Slashdot Mirror


Moscow Plane Crash Caught On Passerby's Dash Cam

acidradio writes "Yesterday a Tupolev 204 (Russian-made aircraft equivalent to an Airbus 321 or a shortened 757) overran the runway at Moscow Vnukovo airport and crashed into a nearby highway. A plane crash is always bad, but what makes this seem different is how well it was recorded. It seems like everyone in Russia has a dashcam, here is footage. A driver who just happened to be driving by on the nearby M3 highway (right about here on the map) is pelted by flying nose wheels and a row of coach-class seats! An accident like this has probably never been filmed so up close. We are getting better and better at recording accidents and disasters (whether by coincidence due to overuse of surveillance or maybe on purpose). What does that say about our level of documentation and recording of people's everyday lives? And what's the deal with dashcams in every Russian car?"

53 of 253 comments (clear)

  1. One word: Lawsuits by Kid+Zero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, Dash Cams are the best defense against scam artists.

    1. Re:One word: Lawsuits by sabri · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Seriously, Dash Cams are the best defense against scam artists.

      Or to prove that you weren't the culprit. Have a look at these videos, taken from my own dashcam in San Jose, CA:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BgkCUbeuck
      This is my wife driving. Watch the grey SUV on the right lane at 00:09.

      Or the "best" one I ever caught: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9g7H0-NelI
      Skip to 00:50 for the action. You can clearly see the red car turning left on a red light. After the accident I provided first aid until CHP arrived (none of the injured had life threatening injuries). I lived close to the accident site so I drove home and burned the 1080p video on a DVD and gave it to the police.

      Two months later I get a call from the insurer of the red car. Apparently they were unaware of the existence of the video: "Are you sure you saw that the light was red? Are you really really sure? Really??". So I answer "I got it on video on my dashcam". "Oh, ok, thanks -click".

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
    2. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, they're the best defense against police. When a policeman pulls you over and tries to extract a bribe, the dash cam is how you prove that you didn't follow too close, change lanes too suddenly, or whatever.

      dom

    3. Re:One word: Lawsuits by hawguy · · Score: 4

      Seriously, Dash Cams are the best defense against scam artists.

      Or to prove that you weren't the culprit. Have a look at these videos, taken from my own dashcam in San Jose, CA:

      The Youtube page says you're using a dod-tec GS600 dashcam -- are you happy with it? The Amazon page for the camera has mostly 1 star ratings.

      I'm looking for a good, relatively inexpensive dash-cam. Something small that I can "set-and-forget" - mount it on the windshield, run 12V power to it and be reasonably confident that it's going to record everything without me needing to check on it or replace SD cards.

    4. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Mononoke · · Score: 5, Informative
      Not that you asked me, but I'm using the Roadhawk DC-1: http://www.roadhawk.co.uk/roadhawk-dc-1-car-black-box-camera/prod_18.html

      The Roadhawk is the best implementation of a black box camera I have seen. It has enough on-board backup power to write the necessary EOF so that the actually crash video isn't corrupted (that's where the dod-tec apparently fails). It stores incident (accelerometer triggered) video files in a separate folder so that aren't eventually written over. It creates 60 sec. standard MP4 video files that can be played anywhere, yet those same files when read with Roadhawk's Windows software also show accelerometer graphs, speed of travel, and GPS maps. "Incident" files get written as 20 sec MP4 files with the triggering incident at the 10 second point in the file. Yes, they sell to US customers also.

      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    5. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have one and they are teh crap.

      It often freezes up, recording nothing until you notice (blinkylight is not blinking) and press the reset button. The fact that it has a reset button should have made me suspicious. Sometimes it freezes up in such a way that I need to reformat the memory card in order to get it going again.

      So, you can't rely on it to have recorded anything in case you do have an accident. Not good.

    6. Re:One word: Lawsuits by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Funny

      This is my wife driving. Watch the grey SUV on the right lane at 00:09.

      In my country we either sound our horn for one long continuous 30 second blast to publicly shame the offender, or simply allow the accident and claim vast sums of $currency for whiplash injury compensation. I think you guys could learn from this.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:One word: Lawsuits by immaterial · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That camera looks pretty damn nice overall. But given that a simple GoPro can record quite clear 1080p, the 640x480 resolution seems anemic. Image quality isn't the absolute most important feature (as long as it is clear enough that you can see who did what), but I'd still love to find a great 1080p-capable dash cam (more likely to capture plate numbers of hit-and-runs or potential witnesses, etc.). I'm also a little wary of GPS data; normal flow of traffic around here is 5-10 MPH over the limit (depending on the road or freeway) and I'd hate to have someone entirely at fault for hitting me try to claim contributory negligence on my part based on my own recorded evidence (I'm sure someone here will take issue with this, but the camera is to cover my ass, not anyone else's).

