Stay off that center strip of snow on the road...

[babbage]

30 second video. Warning: it's horrific, so if you are weak don't watch.

http://rmirror.net/r/videos/comments/q5hu9/car_accident_nsfl/

I can't help but think that feathering the gas would have gained control better, and or just let go of the wheel to straighten out..

[SID210SA]

OMG....thats bad...I pray for those people!!

[Timw286]

Good tip...saw that video a couple days ago..it's seared into my brain

[ShadyLurker]

Holy ****! That's brutal to watch.

[SC Cheesehead]

Any idea where and when the wreck took place?

Depending on the depth and density of that snow strip, it can suck you right off course. I always made it a point to just stick to the right lane and slow down whenever driving under those conditions.

[whitey]

HOLY CRAP!, it just exploded!

[SC Cheesehead]

HOLY CRAP!, it just exploded!

Yup.

55 + 55 = 110 mph impact force.

Not much gonna survive that... :(

[CBT]

Done. Hopefully the driver didn't take anyone with them.

[tbone]

That is truly horriffic.

[jwibbity]

holy ****balls, that thing disintegrated !!!!!!:eek::eek::eek::eek:

[MrBluGruv]

Yup.

55 + 55 = 110 mph impact force.

Not much gonna survive that... :(

....more like the inertial difference between the two objects was massive, mated with the fact that the SUV is probably built with significantly more "give" than the 18-wheeler, and that SUV absorbed almost ALL of the impact force by itself. I bet the 18-wheeler driver was relatively unscathed by the collision.

[guspech750]

Yep truely awefull.

Still dont get how the truck exploded like legos. I cant recall seeing other collision videos where a vehicle just explodes like that.


Didnt the Mythbusters put to rest that two vehicles coliding into one another does not equate to doubling the speed apon impact?

[MrBluGruv]

Didnt the Mythbusters put to rest that two vehicles coliding into one another does not equate to doubling the speed apon impact?

It's actually basic physics.

For "55mph + 55mph = 110mph" to actually be true, a few conditions would have to be met:

1. The two objects colliding would have to be travelling at equally opposing vectors (i.e. PERFECTLY head on)

2. One of the objects in the collision would absorb no force from the impact and would continue moving completely uninhibited (i.e. vehicle would keep going 55mph in the same straight line.)


This would be a perfectly inelastic collision, and isn't really possible in the real world.

The closest you can come to seeing this would be like hitting a butterfly with your car at-speed, but even then the butterfly does make an infinitesimal impact on the velocity of the car.


long story short, adding the speed of cars together in a collision to somehow independently gauge impact force isn't a very accurate assessment of what's really going on.

[whitey]

It's actually basic physics.

For "55mph + 55mph = 110mph" to actually be true, a few conditions would have to be met:

1. The two objects colliding would have to be travelling at equally opposing vectors (i.e. PERFECTLY head on)

2. One of the objects in the collision would absorb no force from the impact and would continue moving completely uninhibited (i.e. vehicle would keep going 55mph in the same straight line.)


This would be a perfectly inelastic collision, and isn't really possible in the real world.

The closest you can come to seeing this would be like hitting a butterfly with your car at-speed, but even then the butterfly does make an infinitesimal impact on the velocity of the car.


long story short, adding the speed of cars together in a collision to somehow independently gauge impact force isn't a very accurate assessment of what's really going on.


whats the last thing that goes through a bugs mind when it hits your windsheild?











their ass:lol:

[justbob]

Not much out there makes me sick to the stomach (besides white castle) But this here ^^^ bad, very bad.

[CBT]

Not much out there makes me sick to the stomach (besides white castle) But this here ^^^ bad, very bad.

Hey hey hey, show some damn respeck!

[GetMeMyStogie]

It's actually basic physics.

For "55mph + 55mph = 110mph" to actually be true


I hate when you hear reporters say this on the news. Not only is it tragic news to begin with, they embelish the story for likely selfish reasons.

I think of it as: What was the speed before the collision, and what is the speed after. Subtract the latter from the former to get your 'brick wall' feel.

If two cars of similar mass travelling at, say 55 mph, collided head on cleanly such that both vehicles came to an abrupt standstill, each driver would have an experience similar to hitting a brick wall at... <drum roll, please>....<drum roll!>..drrrrrdrrrdrrr 55 mph.

In this video, the SUV was sliding at, maybe 50 mph before, and what? 30 mph after? That would be -30 mph, relative to the initial direction of travel. The difference of 80 mph or so looks truly devastating.



After thinking about this today, I figure the SUVs best chance would have been to hit the gas and hope to clear the semis path. But, alas, I mulled it over about 12 hours - that poor driver had all of 2 seconds, maybe 3. Plus, a rattled head after the initial minor collision.

The lesson to be learned: don't fūck around when the conditions are shït. Better to arrive alive 2 hours late, than on the 6 o'clock news.

[MrBluGruv]

I hate when you hear reporters say this on the news. Not only is it tragic news to begin with, they embelish the story for likely selfish reasons.

I think of it as: What was the speed before the collision, and what is the speed after. Subtract the latter from the former to get your 'brick wall' feel.

If two cars of similar mass travelling at, say 55 mph, collided head on cleanly such that both vehicles came to an abrupt standstill, each driver would have an experience similar to hitting a brick wall at... <drum roll, please>....<drum roll!>..drrrrrdrrrdrrr 55 mph.

In this video, the SUV was sliding at, maybe 50 mph before, and what? 30 mph after? That would be -30 mph, relative to the initial direction of travel. The difference of 80 mph or so looks truly devastating.



