Rear-Ender accident in Palmdale - 7/4/14

[tdelta1000]

First, blessing to all who have been injured or killed by someone driving a Model S. Now!!! bad drivers are the cause of these accidents and not the "S" themselves. The Model S still continues to show that it is one of the safest cars or the road and not a single person driving a Model S has not died. Again, blessing to the killed and injured.

 

[K5ING]

They are reporting the driver of the Model S as Rick Garrison of Newhall. In addition they are stating he was not intoxicated. Is he a member of TMC?

A quick Facebook search shows a Dr. Ric S. Garrison, a plastic surgeon, with a practice in Palmdale. His personal page, found in his friend's list, doesn't show a town or any references to Tesla that I could find. I have no idea if this is the driver or not.

UPDATE: KTLA is reporting that this is indeed the individual involved.

Thoughts and prayers to all involved and their families.

 

[Jack6591]

Mandating the car have acc is reactionary nonsense. This is the fault of the driver, and the driver alone.

The investigation is on-going.

 

[omarsultan]

There seems to be a mistaken notion that the MS is particularly heavy, but that's not the case:

- Model S: 4,647 lbs
- Audi RS7: 4,475 lbs
- BMW M5: 4,387 lbs
- Maserati Quattroporte: 4,389 lbs
- MB CLS 550: 4,255 lbs

The MS is about ~10% heavier that the lightest of these (the MB) and any of these cars driven at high speed will become a weapon. An before we start picking on performance sedans, the lightest version of the Ford F-150, the most popular vehicle in the US, is 4,685 lbs (this should drop by ~700 lbs with the intro of the aluminum 2015 model).

O

 

[mrdoubleb]

There seems to be a mistaken notion that the MS is particularly heavy, but that's not the case:

- Model S: 4,647 lbs
- Audi RS7: 4,475 lbs
- BMW M5: 4,387 lbs
- Maserati Quattroporte: 4,389 lbs
- MB CLS 550: 4,255 lbs

The MS is about ~10% heavier that the lightest of these (the MB) and any of these cars driven at high speed will become a weapon. An before we start picking on performance sedans, the lightest version of the Ford F-150, the most popular vehicle in the US, is 4,685 lbs (this should drop by ~700 lbs with the intro of the aluminum 2015 model).

O

Copied your numbers to the comments of the KTLA article where someone came with that same old argument. Hope you don't mind.

 

[omarsultan]

Copied your numbers to the comments of the KTLA article where someone came with that same old argument. Hope you don't mind.

Not at all - thx for checking.

 

[Lloyd]

Also Gasoline cars are listed "empty weight". Add Gas and oil of ~ 150 lbs to each

 

[mrdoubleb]

Also Gasoline cars are listed "empty weight". Add Gas and oil of ~ 150 lbs to each

lol, you are so correct. Never thought of that, but the Model S doesn't have an "empty weight" and a "with fuel and lubricants". Electrons don't weigh much, do they?

 

[ecarfan]

Thank you for that note of reason. The S is a heavy car, just like many other cars that are currently on the road. And heavy cars can be twice the weight of compact cars. Heavy car hits small lighter weight car, bad outcome for the small car and it's occupants. Just like when a big truck hits any passenger car, bad outcome for the car.

There seems to be a mistaken notion that the MS is particularly heavy, but that's not the case:

- Model S: 4,647 lbs
- Audi RS7: 4,475 lbs
- BMW M5: 4,387 lbs
- Maserati Quattroporte: 4,389 lbs
- MB CLS 550: 4,255 lbs

The MS is about ~10% heavier that the lightest of these (the MB) and any of these cars driven at high speed will become a weapon. An before we start picking on performance sedans, the lightest version of the Ford F-150, the most popular vehicle in the US, is 4,685 lbs (this should drop by ~700 lbs with the intro of the aluminum 2015 model).

 

[NuclearPowered]

We don't know that exactly... yet.


Why would the driver just drive into a car and rear end them. Its stated that he wasn't intoxicated either so i'll like to see how this happened.


the toyota could have abruptly braked... or the guy in the tesla just rear ended them for unknown reasons... who knows... we'll find out


But this is why dash cams should be standard in all new cars, not stupid back up cameras.

Attorneys.com says... "If a driver's vehicle is struck from behind by another vehicle, the resulting accident is nearly always the striking driver's fault. This holds true regardless of the reason for the first driver's stop or slow down. Why?

Because basic*traffic laws*mandate a driver must be able to come to a safe stop if the vehicle(s) ahead stops or slows down. Incidentally, this traffic rule also governs sudden stops. If the subsequent driver cannot come to a safe stop, chances are he or she is not driving in a safe manner and probably not as safely as the driver in front of him or her."


Maybe I should have been more clear. 99.9% chance this is the rear drivers fault regardless of the leading driver's behavior. I don't think the car drove itself into the back of a Toyota and killed 3 people. One driver not operating a high performance car safely does not justify some mandatory self braking feature.

