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

91–100 of 278 posts

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

#91

Post by leto_ii »

radu_floricica wrote: post #77
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

Vans are nightmare stuff for motorcyclists. Hitting a compact car from most angles means rolling over it. Hitting a van from any angle is instant SPLAT - all potential energy gets instantly converted into damage. We don't have SUVs here (Eastern Europe), but I think they're a closer to vans than to compacts.

Radu, I'm Romanian too (and assuming based on your name you're Romanian), we have lots of SUVs. Maybe you're thinking of something else? Maybe pickup trucks?

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

#92

Post by egman_ekki »

HailTheGreenOne wrote: post #88
radu_floricica wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vans are nightmare stuff for motorcyclists. Hitting a compact car from most angles means rolling over it. Hitting a van from any angle is instant SPLAT - all potential energy gets instantly converted into damage. We don't have SUVs here (Eastern Europe), but I think they're a closer to vans than to compacts.

What do you mean we don't have SUVs in Eastern Europe? Where would you have to live to think that?

Guessing by the name, perhaps Romania. Maybe they mean large ones like Ford F150? otherwise (Eastern) Europeans love their SUVs for sure, 45% of new vehicles bought in Europe are SUVs.

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

#93

Post by dairylee »

ramraj07 wrote: post #36

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…

> If you crave physical activity so much there’s many other alternatives

This seems like such a typical American view on cycling. The main aim of regular cycling isn't about physical activity, it's about getting from A to B.

> I had to use a bike (because I was broke)

And this too. Being able to afford to drive a car shouldn't be an aspiration and cycling isn't only for people who can't afford a car.

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

#94

Post by Mordisquitos »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #60
DangitBobby wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

How low is low enough? Don't drive? Don't bike? Don't eat? For that matter, is it immoral for a pedestrian walk down the street because they have some low probability of harming an SUV driver when they splatter off the front end?

How high is too high? Can you have headlights so bright they blind other drivers? Can you drive an armoured vehicle with tracks that could crush other vehicles? Can you have circular saws on the sides of your car to deter careless fender benders?

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

#95

Post by Ygg2 »

atoav wrote: post #76
kqr wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Just roll up and off of it" makes it sound like a pleasurable experience. The majority of serious injuries happen not upon collision with the vehicle, but when hitting the ground afterwards. This applies for any vehicle shape, but in different ways.

Yeah, but landing on the round hood of a VW Polo vs being hit by the equivalent of a rolling brick wall makes a difference. If you look at the formula for acceleration (a = ∆v/∆t) and acceleration force (F = a⋅m) the only two things we can truly influence here are speed (slower collisions are less dangerous) and time (collisions where the force transfer takes longer produce less force). The latter is what makes the d…

Mass also affects force transferred, during contact.

Newton's 3rd law, implies the more mass you have the less recoil you feel.

For example hitting a massive box will hurt a lot more than a light box, because light box will get some acceleration of its own vs massive box.

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

#96

Post by Xylakant »

Ygg2 wrote: post #95
atoav wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but landing on the round hood of a VW Polo vs being hit by the equivalent of a rolling brick wall makes a difference. If you look at the formula for acceleration (a = ∆v/∆t) and acceleration force (F = a⋅m) the only two things we can truly influence here are speed (slower collisions are less dangerous) and time (collisions where the force transfer takes longer produce less force). The latter is what makes the d…

Mass also affects force transferred, during contact. Newton's 3rd law, implies the more mass you have the less recoil you feel. For example hitting a massive box will hurt a lot more than a light box, because light box will get some acceleration of its own vs massive box.

Though at the mass ratios of car vs pedestrian/cyclists, the difference on the car side makes no significant effect. It doesn‘t really matter if the ratio is 1:10 in favor of the car or 1:20. The acceleration that the car will feel is negligible either way.

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

#97

Post by Nick87633 »

DangitBobby wrote: post #38
Nick87633 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Bobby That is a consideration I hadn't thought of... I always take the full lane unless there is a dedicated bike lane.

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

#98

Post by prmoustache »

Temporary_31337 wrote: post #57
Ferrotin wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That means yes, they are required by law to be larger. It was also because a fuel economy rule change.

Have you even seen a Smart car or a Toyota Aigo which has all the required safety parts? So tell us exactly which safety parts are so huge again ?

They are respectively larger than cars that had similar interior space 40 years ago.

Saw a review of an old peugeot 505 wagon. It was way smaller than the current Toyota Camry but you could fit 8 persons and still have larger storage capacity.

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

#99

Post by sephamorr »

kube-system wrote: post #27
Drunk_Engineer wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California, drivers are only required to have $15,000 liability insurance.

And 17% of them just drive around with no insurance at all. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/car-insurance/uninsured-motor...

Anecdotally from my experience in CA, my friends have been in a total of 6 crashes and not a single other driver was insured. Makes sense why my un/underinsured driver line item on my car insurance is ~40% of the total.

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

#100

Post by Gibbon1 »

jbay808 wrote: post #55
asdff wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 str…

Pedestrian visibility is also compromised. My SO is not a tall person. We've tested - she's quite invisible standing in front of these trucks and SUVs, because their front hood is so high and square. A small child would be impossible to see even some meters away. Worse if the driver of the vehicle is not tall.

A complaint I have and I've heard from others is the airbags in the A pillars are a menace to pedestrians because they block the drivers view.
Post reply on HN