    8. Re:One word: Lawsuits by CaptainLard · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or you could just easily avoid the accident as the GP did and get home for dinner on time and rant for 3 min about some idiot on the road. In the process you'll save yourself an hour at the scene talking to police, 6 hours in the emergency room, 2 hours on the phone with your insurance, a week waiting for your car to get fixed, a day talking with your lawyer, a day or two in court/mediation, 1-2 years waiting for settlement negotiations, and then another 6-12 months for payment assuming its not doled out periodically over many years (*my numbers are wild speculation but the hassle is not). Seriously, bad drivers piss me off royally but I'd rather not give up potentially hundreds of hours of my life for spite and a small chance of a financial return greater than all of the work hours I missed if I can just avoid the accident. Not to mention if I actually did end up with whiplash and have neck problems for the rest of my life.People in your country should learn from slashdot nerds and get a hobby. Bad drivers suck but sometimes its best to just let it go.

    9. Re:One word: Lawsuits by PNutts · · Score: 2

      Nah, that was just a poor joke. :) Had she been going 52 and collided with the SUV, I assume the SUV's insurance company would successfully argue that she was double-digit percent at fault for the accident.

      I used to work for a guy that always speeded (sped?). He could never figure out why people always cut him off changing lanes or by pulling out in front of him. He just couldn't understand that other drivers don't expect and aren't used to other vehicles going must faster than the speed limit.

    10. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Kethinov · · Score: 2

      Wow your videos hit a bit too close to home for me! I drive down that road in your first video all the time. I've also been considering getting a dashcam for the same reason you have one. My only concern is finding one that doesn't require a lot of fuss. I'm looking for something that auto-activates when the car is on and shuts itself off when the car is off. Ideally it'd roll over the video too, only keeping a memory of the last X hours. That way I only have to do anything with the dashcam when I actually want to permanently archive some video when something notable happens.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    11. Re:One word: Lawsuits by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To start, I'm an American, living in the United States.

      I started recording all my driving a few months ago. I got a red light ticket, and I specifically remember the light being green until it was out of view, obscured by the roof of my car.

      I've also been in car accidents, where people lie about what happened. There have also been incidents where the police make wild claims about my driving which just weren't true. "Careless driving" where you were swerving in the lane is hard to argue in court, but easier with video proof.

      My logic is, rather than let my word stand up in court, let the video testify for me.

      Since I'm recording with my phone, it eliminates any question of if I'm texting or talking on the phone while I'm driving. I can't. The phone is busy recording. If I had a second phone, you'd hear me talking. The only talking you hear is the radio, or if I dictate license plates.

      I'm using the Android app "Torque Recorder". It's not perfect. Well, it's much less than perfect. It does record my OBDII information, but when it encodes to combine the data, the data and video skew. It's about 5 seconds in 15 minutes of driving. It also sucks down the battery in my phone horribly. In a 2.1A charger in the car, it drops about 2% in 30 minutes. Without charging, it will have sucked about 90% of the battery in 30 minutes.

      The other problem is the video quality. It's fine for seeing which car did what, and ambient noises. You can't read license plates. That's why I dictate the occasional license plate. If someone is driving badly, and I think there might be a problem, I already have the plate dictated which can be heard on playback. It also gets confused about focus. There's no setting for manual focus, and sometimes it'll focus back to the windshield rather than the objects in front of the car. Like, if it's raining, the focus changes from windshield to cars when the wipers sweep by.

      Sometimes the Torque Recorder encoding program can't actually encode the stored video. The video is just MP4, so it's fine. It just doesn't have the vehicle data included. If it had to go to court, I can provide the data file, since it's just a CSV.

      So far, I've been lucky. There have been some lunatics. I've had to make extreme maneuvers to avoid them, but so far there has been no accident. Lately, I've caught the end result of two accidents resulting in fatalities (after the police arrived, not the accident itself), and lots of smoke from people locking up their tires skidding to a stop just short of accidents.

      I don't worry about it while I'm driving. I just have to remember to start it when I start driving, and stop it when I get to my destination.

