• MrSmith@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Dumbass too big american car smashes into a dumbass american bus that is so high up that a dumbass american car that’s too large can get under it.

    Imagine if that was a smaller car. 100% decapitation.

      • MrSmith@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Correct! That’s the cheap option at least.

        The expensive solution is to reduce the mass of the passenger vehicle and lower the bus. Maybe even put the engine of the bus in the back.

    • AxExRx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I read or was told at one point as a kid that that was an intentional feature on busses- they made the floor that high on purpose to make them safer for the occupants- instead of a rear collision hitting the frame head on eith their grill, and transferring all that momentum to the occupants, they were hitting the bus with their windshield/ chasis, and, much of the force that did transfer would be pushing the bus up because they were going under it like a wedge

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        43 minutes ago

        I don’t know, the bus has a lot more mass than most cars - even in a bumper to bumper collision they should come out pretty well

      • MrSmith@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        The goal of safety design of vehicles is to dissipate as much energy as possible, at no expense to one or the other side.

        This is still a rather mild accident of a pasanger vehicle rear-ending a bus. But it’s made so much worse simply because of both-sided idiotic vehicle designs.

        Most of the world realised that and rectified it rather qucikly.

        One car getting under another car is never the “safe” solution.

        • AxExRx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Are you talking about ideal safety design, or American design IRL?

          Because weve been in a weight and height arms-race for decades explicitly because whoever weighs more and is higher is safer, at the expense of the other vehicle.

          • MrSmith@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            53 minutes ago

            The cars I’m talking about are far from ideal. Ideal cars would look awful, and since, “for some reason”, we’re very touchy about what a car should look like, it’s a shape of an inefficient, unsafe brick.

            But yes, the issue is the arms race, as you’ve put it. And it’s starting to infect Europe as well, so education on vehicle safety is paramount.

            Vechicle safety is not “as long as I’m in a tank - I’m safe, and that’s all that matters”. (This is not aimed at you)

      • MrSmith@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        “Did you born”. Intelligence of an american dumbass car that’s too big owner.

        • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          19 minutes ago

          american dumbass car that’s too big owner

          oof, you just couldn’t stick the landing. being unfamiliar with a dialect is no reason to mock it.