After thinking about this today, I figure the SUVs best chance would have been to hit the gas and hope to clear the semis path. But, alas, I mulled it over about 12 hours - that poor driver had all of 2 seconds, maybe 3. Plus, a rattled head after the initial minor collision.

The lesson to be learned: don't fūck around when the conditions are shït. Better to arrive alive 2 hours late, than on the 6 o'clock news.

The explosion of pieces is likely indicative that the SUV itself absorbed the majority of the impact forces and deflected those forces a fair bit, so possibly the driver didn't take the full brunt of the impact with their own body, although probably still a heavy impact. This is assuming the body panels on that SUV weren't Elmers-Glued on, as that may explain the vehicle falling to pieces as well. :rolleyes:

I'd really like to see the report of the incident itself to see how the passengers of both the SUV and the 18-wheeler fared.

[Hadamustang1]

[QUOTE=SC Cheesehead;1161767]Any idea where and when the wreck took place?

Look like US97 in Oregon south of Bend Or. heading to Klamath Falls. I used to be trucker and drove that road alot..

[dohc324ci]

Horrific! Life is precious.

[MrBluGruv]

bTjU3jrEWis

Talking about minimal time to react....

Be sure to watch the road surface as best you can whenever you drive!

[blkZooM]

I saw this video the other day and just thought to myself holly *** that's scary as hell man, made me really think about driving the marauder in the snow and that was a truck. Just sad to see that.

[mrjones]

That made my stomach and my heart hurt. I don't see any way that anyone in the Sub survived. It looked to be completely sideways when hit by the truck. Almost no impact protection from the side.

[SC Cheesehead]

....more like the inertial difference between the two objects was massive, mated with the fact that the SUV is probably built with significantly more "give" than the 18-wheeler, and that SUV absorbed almost ALL of the impact force by itself. I bet the 18-wheeler driver was relatively unscathed by the collision.

Correct with your observations, the example I gave was just a off-hand statement relating to the violence of the impact (which was obviously severe).

To actually determine the force of the impact (i.e. kinetic energy generated by the crash), you'd need to know the weight of the vehicles as well as their speed. You could then plug those values into the formula EK = (1/2)mv^2, and if the components of the vector are known then magnitude and direction can be calculated with the use of the Pythagorean relationship and triangle trigonometry.

[MrBluGruv]

Correct with your observations, the example I gave was just a off-hand statement relating to the violence of the impact (which was obviously severe).

To actually determine the force of the impact (i.e. kinetic energy generated by the crash), you'd need to know the weight of the vehicles as well as their speed. You could then plug those values into the formula EK = (1/2)mv^2, and if the components of the vector are known then magnitude and direction can be calculated with the use of the Pythagorean relationship and triangle trigonometry.

lol, don't remind me. I had to take a course in physics last semester, and the focus was almost entirely linear and rotational kinematics. Boy did that stuff give me headaches.

[CBT]

Correct with your observations, the example I gave was just a off-hand statement relating to the violence of the impact (which was obviously severe).

To actually determine the force of the impact (i.e. kinetic energy generated by the crash), you'd need to know the weight of the vehicles as well as their speed. You could then plug those values into the formula EK = (1/2)mv^2, and if the components of the vector are known then magnitude and direction can be calculated with the use of the Pythagorean relationship and triangle trigonometry.


lol, don't remind me. I had to take a course in physics last semester, and the focus was almost entirely linear and rotational kinematics. Boy did that stuff give me headaches.



Nerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrds!!!! :shake:

[SC Cheesehead]

lol, don't remind me. I had to take a course in physics last semester, and the focus was almost entirely linear and rotational kinematics. Boy did that stuff give me headaches.

I hear that... :(

Actually enjoyed trig, and used a lot of trig calculations to estimate volume/mass in my former postion, now I just f@rt around with stuff like this for the heck of it.


Nerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrds!!!! :shake:

Yeah, well numbers are my life.... ;)

[Odinson]

Got my second best driving complement in a university physics class.

The teacher said 'You can't have lateral force greater than the static friction of the four tires touching the ground.'

I said 'That's not exactly true.' Of course I was talking about drift and torque steer.

He said, "You remind me of the pilots.":banana::rock:
:burnout:

[Ozark Marauder]

Nerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrds!!!! :shake:


Correct with your observations, the example I gave was just a off-hand statement relating to the violence of the impact (which was obviously severe).

To actually determine the force of the impact (i.e. kinetic energy generated by the crash), you'd need to know the weight of the vehicles as well as their speed. You could then plug those values into the formula EK = (1/2)mv^2, and if the components of the vector are known then magnitude and direction can be calculated with the use of the Pythagorean relationship and triangle trigonometry.


lol, don't remind me. I had to take a course in physics last semester, and the focus was almost entirely linear and rotational kinematics. Boy did that stuff give me headaches.


I hear that... :(

Actually enjoyed trig, and used a lot of trig calculations to estimate volume/mass in my former postion, now I just f@rt around with stuff like this for the heck of it.



Yeah, well numbers are my life.... ;)


I'm convinced that theoretical physics and math are actually philosophy........:D

OZ

[SC Cheesehead]

I'm convinced that theoretical physics and math are actually philosophy........:D

OZ


I will not argue that statement! :D

[CBT]

We already put a man on the moon, and I will never see a paycheck with a(c-b)Vx - (a2-b3) x -597 = Your Pay on it, so I could care less about math. Only taking it because I have to.

[Ozark Marauder]

Math is the one true universal language because the principles and foundations of math are the same everywhere around the world. Same as with music.....But it would be impossible to say "That's what she said" in mathematical form...music maybe....:D

OZ

[lji372]

holy *?*?*?