That's a T intersection and both the culvert and the car in the photo are at the top of the T. Marks on the curb (not in the photo) show that that a car has recently headed straight through the stop sign, over the curb, and head on in to the culvert.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
New Tesla Fatality - Single Car Accident.
- Thread starter MattMDK
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
That's a T intersection and both the culvert and the car in the photo are at the top of the T. Marks on the curb (not in the photo) show that that a car has recently headed straight through the stop sign, over the curb, and head on in to the culvert.
What stop sign? The T intersection next to the car in @dennis' photo is where a driveway goes over the culvert and meets Shannon Rd. There's no stop sign there. There's a stop sign down at the intersection of Shannon and Short but that's after the culvert and after the point where he went off the road. I don't see how anybody could have gone through a stop sign and head-on into the culvert.
Looks like they're are stop signs at all ways. This view of Shannon Rd shows that perhaps he was coming from this direction and went straight through.
The view in this second photo shows the culvert to the right, and would mean veering off the road (falling asleep could do that).
The view in this second photo shows the culvert to the right, and would mean veering off the road (falling asleep could do that).
wiztecy
Active Member
Race car drivers always wear their seat belts and there's a very good reason for that.
I honestly can't drive a car without a seat belt and actually would prefer a 4 or 6 point harness over the side shoulder strap. I feel more secure when pushing hard through turns or in the case of a crash/roll that my body stays tight the seat when G's go in unfavorable directions.
In my Roadster, the biggest fear is that the car is so low that the front windshield pillers offer absolutely NO protection against objects of any significant weight approaching the driver/passenger. Look at the Lotus forum for this issue and pics. The car is a ramp for objects and cars to ride up and on top of you. Since my Roadster is my daily commuter I've been considering a full roll cage and at a minimum a 4 point harness to guarantee my own personal safety, either from an error on my own driving or in the event of some other person's mistake.
Even Elon knew he couldn't keep away from fatalities over time. With more cars produced and people buying them the odds are against your favor. For the Roadster I believe none have occurred for that there are very few of them around. To give credit the Roadster is built strong and ample for its time, having ample front/rear crumple zones, but most importantly a tub that has very strong aluminum beams running down the sides as well as side impact beams in the doors. Mike Malony's harsh accident that he walked away unharmed is a pure example of the strength and protection of the tub. But as time goes on it will eventually happen. The Elise as a very close model and fatalities have occurred, from my observation its from the lack of a cage and the piller failing to offer proper protection. It was spec'd and designed to hold glass, not to protect the driver/passenger.
I have a Jeep Rubicon that's built for rock crawling, it has a full roll bar / cage and a 4 point harness as well as full armor all the way around. The cage and seat belt harness give me great confidence that if anything goes south while I'm driving this Jeep that I'll most likely walk away. And ONLY when I'm strapped in with the safety/seat belt. Worse case spend some time in a hospital for odds and ends, but for the most part steel will protect me if its a properly designed barrier / zone around my body. In order for this safety system to fully function in order to protect me I must be strapped in. And no-matter how short of a trip you're making, you need to buckle up. Most accidents occur very close to home as this thread has pointed out.
I honestly can't drive a car without a seat belt and actually would prefer a 4 or 6 point harness over the side shoulder strap. I feel more secure when pushing hard through turns or in the case of a crash/roll that my body stays tight the seat when G's go in unfavorable directions.
In my Roadster, the biggest fear is that the car is so low that the front windshield pillers offer absolutely NO protection against objects of any significant weight approaching the driver/passenger. Look at the Lotus forum for this issue and pics. The car is a ramp for objects and cars to ride up and on top of you. Since my Roadster is my daily commuter I've been considering a full roll cage and at a minimum a 4 point harness to guarantee my own personal safety, either from an error on my own driving or in the event of some other person's mistake.
Even Elon knew he couldn't keep away from fatalities over time. With more cars produced and people buying them the odds are against your favor. For the Roadster I believe none have occurred for that there are very few of them around. To give credit the Roadster is built strong and ample for its time, having ample front/rear crumple zones, but most importantly a tub that has very strong aluminum beams running down the sides as well as side impact beams in the doors. Mike Malony's harsh accident that he walked away unharmed is a pure example of the strength and protection of the tub. But as time goes on it will eventually happen. The Elise as a very close model and fatalities have occurred, from my observation its from the lack of a cage and the piller failing to offer proper protection. It was spec'd and designed to hold glass, not to protect the driver/passenger.
I have a Jeep Rubicon that's built for rock crawling, it has a full roll bar / cage and a 4 point harness as well as full armor all the way around. The cage and seat belt harness give me great confidence that if anything goes south while I'm driving this Jeep that I'll most likely walk away. And ONLY when I'm strapped in with the safety/seat belt. Worse case spend some time in a hospital for odds and ends, but for the most part steel will protect me if its a properly designed barrier / zone around my body. In order for this safety system to fully function in order to protect me I must be strapped in. And no-matter how short of a trip you're making, you need to buckle up. Most accidents occur very close to home as this thread has pointed out.
Last edited:
caddieo
Member
Thanks to 4SUPER9 for the last 2 pictures as they clarify the trajectory of the crash. However I will leave speculation about the mechanics of the crash to those who are inclined to do so.
chickensevil
Active Member
See I used to wear them especially when driving but was less motivated about remembering in other situations until I joined the military. They basically had a rule in place that you had to wear your seatbelt or face potential loss of rank and any passengers must be belted or your would be punished for their actions as well. Basically if you were in a car it was your responsibility to ensure everyone was buckled. As such I had gotten in such a habit of not only ensuring I am buckled but everyone else is that years later even though I am no longer in the military I still tell everyone to buckle up if I notice they aren't. And then hearing stories on both sides of tragic loss of life and surprising saves reinforces that habit.