 

[K5ING]

Attorneys.com says... "If a driver's vehicle is struck from behind by another vehicle, the resulting accident is nearly always the striking driver's fault. This holds true regardless of the reason for the first driver's stop or slow down. Why?

Because basic*traffic laws*mandate a driver must be able to come to a safe stop if the vehicle(s) ahead stops or slows down. Incidentally, this traffic rule also governs sudden stops. If the subsequent driver cannot come to a safe stop, chances are he or she is not driving in a safe manner and probably not as safely as the driver in front of him or her."


Maybe I should have been more clear. 99.9% chance this is the rear drivers fault regardless of the leading driver's behavior. I don't think the car drove itself into the back of a Toyota and killed 3 people. One driver not operating a high performance car safely does not justify some mandatory self braking feature.

There is another reason also why the rear car is almost always at fault, legally, and I have a relative that got stung by it. It's pretty much as you described, but also extends to multi-car chain collisions. Many years (decades?) ago, my aunt was driving her air-cooled VW bug near Chicago, in the snow, and there was a 15 car chain collision that had she had the unfortunate luck to be last in. Even though cars ahead of her had already hit each other, she was automatically charged with the accident because every driver could claim that they were pushed into the car ahead by the car that rear ended them. Being the end car, she was the only one that couldn't make that claim.

 

[Shumdit]

There are a number of possibilities: toyota was in stopped traffic in lane next to Tesla and pulled out in front of the Tesla. Toyota slams on brakes for some reason and car between it and Tesla successfully swerves and misses but Tesla driver does not react quick enough, etc. etc.

 

[NoMoGas]

Model S Fatal and fiery crash on 14 Freeway July 4, 2014

Sadly 3 people were killed, including 2 children, when a Model S rear ended a Toyota Corolla on SR 14 outside of Los Angeles. The Toyota subsequently burst into flames, but since it wasn't the Tesla that caught fire, the fire isn't mentioned in the headline. To be clear, the fatalities were in the Toyota, the Model s driver wasn't seriously injured. The downside of driving the safest car in the world is that accident injuries are not evenly distributed between the vehicles involved. I can't recommend enough maxing liability coverage.

One Adult, Two Children Dead After Tesla Crash In Palmdale | KHTS Radio - Santa Clarita News

MOD; feel free to move, repost

 

[Denarius]

While most of the time the driver in the rear car is at fault, but I've witnessed more than once people swerving into another lane because they weren't paying attention to traffic, narrowly avoiding rear ending the vehicle in front of them, which causes them enter the next lane (many times crossing a double white into the HOV lane which is still running significantly faster) almost completely stopped, serving directly in front of a vehicle still moving 40-50 miles per hour. In those scenarios even collision avoidance wouldn't stop the accident, though it might reduce the severity.

The driver in the car full of people could also pulled into traffic without looking because they were busy chatting.

Both these scenarios aren't as likely, but passing judgement without facts is silly.

 

[swaltner]

I am someone that has rear-ended a car on the highway and unlike you would normally expect, the driver of the vehicle in front was given a ticket and their insurance paid for the repairs to my vehicle. Well, they totaled it since it was a junky car for college. I receive no blame or ticket for the accident. The situation was very similar to what Denarius outlined.

I had the car loaded up to return home for Christmas break from college. Driving on a stretch of I-135 (divided highway, two lanes in each direction), I saw a vehicle ahead preparing to enterthe highway on the on-ramp. To make room, I pulled to the inside lane to clear the outside lane for the merging traffic. I maintained the speed limit (currently 75, but I think it was 65 at the time). They entered the highway (below the minimum speed of 40 mph, never having really accelerated to full speed) and immediately pulled into the inside lane just as I was passing them. There was a paved crossover to the other side of the highway about 0.1 miles from the on ramp. This was marked with a no u-turn sign and they were planning on turing around and getting back off the highway for some reason.

I don't know any details about this accident in Palmdale, but as my experience proves, fault for the accident isn't automatically charged to the person in the rear.my accident is the only specific accident I know of like this, but I suspect there have been other occurrences. If the other driver in my accident had been driving above the minimum speed or not tried to make an illegal u-turn, I would have been charged with the accident.

 

[Pilot_51]

I am someone that has rear-ended a car on the highway and unlike you would normally expect, the driver of the vehicle in front was given a ticket and their insurance paid for the repairs to my vehicle. Well, they totaled it since it was a junky car for college. I receive no blame or ticket for the accident. The situation was very similar to what Denarius outlined.

I had the car loaded up to return home for Christmas break from college. Driving on a stretch of I-135 (divided highway, two lanes in each direction), I saw a vehicle ahead preparing to enterthe highway on the on-ramp. To make room, I pulled to the inside lane to clear the outside lane for the merging traffic. I maintained the speed limit (currently 75, but I think it was 65 at the time). They entered the highway (below the minimum speed of 40 mph, never having really accelerated to full speed) and immediately pulled into the inside lane just as I was passing them. There was a paved crossover to the other side of the highway about 0.1 miles from the on ramp. This was marked with a no u-turn sign and they were planning on turing around and getting back off the highway for some reason.

