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
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.
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.
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)
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
Exactly, would you rather an accident kill a dozen innocent students or 1-2 dumbass(es) who rear ended a bright yellow bus.
Or, you know, kill 0 people, in the normal world.
hold on what was the social credit score of the children
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
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.
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.
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)
excuse me the multipla looks more like a mangled duck