Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/07

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] S2 vs. 645D (cars)
From: Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 08:31:43 +0000
References: <96F81691-F34F-446A-AFBC-ADEEE51619A7@frozenlight.eu> <CB79B841.F43E%chris@chriscrawfordphoto.com> <20120306182614.GB17112@selenium.125px.com> <48F6AD8C-CD9C-40CE-8CF8-F318B00FD1E6@archiphoto.com> <CABXy405i3d3QAGaoK6Uwqo-CtUAb-mZRvwh8Ci=smMsCU7WNqg@mail.gmail.com>

This is clearly the best policy! Having a nimble good handling car with good 
brakes means you may well avoid an accident other cars would inevitably have.
OTOH if you're going to get hit by a big truck driven by an 
incompetent/distracted driver, best to be in something well designed for 
impact!

Two things make a lot of difference.
1. Many licensed drivers are not actually very good at driving, though few 
admit it. Nobody assumes that at the age of 16, with a small amount of 
acclimatisation and training, that everybody would be a good footballer etc 
(fill in your own choice of skill) but -everybody gets a chance of the 
freedom of driving. This means that a very large number of people out there 
are actually a bit/lot beyond their capability driving. On top of that IME 
the people who are most nervous drivers usually choose a big SUV since they 
feel safer in it, even though tall cars usually skid further and/or roll 
over. This means the least competent drivers are usually equipped to do the 
most damage and be the most dangerous.

2. There are very strict rules for the impact resistance of cars and 
measures for protecting pedestrians. These include the specification of 
bumper height, which is kept low so that pedestrians are swept onto the car 
rather than run over, for example. There is also a regulation about 
deformability of the parts of the car which a pedestrian may hit, for 
example there needs to be quite a big clearance nowadays over the engine, 
for example. This control means that front and side impact height is known 
and the structures designed accordingly. The low bumpers also mean the 
floorpan of the car takes a lot of the impact, which is good for passenger 
protection.
What makes a mockery of all this work and effort over the last 40 years or 
so is, of course, trucks don't have the same regulations Duh! They have high 
bumpers which almost guarantee they do serious damage to pedestrians, and in 
sideswipe accidents where they hit the middle of the door opening. Etc..
If it wasn't for the fact that plenty of people who don't have enough money 
to own a car and a truck, and need the truck for work, I would favour 
banning trucks from towns.
cheers,
FD

On 6 Mar, 2012, at 20:25, Ken Iisaka wrote:

> But again, the best strategy is not to get in an accident, period.



In reply to: Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D)
Message from chris at chriscrawfordphoto.com (Chris Crawford) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D)
Message from tgray at 125px.com (Tim Gray) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D (cars))
Message from ken at iisaka.com (Ken Iisaka) ([Leica] S2 vs. 645D (cars))