Found this neat article.

This is a reconstruction of a crash involving a stationary Ford Falcon XT sedan being struck in the driver's door by another vehicle travelling at 50 km/h.

0 milliseconds - An external object touches the driver's door.

1 ms - The car's door pressure sensor detects a pressure wave.

2 ms - An acceleration sensor in the C-pillar behind the rear door also detects a crash event.

2.5 ms - A sensor in the car's centre detects crash vibrations.

5 ms - Car's crash computer checks for insignificant crash events, such as a shopping trolley impact or incidental contact. It is still working out the severity of the crash. Door intrusion structure begins to absorb energy.

6.5 ms - Door pressure sensor registers peak pressures.

7 ms - Crash computer confirms a serious crash and calculates its actions.

8 ms - Computer sends a "fire" signal to side airbag. Meanwhile, B-pillar begins to crumple inwards and energy begins to transfer into cross-car load path beneath the occupant.

8.5 ms - Side airbag system fires.

15 ms - Roof begins to absorb part of the impact. Airbag bursts through seat foam and begins to fill.

17 ms - Cross-car load path and structure under rear seat reach maximum load. Airbag covers occupant's chest and begins to push the shoulder away from impact zone.

20 ms - Door and B-pillar begin to push on front seat. Airbag begins to push occupant's chest away from the impact.

27 ms - Impact velocity has halved from 50 km/h to 23.5 km/h. A "pusher block" in the seat moves occupant's pelvis away from impact zone. Airbag starts controlled deflation.

30 ms - The Falcon has absorbed all crash energy. Airbag remains in place. For a brief moment, occupant experiences maximum force equal to 12 times the force of gravity.

45 ms - Occupant and airbag move together with deforming side structure.

50 ms - Crash computer unlocks car's doors. Passenger safety cell begins to rebound, pushing doors away from occupant.

70 ms - Airbag continues to deflate. Occupant moves back towards middle of car.

Engineers classify crash as "complete".

150-300 ms - Occupant becomes aware of collision.

For those who don't click the link, vid of the crash can be found here. Looks like the dummy still absorbs a lot of impact. I'd like to know what sort of injuries that would equate to.

When I had my accident (sideways into a traffic light) all I can remember is seeing the traffic light and thinking "Oh my f***" and then there was just white dust in the air from the now deflated airbag and everything was over.

well its probably still going to tickle a little bit but I think i could deal with a broken arm or something > being quite dead

I've luckily only ever been involved in a few crashes, none major (ie never had an airbag go off)
rear enders / sideways into poles (as a passenger on the side that hit the pole)

I can vividly remember one crash happening before, during and after
was reasonably freaky seeing a pole come at you and knowing theres nothing you can do to stop it, side airbags would have been a welcome thought

Car crash safety is pretty crazy these days. I know if I had that crash or anything high speed crash in my 87 commodore i'd get f***ed up. They're made like tanks back then. No energy absorbtion, no airbags. But then again, for saving your life you pay a f***load to have newer cars repaired coz they crumple like plastic.

last edited by 3dee at 15:09:12 24/Feb/09

probably wouldn't have tickled :D


not much of an impact though...



that's an impact ! :D

Thats nuts. His arm gets thrown out the window for a second. Luckily didnt get it mashed while rolling!

But then again, for saving your life you pay a f***load to have newer cars repaired coz they crumple like plastic.

even replacing the car out of your own pocket and paying off the wreck would still be a small price to pay for your life though, no?

I'm getting a big ass bullbar on my ute shortly, beware retards who turn from lights (that has two turning lanes) and veer into my lane because they're too retarded to stay between the white lines

no more honking, i'm going to f***ing ram you back into your own lane and keep driving because it wont bother me having a few scratches on my bullbar

and yeah those rally cars are built to be all-but death proof

last edited by tequila at 15:15:57 24/Feb/09

even replacing the car out of your own pocket and paying off the wreck would still be a small price to pay for your life though, no?

Not saying its not a good thing they crumple to save your life. They just don't skimp of destroying your wallet though hah...

insurance can worry about my wallet ;)

1 foot to the left and would have been fine. Shows how quick things go from good to bad, it didnt even look like a huge mistake.

