Live data from Hacker News

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

sciencedirect.com

241–250 of 278 posts

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

#241

I wonder if insurance rates have been adjusted to reflect this. I would assume that being "at fault" for a crash with a fatality would result in a hefty insurance payout....

In British Columbia, we solved it by switching to a "no fault" regime where motorists and the government insurance provider are simply legally impossible to sue for damages. If you are rendered as a quadriplegic because of a negligent driver, you may get some of your rehab paid for by the government if they agree that your therapy is required. You will receive precisely $0 for your reduced quality of life. So, problem solved. Simply abdicate any responsibility for the disastrous consequences motorists impose on pedestrians and cyclists, all for those sweet sweet low premiums!

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

#242
post #169

As an American, we need to rethink how the cities are designed. Way too much emphasis on car centric design. An emphasis on car centric transportation means fed government and people want cars to be safer. Larger A-pillars which decrease line of sight. Larger vehicles give people a higher sense of security and safety. These 2 points make it very safe for the driver and occupants but disregard any safety for pedestria…

We have rethought it extensively. There are proposals in every major city and probably nearly every neighborhood for improved street designs. But enough of those who drive through those neighborhoods oppose those improvements that they rarely happen. It’s easy for a driver to assign themself responsibility to “drive safely” - and hard to admit that we take constant risks that sometimes result in harm. Accepting that…

>We have rethought it extensively. There are proposals in every major city and probably nearly every neighborhood for improved street designs. But enough of those who drive through those neighborhoods oppose those improvements that they rarely happen.

It doesn't help that half the time these proposals wind up being half-baked boondoggles that result in a great deal of money being spent for a situation that is at best net neutral. In my own city they redeveloped some main streets according to modern principals coinciding with a stadium development. They then patted themselves on the backs for how effective they were at traffic calming without reducing throughput at the points before and after the project zone at which they measured. Of course, nobody was talking about the fact that they basically just displaced the traffic from that main thoroughfare into the adjacent neighborhoods and turned "kids play here" streets into exactly the kind of car-filled hellscape they allege to be against. Of course, only the locals know this. If you're far away in some ivory tower the project looks like a success.

>and hard to admit that we take constant risks that sometimes result in harm.

Modern society is incapable of having the requisite tough discussions about the pros and cons of various risks/rewards when human life and limb is involved. I think the HN classes ought to take a good look in the mirror because we do a great amount of peddling the kind of rhetoric that perpetuates this immaturity.

>I think the only way to solve this is to take street design decisions (and funding for safety improvements) out of the hands of governments - there’s no level of local gov that is immune from the backlash. But how do we do that without some horrible other outcomes?

We don't. Further removed government doesn't exactly have a great track record. Time and time again you'll see local governments do absolutely asinine infrastructure things because checking some box to meet some criteria for state or fed funding results in a lower total cost after the higher level of .gov kicks in some fraction of the money even though the end result is not what they need.

I think the solution here is more direct local control. If some municipalities do figure it out and make improvements then their ideas and patterns of development will be copied elsewhere.

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

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> buying groceries in my local suburb Ah yes, the natural environment of the 4ft tall tired diesel monstrosity truck. I understand that you want this vehicle for offroading. But in my opinion it should be treated like a dirt bike or a 4 wheeler: you should have to tow it to the trails. If you live in the wilderness, feel free to drive it right onto dirt roads and trails. But it just shouldn't be allowed at all in a s…

I was tongue in cheek. It is not even very useful for off roading except out in very open areas, which it does do okay at, it has a great suspension setup. Too wide to fit on most of the mountain trails here in Colorado, though. And it does fit in a parking spot, if you are very careful, but I generally just park away from other vehicles so no one has to deal with it. I drive smaller vehicles in congested areas. And…

As a former Coloradan myself, up your off roading game and get yourself a mountain bike! Especially if you live on the Front Range, there are a ton of trails much closer to home. You might even be able to bike to them!

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

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It'd last a couple years then be thrown out by the conservative SCOTUS

Where in the Constitution is vehicle size a protected right?

Commerce clause.

(Yes I know it's not a "right" but there's no political will to ban it federally so the distinction doesn't matter much here.)

And given the choice between putting up with oversized vehicles and completely eviscerating federal authority to set rules for individuals and small local businesses and organizations (which is what reinterpreting the commerce clause would lead to) oversized vehicles doesn't seem that bad.

