Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla asked to brief U.S. Senate panel on fatal Florida crash

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
should these trailer panels be mandated in the US? They are in much of Europe for fuel efficiency purposes.

They've been mandated in UK for 30 years - long before fuel efficiency would have been a consideration, but some of the new ones do look a lot more streamlined than 2 or 3 bars welded along the side of a trailer!

Come on USA, buck up and get trailer side impact bars mandated and start saving countless lives.

In UK the law change was retrospective, plus we are in the process of removing most of the exemptions - going back to vehicles built since 1960. Some large construction projects over here include contractual terms for vehicle safety that exceed legal requirements, and contractors have to retro-fit the additional equipment, send drivers on safety courses, and stick to designated (safer ...) routes when travelling to/from the site. Incentives like that help to improve the fleet
 
They've been mandated in UK for 30 years - long before fuel efficiency would have been a consideration, but some of the new ones do look a lot more streamlined than 2 or 3 bars welded along the side of a trailer!

Come on USA, buck up and get trailer side impact bars mandated and start saving countless lives.

In UK the law change was retrospective, plus we are in the process of removing most of the exemptions - going back to vehicles built since 1960. Some large construction projects over here include contractual terms for vehicle safety that exceed legal requirements, and contractors have to retro-fit the additional equipment, send drivers on safety courses, and stick to designated (safer ...) routes when travelling to/from the site. Incentives like that help to improve the fleet


..I read recently that around 500 people per year are killed in the US as a result of side impacts to Tractor Trailers. There is absolutely no excuse for not mandating side impact guard rails on US trucks, and not having them is putting more lives at risk everyday.
 
I'm a bit confused by this letter. Does Thune expect a short brief to satisfactorily answer the questions it will take the NHTSA weeks/months to investigate? Why doesn't he wait for the NHTSA report?

Of course Thune does not expect a short brief to answer any questions. What you should ask is - how does the brief do good for Thune?

Let me count the ways:

  • Gets Thune's name in the press attached a very hot topic.
  • Gets Americans who had no idea who Thune is to pay attention to him.
  • Perhaps serves the interest of continuing to hurt Tesla in the press - which may help people behind the scenes who have influence over Thune.
  • Feeds Thune's ego.
  • Justify's Thune's existence.
  • Makes Thune look like he is protecting the sheeple voters from Big Bad Corporate America.
  • Helps Thune feel less useless in his darker moments late at night.
 
They've been mandated in UK for 30 years - long before fuel efficiency would have been a consideration, but some of the new ones do look a lot more streamlined than 2 or 3 bars welded along the side of a trailer!

Come on USA, buck up and get trailer side impact bars mandated and start saving countless lives.

In UK the law change was retrospective, plus we are in the process of removing most of the exemptions - going back to vehicles built since 1960. Some large construction projects over here include contractual terms for vehicle safety that exceed legal requirements, and contractors have to retro-fit the additional equipment, send drivers on safety courses, and stick to designated (safer ...) routes when travelling to/from the site. Incentives like that help to improve the fleet
We barely have regulation for rear crash barriers on semi trailers. The trucking industry always resists changes that cost money.
 
We barely have regulation for rear crash barriers on semi trailers. The trucking industry always resists changes that cost money.
Seems to me they could be mandated to do so based upon the evolving technologies and how they are being applied to the next-gem vehicles. It then no longer is a cost issue but rather an evolving safety issue with the newer cars and how they read their surrounding environments.
 
Understood (and I'm sure we had the same thing here, at the time), but what I'm struggling with, gazing at you across the Pond, is why you put up with it?
That's the way our political system works. Large organizations with money "donate" to the politicians that are in control of the specific things and, low and behold, the laws are are enacted just so happen to favor the organizations.....