I don't know any details about this accident in Palmdale, but as my experience proves, fault for the accident isn't automatically charged to the person in the rear.my accident is the only specific accident I know of like this, but I suspect there have been other occurrences. If the other driver in my accident had been driving above the minimum speed or not tried to make an illegal u-turn, I would have been charged with the accident.

I assume the only reason you weren't charged was because the other person confessed? If they thought it was your fault or lied about it, I'm sure it would be much more difficult for you to get out of it, especially without solid proof like a dash cam.

 

[bonnie]

I'll speak up with another example of rear-ending, not at fault. When I was 19 years old, I was driving the speed limit (probably around 80 at that point in time) going south on I-35 in Southern MN. There was a semi truck going very slowly in the right-most lane of the two lane highway. As I passed the truck, the car right in front of him (also the cause for the semi driving so slowly), pulled directly in front of me, meaning to take a center divider turn so that he could get to his farm on the other side of the road.

Days before mandatory seatbelts ... I remember thinking as I hit the brakes, 'Well, this wont do much good'. And I flew through the windshield from the impact, visor wrapped around my head leaving some permanent scars, and hit the freeway. Obviously not a fun day (but miraculously, no really serious injuries).

I was not ticketed. But yes, there were witnesses - the semi truck driver and others gave reports at the time that the car swerved in front of me with no warning, no signal. Just switched lanes.

 

[Doug_G]

While most of the time the driver in the rear car is at fault, but I've witnessed more than once people swerving into another lane because they weren't paying attention to traffic

Just before I traded in my Infiniti G37xS for my Model S, it was almost totaled by another driver's stupidity. I was traveling at 60 kph (40 mph), which was right at the speed limit, and I was passing a couple of cars waiting in a left turn lane. Just as I reached the second car in the turn lane, the first suddenly bailed out in front of me. I had about a car's length to react, but fortunately my accident avoidance training kicked in. My car screeched to a halt in the middle of the intersection, ending up diagonally across the road and well past the car that cut me off... but amazingly I didn't hit him!

If I wasn't on the ball, or if I hadn't been taking HPDE courses, we would have hit the back of his car very hard. And it most definitely would NOT have been my fault since he cut me off without warning. So clearly there are situations where a rear-end collision can be the fault of the car ahead.

 

[NoMoGas]

Precisely why I have dash cams in my vehicles

I am someone that has rear-ended a car on the highway and unlike you would normally expect, the driver of the vehicle in front was given a ticket and their insurance paid for the repairs to my vehicle. Well, they totaled it since it was a junky car for college. I receive no blame or ticket for the accident. The situation was very similar to what Denarius outlined.

I had the car loaded up to return home for Christmas break from college. Driving on a stretch of I-135 (divided highway, two lanes in each direction), I saw a vehicle ahead preparing to enterthe highway on the on-ramp. To make room, I pulled to the inside lane to clear the outside lane for the merging traffic. I maintained the speed limit (currently 75, but I think it was 65 at the time). They entered the highway (below the minimum speed of 40 mph, never having really accelerated to full speed) and immediately pulled into the inside lane just as I was passing them. There was a paved crossover to the other side of the highway about 0.1 miles from the on ramp. This was marked with a no u-turn sign and they were planning on turing around and getting back off the highway for some reason.

I don't know any details about this accident in Palmdale, but as my experience proves, fault for the accident isn't automatically charged to the person in the rear.my accident is the only specific accident I know of like this, but I suspect there have been other occurrences. If the other driver in my accident had been driving above the minimum speed or not tried to make an illegal u-turn, I would have been charged with the accident.

 

[MikeK]

Very unlikely that the Palmdale Model S was driving on CC; given the visible damage to the Model S, I'd guess it impacted the Honda at at least 30 mph, so probably it was driving 40-50 mph faster (assuming the driver slammed on the brakes just before impact). The Honda was probably driving about the speed limit. People driving 100+ mph don't usually have CC on.

Are you just assuming that the Honda was driving at the speed limit, or was that reported somewhere? Do we even know for sure that the Toyota was in motion at the time? It could, for example, have stalled.

One scenario that has almost bitten me in the past is that I was driving along in the HOV lane behind somebody at a safe following distance, and then that person suddenly swerved out of the lane, revealing a car at a dead stop. Scared the daylights out of me. Fortunately there was room to go around the stopped car, but that situation to me seems like a real "gotcha". I couldn't see around the guy in front (it was an SUV), and my following distance was based on the assumption that he might slow down or even stop suddenly, but that he would not come to an instantaneous stop.

I leave more room now if I can't see past the car ahead.