      Since it's recording some select OBDII information, I have my throttle position and actual ground speed recorded, rather than trusting the

      I intend to work on my own app, and hopefully fix the video quality, battery life, and encoding problems.

      Hopefully I'll never be "lucky" enough to catch a plane crash.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    12. Re:One word: Lawsuits by ls671 · · Score: 2

      You will see what I will do of your dash cam and your silly evidence next time I stop you AC.

      Your friendly neighborhood sheriff.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    13. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've seen wrecks where people would back up into another car to deliberately cause an incident. Were it not for witnesses who chose to stay there and gave statements, the police would have faulted the completely wrong parties.

      I'm all for a good TV cam. If it is someone else's fault, it means that it is caught on film in full HD for a jury and insurance to look at. If it is my fault, that is what insurance is for. Using a TV cam means that in general, I am gambling that a wreck is going to be someone else's doing as opposed to mine.

    14. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Mumford · · Score: 2

      Take a look at this screen grab. I've circled the left turn control signals. They're clearly red as the car is coming into the intersection.

    15. Re:One word: Lawsuits by jamesh · · Score: 2

      Take a look at this screen grab. I've circled the left turn control signals. They're clearly red as the car is coming into the intersection.

      Can such a device offer any proof that the resulting image (and in particular screen grabs) have not been tampered with? Changing that light from green to red would be a few minutes work with any decent image manipulation software.

    16. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Ocker3 · · Score: 2

      In the absence of other contradicting data, video footage from a random bystander who has no stake in the outcome of the decision is going to be highly valued by the Police.

    17. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Vaphell · · Score: 2

      if you want to link to some specific moment in youtube clip, add timestamp to the url in the following format: #t=XmY (X minutes Y seconds, though seconds alone work too)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BgkCUbeuck#t=0m9
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9g7H0-NelI#t=0m50

    18. Re:One word: Lawsuits by nschubach · · Score: 2

      Both my friend and I bought the DOD GS600... one came with a bum controller, but we had the other one to use for setting it up. They've been reliable with very few lost videos (if it's in the middle of a 1 minute block and you shut off the car it may lose that clip.) Interestingly enough, we've had better luck using 5 minute blocks of video.

      We got it because it claimed 1080p video. We've mainly been using it in 720p because it looks about the same (ie: you can't read plates unless you are right up on the person even in 1080 mode) and you can record longer without having to reformat/clear the card.

      Video wise and dependability? It's not bad. It's good for CYA and a few laughs at morons doing stupid things. I've considered it well worth the cost of the unit and I don't know if there's anything else out there that would give (better) real good clear video without paying for it.

      I've left mine in the front window 24/7 (garaged at home, open parking lot at work) without any issues in regards to the sun beating down on it all day.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    19. Re:One word: Lawsuits by nschubach · · Score: 2

      The DOD GS600 (the one the op uses) supports all that. I have one as well. I just get in the car and leave it plugged in. when it gets power it automatically starts recording to the SD Card and when it's out of space it will delete the oldest.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    20. Re:One word: Lawsuits by nschubach · · Score: 2

      I had problems with it recording sometimes as well, but then I got a Class 10 SD card and have had a 99% capture rate.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    21. Re:One word: Lawsuits by Smauler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I speed - and I am not angry in the slightest when someone pulls out in front of me & cuts me up. It's very, very rare I ever brake hard (I don't remember the last time I did) when it's not just me on the road.

      When you're going quickly, you've got to anticipate people pulling out in front of you. If you don't, you should not be going quickly. You should not blame people going a reasonable speed moving into the overtaking lane in front of you, if you're going quick. It's very easy to do - you do not expect someone to be approaching from behind quickly.

      People who speed then blame others is moronic IMO. However, people who do stupid stuff then blame people who speed is also moronic.

    22. Re:One word: Lawsuits by ckedge · · Score: 2

      > Can such a device offer any proof that the resulting image (and in particular screen grabs) have not been tampered with?

      I think all evidence submitted into court relies on the testimony of the individual who collected or produced the evidence. Whether or not something can theoretically be faked is less important than how trustworthy the person or persons who produced the evidence is, and the supporting coroberating evidence that backs up the claims of where and how they collected the evidence.

      ie: Does he have a vested interest? Or is he a disinterested third party? Latter? Then he likely did not tamper with his video. Did he give the memory chip directly to the police at the scene? Very unlikely he tampered with it. Soon after the incident when he had a chance to burn it to a DVDR? Not likely, not unless someone can testify that he's a photoshop freak and likes lying to police and screwing with people. And again, straight back to the question of "conflict of interest or disinterested third party" and "citizen with a clean record".

