternatives.

When I lived in College Station Texas I had to use a bike (because I was broke) but I stuck to the sidewalks, rules be damned. And even in the sidewalk had to keep an eye for unruly drivers on the road alongside because the last person you want to trust not to mount the curb is a drunk Texan kid with a raised pickup after a football game.

And when time came to cross a road, even if the light was green, even if I made eye contact with the dude in the truck, I wouldn’t venture out until the road was fully empty. I decided a long time back id never put myself in a place where another American in a car has to brake to not hit me when I’m outside a car.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#37

Post by DangitBobby »

elihu wrote: post #7

Something I've wondered about is how do some of the newer vehicle designs fare when it comes to pedestrian safety? Presumably getting hit by a Tesla Cybertruck or Canoo Lifestyle Vehicle would be pretty bad, but are they just as bad as a giant pickup truck? My intuition says yeah, probably. But there might be some nuance, like maybe the Canoo has better-than-average visibility so hitting pedestrians is less likely. I…

EVs are probably even worse because they are considerably heavier.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#38

Post by DangitBobby »

Nick87633 wrote: post #8
nerdponx wrote: post #2

This article is a great example of how correlation might be suggestive of causation, but is not itself causation. Are pickup trucks inherently more dangerous than other vehicles? Or are pickup truck drivers more dangerous than other drivers? Or are pickup trucks more likely to be driving on more-dangerous roads than on less-dangerous roads? Unfortunately I wasn't able to read the article due to the paywall, but I did…

I've never seen a Camry roll coal on a bicyclist but I've seen it half a dozen times by pickup truck drivers

I've had plenty of people in sedans pass me in my lane with less than 1 foot of space.

Re: Effects of large vehicles on pedestrian and pedal-cyclist injury severity

#39

Post by asdff »

mc32 wrote: post #19
yboris wrote: post #14

Exactly on topic: a philosophy paper " Vehicles and Crashes: Why is this Moral Issue Overlooked? " by Douglas Husak. Author argues that because of the high crash incompatibility with other vehicles (and pedestrians), SUV driving is immoral - imposing an oversized amount of harm to others with no proportional safety for self. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23562447

There are three trends: bigger mass, larger sizes and taller vehicles. Which one of the above is the most consequential? I'm guessing height. at 2500 or 5000 lbs, neither is going to be pleasant when you bang in to it. size maybe there is more surface area to get hit by, but that's unlikely to be significant. mass does influence stopping distance though, so that could be, but at the same time we now have large disc b…

Also, shape. Go look at the front end of a car like a ford F150. The hood is flat and sits 4 feet high. Now go look at a more compact car like a prius. The hood is low, and is angled like a wedge smooth into the windshield. When a prius hits you, its liable that you will just roll up and off of it and not get much of the force from the impact as a result. When an F150 hits you with its 4 foot tall wall of a grill straight in your chest, I don't think you will be rolling up and over. Maybe your head would just pop off from the kinetic force, sparing you from a slower death?
Post reply on HN