His arm gets thrown out the window for a second. Luckily didnt get it mashed while rolling!

haha yeh... it maybe be indicative of how fast some people's brains do work coz in the interview after that accident pastrana said that in the middle of the crash he saw that his arm was outside the car n went 'what's that doing out there?' n pulled it back in :P

My Bro has a Hilux + this ^. Very persuasive! Next you've got to get one of these!

haha yeah i've considered the air horn before
i'd rather just plough into them while they'rein my lane so its their fault (at least technically)

even if it does damage to my car its a $400 insurance excess that i'm happy to pay just for the photos i'd get to take of some f***ing a******s smashed in doors/quarter panels


edit for trog;

Fatal error: Cannot redeclare agn_dbquery() (previously declared in /www/mammoth/ausgamers/phplib/agnfuncs.php:32) in /www/mammoth/phplib-common/ausgamers/agnfuncs.php on line 58

add _once to your includes

ie require_once or include_once

last edited by tequila at 15:45:48 24/Feb/09

the human body is very resilient sure, but never intended to travel at those speeds. i mean if we were, we would be built with wheels amirite?

or we'd still be walking on all fours, compare the land speed of mammals walking on 2 vs 4 legs

Or we'd all be built like brick s***houses.

add _once to your includes

ie require_once or include_once

cheers but that won't stop functions from being declared twice when they're in two different included files

Jim, I need you to rewrite the dbquery function you sent me about 10 yrs ago.. pass by reference is now being depreciated and I'm too lazy to write my own.

What I find stupid is that cars don't realise they're going to crash BEFORE they crash. According to the OP the car could be getting hit by a Mac Truck and the f***ing thing is still asking itself "is it a shopping trolley?".
Human beings know sometimes several seconds in advance when they're f***ed. Why can't the car? The car doesn't even need eyes and ears hooked into some bulls*** AI system, it could just detect these things magnetically, or with radar.
Why not build a buffer around the car using a force field? Car companies certainly do not employ clever people.

lols ticman
just delete the ampersand and hope for the best imo :P

:(

Don't make me do my OWN coding!

well you're safe there, nothing I've ever done could be considered coding :)

cheers but that won't stop functions from being declared twice when they're in two different included files

ok well

if (!function_exists('agn_dbquery')) {

function ..


}

Jim stop coding php kgo

when we had one of the cabs written off the airbags went off and the cabbie sustained burns up the insides of his arms. apparently this is common to receive burns from the airbag inflating. if there was no airbag he would have been okay, however. He was off work for weeks cos of these burns, and apparently if he had been in a pre-airbag car he could have been back on the road the next night, no problems. Apparently in the old days some dodgy cab operators used to disable the airbags because of this, and because then they'd have less to replace on a crashed cab. Not good.
3dee, if i was in a crash bad enough to crumple my car real bad and set the airbags off, i'd rather it cost my insurance company $10k instead of $5k to repair, seeing as i'd still have my front teeth left.
And just remember in 1987 old men would have laughed at how plastic and crumply a VL would have been compared to a HR or something like that, and how a HR could have crashed into a stone wall at 100kmh and simply sustained a scratch on the chrome bumper and other old man lies and hoo-haa. Just remember they don't make em like they used to, and thank god for that, cos they make 'em a whole lot better now.

if there was no airbag he would have been okay

what makes you say that?

if (!function_exists('agn_dbquery')) {

heh no thanks

what makes you say that?

The impact actually wasn't that bad. The front end was mashed, but the driver was (surprisingly, as they don't have to by law) wearing his seatbelt and the interior was completely untouched (apart from the airbags), dash unmoved, you could even still open the doors. one of the reasons i was swayed on the falcons, cos i've seen many random car vs falcon, and the falcon is always surprisingly well off compared to the other car, from many different angles. Probably due to its large size and not much else, however.

if($user != "jimsaq" && ((rand()%8) == 1)
do_random_but_cryptic_error();

I can vividly remember one crash happening before, during and after
was reasonably freaky seeing a pole come at you and knowing theres nothing you can do to stop it, side airbags would have been a welcome thought

I've heard similar anecdotal reports, but never researched it properly. My guess is you actually encode the memory better, so that, after the fact, the events are very clear and seem like they happened in slow motion. If you think about it, it's evolutionary advantageous to remember life-threatening events in detail, so we can hopefully avoid them in the future.

beware retards who turn from lights (that has two turning lanes) and veer into my lane because they're too retarded to stay between the white lines

Pisses me off so much when people do that. Similar to when people in a left lane that ends just merge into the right lane without indicating or even checking, like it's their right to just push in. Girls do that all the time at the end of Sir Fred going to UQ, and I'm so tempted to just let them crash into me....

What I find stupid is that cars don't realise they're going to crash BEFORE they crash. According to the OP the car could be getting hit by a Mac Truck and the f***ing thing is still asking itself "is it a shopping trolley?".
Human beings know sometimes several seconds in advance when they're f***ed. Why can't the car? The car doesn't even need eyes and ears hooked into some bulls*** AI system, it could just detect these things magnetically, or with radar.
Why not build a buffer around the car using a force field? Car companies certainly do not employ clever people.