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

#245

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…

> I stuck to the sidewalks, rules be damned Sidewalks can be the most dangerous place for cycling when cars come out of hidden driveways quickly. Maybe not where you are (perhaps there's good vision with big verges and/or big yards with no front fences), but this approach cant be applied safely in many areas. The real underlying issue of course is a disparity in street design between care for vehicle passenger safety…

That's why I don't just zoom past openings, unless they are clearly visible that no car is coming out, such as an empty parking lot where nothing is blocking the view of the lot. I always treated those spots as a stop sign of sorts. Pull up to the edge of the drive, stop and check for cars turning in or out, then go on my way.

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

#246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where in the Constitution is vehicle size a protected right?

Commerce clause. (Yes I know it's not a "right" but there's no political will to ban it federally so the distinction doesn't matter much here.) And given the choice between putting up with oversized vehicles and completely eviscerating federal authority to set rules for individuals and small local businesses and organizations (which is what reinterpreting the commerce clause would lead to) oversized vehicles doesn't…

We are talking about the SCOTUS striking down state safety standards for vehicles. I dont think they would.

I'm in NH and drive a modded Subaru and I'm getting fisted by CA emissions standards. Will the SCOTUS back me up when I sue CA?

Edit: Ooh! There is apparently a lawsuit over this exact issue. I guess we can wait and see!

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

#247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was tongue in cheek. It is not even very useful for off roading except out in very open areas, which it does do okay at, it has a great suspension setup. Too wide to fit on most of the mountain trails here in Colorado, though. And it does fit in a parking spot, if you are very careful, but I generally just park away from other vehicles so no one has to deal with it. I drive smaller vehicles in congested areas. And…

As a former Coloradan myself, up your off roading game and get yourself a mountain bike! Especially if you live on the Front Range, there are a ton of trails much closer to home. You might even be able to bike to them!

Yeah, we do all our "real" Colorado activities in our 4Runner and or with our off road camper. My son loves mountain biking when we go camping. I just don't enjoy mountain biking, but I do live in Golden where you have some great trails minutes away. In all seriousness I actually just use the truck to tow trailers and move cars and other things around, and occasionally take the camper to the more open areas :)

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

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got into a head on collision with an SUV that came off two wheels while rounding a curve and crossed the yellow divider right into my little car. In that case it was definitely the height that did us in.

Glad to hear that you lived to tell the tale. Sounds like a horrendous collision.

My car crumpled perfectly and my only injuries were scrapes from the airbag. The other driver broke a few ribs.

I will never forget the split second I recognized there was a huge mass of metal coming straight at me at a high speed and I resigned to the fact that it would probably mean life altering injuries. Good thing I wore my seat belt!

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

#249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree that consumers are strictly limited by price. It's been the norm to finance vehicles with loans for a while now. So much that dealerships make more on financing than they do on selling cars in some cases. As profit in the industry has grown, so too has the amount of available credit. We now see 7 year loans on vehicles becoming more common.

The price of anything expensive includes the cost to obtain enough money to buy it. When I said "price" that recognizes the fact that cars are financed. It's like the price of a home that way, you're not disagreeing with anything, you just didn't know what that word meant in this context, for some odd reason.

Yeah, the fact here is obviously I can't English. Not that you ignore the reality that consumers consider a car purchase a "$X per month" and not as an actual cost. Every consumer is perfectly educated and diligently computes the total cost of ownership of every purchase.

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

#250
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.

> The majority of serious injuries happen not upon collision with the vehicle, but when hitting the ground afterwards. That claim right there is begging for a source. It's hard to imagine landing from a person's height is worse than hitting a brick wall moving 40 km/h, unless that brick wall also threw you more than 6 meters up into the air, which point at which you'd be moving faster than 40km/h when you hit the gro…

A few months ago, I saw a pedestrian get hit by an SUV going ~40mph (64km/h). He flew far enough that when he came to a stop he was a good ways down the road. If you made it through the sudden acceleration to 40mph, I could also see "the road braking you from 40mph to zero" doing some damage.

As another example, here's a locally-high-profile crash [0] (the driver, a city councilwoman and the daughter of the county commissioner, left the scene and didn't report the crash for hours). Red lights and sightlines aside, even though not much momentum is imparted to the cyclist, the crash was enough to flip him over and knock him into the air, which changes all of the calculus for landing damage from what normally happens when you fall off a bicycle. If you land straight down on your head, it might be worse for you than getting hit in the torso at a higher speed.

[0] Content warning: this is a video of someone getting hit by a car https://youtu.be/X7V_H9bADDM?t=54

Post reply on HN