About the model S it will eventually go silent on the ringer once you get up to speed (like 30MPH) but if you ever come to a stop again it will start complaining at you again. Or so I have heard from people on the forums. I have never driven far enough without a seatbelt on to find out.
About the model S it will eventually go silent on the ringer once you get up to speed (like 30MPH) but if you ever come to a stop again it will start complaining at you again. Or so I have heard from people on the forums. I have never driven far enough without a seatbelt on to find out.
This is very sad. He looked like a great guy with a great family. Having lost my dad at 13, it ruined my life. I hope his children get a replacement father, but that is extremely difficult. I never got one and it ruined me.
Regarding the accident, I always want to know what not to do and what to do and thoughts for what to prevent. I'm not perfect and I always want to improve.
I have a speculation: the trees were cut before the accident, and he was missing the trees as road cue that the turn was there, and therefore failed to slow down or turn, trying to stay in what he thought was the roadway. This can happen easier with age or poor eyesight, driving by memory instead of sight. It could also happen more easily if distracted (see seatbelt speculations). Missing trees would be a bad deal in the dark for a driver like this (as I age, my eyes get worse and I use more memory cues than visual cues for driving, which is morbidly scary in San Jose with all the new invisible oddly shaped concrete medians). However, I'm not quite sure how this would cause him to stay so close to the crash point even at a light speed.
I found many other speculations here possible to.
I'm very surprised every time I pull over to do texting or phone calls and law enforcement pulls over and asks what I'm doing there. This has happened to me numerous times, and very often I don't see other people pull over to text or call. When I pull over, I find a safe and hopefully legal spot. This phenomenon of LEOs pulling over to ask what I'm doing was a few years ago before I started to see other people doing it a lot. Now days I actually do see other people doing it more often. This is a good thing. If driving conditions don't allow safe operating of some item (car settings, clothing, communications, audio controls, navigation, etc.), one should safely park first just to do it. I do this all the time. I consider my mental driving ability and visual information sufficiency to perform that function while driving, and often me being tired, mentally occupied, heavy traffic or poor visual contrast can easily make the difference between times when I consider it safe to do something en route and times when I have to pull over to do the same thing, such as taking off a shoe, or taking a look at my navigation map.
Regarding the accident, I always want to know what not to do and what to do and thoughts for what to prevent. I'm not perfect and I always want to improve.
I have a speculation: the trees were cut before the accident, and he was missing the trees as road cue that the turn was there, and therefore failed to slow down or turn, trying to stay in what he thought was the roadway. This can happen easier with age or poor eyesight, driving by memory instead of sight. It could also happen more easily if distracted (see seatbelt speculations). Missing trees would be a bad deal in the dark for a driver like this (as I age, my eyes get worse and I use more memory cues than visual cues for driving, which is morbidly scary in San Jose with all the new invisible oddly shaped concrete medians). However, I'm not quite sure how this would cause him to stay so close to the crash point even at a light speed.
I found many other speculations here possible to.
I'm very surprised every time I pull over to do texting or phone calls and law enforcement pulls over and asks what I'm doing there. This has happened to me numerous times, and very often I don't see other people pull over to text or call. When I pull over, I find a safe and hopefully legal spot. This phenomenon of LEOs pulling over to ask what I'm doing was a few years ago before I started to see other people doing it a lot. Now days I actually do see other people doing it more often. This is a good thing. If driving conditions don't allow safe operating of some item (car settings, clothing, communications, audio controls, navigation, etc.), one should safely park first just to do it. I do this all the time. I consider my mental driving ability and visual information sufficiency to perform that function while driving, and often me being tired, mentally occupied, heavy traffic or poor visual contrast can easily make the difference between times when I consider it safe to do something en route and times when I have to pull over to do the same thing, such as taking off a shoe, or taking a look at my navigation map.
Last edited:
When I'm in a private car I always buckle up, but for some reason I don't do so in taxis. Particularly odd behavior gap, given that I don't have any particular reason to trust the cabbie more than I trust me. Time for me to change that behavior.
I noticed that myself about a year ago (when I hopped in an Uber) and changed that real quick. I think one reason is that I typically cab in NYC where you're never really going all that fast to begin with. The Uber I'd taken was from the airport to the city center and there was a lot of highway driving. Now it's pretty much automatic (if a bit disgusting in some vehicles).
DFibRL8R
Active Member
I'm sure Bob Simon's family would agree with you
Disconcerting details emerge about driver in Bob Simon's fatal accident - Yahoo News
Taxi companies need to change with the times...... What are they going to do when there are driverless taxis?
Newton's Laws of Motion apply regardless of which seat you sit in . . . pleased to see your change in behavior:
'Beautiful Mind' Mathematician John Nash Jr. Dies In New Jersey Car Crash : The Two-Way : NPR
I went on a cruise with family and friends last year. For the trip to the airport, a friend ordered a limo that could hold all of us and our luggage. Everyone was having a nice ride to the airport except for me since I didn't have a seatbelt. All I could do is imagine being in an accident and flying forward. Eventually, I moved to the rear of the limo and found the very back seats did have seatbelts so I was able to buckle up. That made the rest of the 45 mile drive to the airport more enjoyable. Unfortunately on the return trip, the limo didn't have any seatbelts and I was worried again during the entire drive home. :crying:
Similar threads