Don't know if that was a joke post or what, but I really don't see how that is possible. Just remember that when it comes to perception, humans are really, really good :p

Pretty cool little rundown there, very clever these things nowdays.

Cool rally crash also, though that type of accident is probably the safest to have if you are going to have a high speed crash, s*** all energy being taken by the driver.

This is a crash:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZKYl8TzNOE

This is a crash: [youtube]fZKYl8TzNOE[/youtube]

nice try

I know if I had that crash or anything high speed crash in my 87 commodore i'd get f***ed up. They're made like tanks back then. No energy absorbtion, no airbags. But then again, for saving your life you pay a f***load to have newer cars repaired coz they crumple like plastic.

its a VB -> VK, though. ps, sit in the boot.

Wouldn't you feel like a tard.

wow ^ f***ed up

thats at 160km/h though, i'm sure a modern car would look pretty much the same.

I reckon the cabin area would look a lot different

You could think of it as a head on at 80km/h

no. you couldn't.

its a VB -> VK, though. ps, sit in the boot.

VK vs a VE...

yeah but thats at a much slower speed...

yeah, ancap only test to 64km/h. thats not an ancap test though, they only do offset frontal impacts.

poor 500 driver

when i came off my bike (nothing serious, back wheel slid out on a downhill corner going reasonably slowly) i dont recall the feeling of hitting the ground, i just remember hearing a scraping noise then thinking 'oh f*** thats my helmet grinding against the gravel'

Pisses me off so much when people do that. Similar to when people in a left lane that ends just merge into the right lane without indicating or even checking, like it's their right to just push in. Girls do that all the time at the end of Sir Fred going to UQ, and I'm so tempted to just let them crash into me....

If I remember that scenario correctly, those lanes just merge into one frickin lane without any "superior lane", ie there is no heavy dashed line with a big f*** off giveway sign on the left. I could be wrong, but just becuase your nose is at the rear tire of someone else doesnt give you right away either!

you still always give way to your right hand side, that rule never changes

twat they have actually marked the roads properly, so the right lane is unbroken, while the left lane ends and has merge right arrows printed.

Well actually, in those situations twat is talking about, whoever is in front has right of way.
They did change it.

Unless you have a Giveway line that crosses your lane (not just a merging line) that is marked/signed whomever is in front goes first. Highway on-ramps are probably the best example.

I think the real problem is people, like you, dont know how to merge. Some people feel they have to be first which is what causes most of the merging problems.

But First is still better tho right Scot?

I dont really care actually, people tend to get out of the way of big 4WD's with Bars and Dints anyway.

Scooter, I'm not clear on what you're saying. What's the rule in this case (Sir Fred):


View Larger Map

the van

the tree

what are we doing?

Merging
ZIP MERGE

There are two kinds of merges in Victoria. In one of these situations two lanes will join together without a dotted line between the two lanes. This kind of Merge is a Zip Merge. You must give way to any vehicle which has any part of its vehicle ahead of yours.

The second type of merge is where vehicles must cross a dashed line. In this situation the vehicle crossing the line must give way to any vehicle already travelling in the lane the driver wishes to enter. This type of merge commonly occurs on freeway entry ramps.

Right lane has right of way in that pic.

Victoria

National road rules these days, and yes it is exactly the same in QLD.

Well billy if you could use google.com as well as maps.google.com you could find out for yourself what the rule is on fred schonell drive.

no. you couldn't.

Why not? Two cars both traveling at 80km/h, both hit each other head on. Thats the same as hitting a still object at 160km/h.

No, it's not.

Assuming the still object is another car, and not a brick wall.

Why not? Two cars both traveling at 80km/h, both hit each other head on. Thats the same as hitting a still object at 160km/h.

no it isn't.

if you hit a wall at 160km/h you go from 160->0. the two cars colliding both go from 80 -> 0.

think about it like this. relative to the car on the left, the car coming from the right is doing 160. and vice versa. BUT when they collide they relatively only decelerate by 80km/h, each and in the opposite directions. for the car hitting another car be equivalent to hitting a wall 160km/h it'd have to MATCH its velocity with the car its hitting.

now if you were doing 80km/h and were hit by a massive truck going the other way at 80km/h it might be true. assuming the truck didn't slow down at all, that might be equivalent to hitting a wall at 160km/h (because its 80 -> -80). realistically a truck being hit by a car IS going to slow down. so the actual relative change in velocity isn't going to be 160->0.

two cars slamming into each other is no different than if both cars hit the wall from opposite sides.

so to come up with a better comparison a car hitting a wall at 160km/h is like a car at 80km/h hitting a wall thats moving in the opposite direction at 80km/h (assuming the wall doesn't slow down).

Ok I've been lawyed
I was thinking more of adding the forces rather then deceleration.