    23. Re:One word: Lawsuits by asdf7890 · · Score: 2

      Altering a video convincingly is much harder than an indivdual frame, though still possible.

      In this instance a there will be other evidence to back up the video: the sequencing of the lights will follow certain patterns for instance, so changing the colour of lights in the video is likely to create a sequence that simply isn't possible. In most cases where video or photographic evidence is accpeted, it is used in conjunction with other evidence rather than trusted on its face value alone because of how many ways such things can be tampered with.

      Also in instances like this it is unlikely to come to court. The insurance company certainly won't fight like that, and the driver will hopefully have either the good sense to not waste the time and money or not have the time/money to throw at such a case anyway. It it really was the insurer calling then it would have been simply to check that they were safe to reject a claim, if not then it will be someone acting on behalf of the driver testing the water to see if there is enough evidence to make a claim (or further appeal) pointless.

  2. Frosty piss? by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Easy answer to this - I was working in Moscow all this year. If you have an accident, you HAVE to wat for the police to come to make an official report, (otherwise your car insurance will not pay out).

    When they get there, the person with the biggest bribe gets the favourable report...

    So, better to have a dashcam...

    1. Re:Frosty piss? by Bearhouse · · Score: 2

      Yeah, yeah..."wait"', sorry...fucking virtual keyboards...

    2. Re:Frosty piss? by dotancohen · · Score: 4, Funny

      Easy answer to this - I was working in Moscow all this year. If you have an accident, you HAVE to wat for the police to come to make an official report, (otherwise your car insurance will not pay out).

      When they get there, the person with the biggest bribe gets the favourable report...

      So, better to have a dashcam...

      That's a good thing, too. I imagine that the airline could afford a bigger bribe than the dashcam driver.

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  3. Dashcams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Dashcams provide proof of what happened in a culture full of corrupt law enforcement officers.

    1. Re:Dashcams by CdBee · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And - it has regrettably to be said - in a culture full of batshit-insane drivers. Even President Medyedev has gone on the record as stating that the Russian Federation has a lot of very poor and excessively reckless drivers.

      Someone once told me that in Russian the words for yield/give way and surrender are identical and Russians surrender to nobody. Don't know if that's true. Not sure I want it to be....

      --
      I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    2. Re:Dashcams by ultranova · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dashcams provide proof of what happened in a culture full of corrupt law enforcement officers.

      And if proof matters, you don't yet know the real meaning of corruption.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    3. Re:Dashcams by prisma · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was in Taipei a few weeks ago an saw that most taxi's had dash cams - very small, very common. It makes sense to me for have these for a multitude of reasons as stated above. I don't see these being sold in the US - yet another case being behind the rest of the world - but of course we will never admit that...

      I'd argue it's the opposite: It is because the relevant parts of American culture is/was ahead of many nations such that our police force and citizens are/were, on average, more honest than those in places where dash cams are more common and necessary.

      You could try to counter this by saying that there's been a regression in society these days but that would only deflect the argument to a completely separate but debatable subject of its own.

      The other replies ahead of mine have also already pointed out that dashcams are (and have been) available for sale in the US for quite some time. They just aren't very commonly used by the general public. Many law enforcement agencies already have them installed as standard equipment on their cruisers.

    4. Re:Dashcams by nmb3000 · · Score: 2

      And - it has regrettably to be said - in a culture full of batshit-insane drivers.

      No joke. There are some pretty crazy Russian dashcam/streetcam compilations on Youtube.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFw1dpGw9uQ (0:55).
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkvX9SVAlk0
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTb4CGhp_eo
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XB-B3Bqsm4 (2:52, 8:30)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiBLfLcUmZs (11:02)

      It seems to be a combination of driving too fast for conditions (and/or bald tires) and assuming everyone else will jump the hell out of your way.

      --
      "What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
      /)
    5. Re:Dashcams by Loki_666 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Its a typical swear word, used similar to how we use "shit" or "fuck". Other common ones are "yo moyo" "yob tvoyu mat" "pizdetz" and "kazul". Last one means literally "goat" and you shout it at other drivers who cut you up and stuff while making a variety of hand signals.

      Driving in Russia is a fun game, but not for the faint of heart. Generally any drive of more than a kilometer or two around a city will enable you to see an accident or three.

      If you are in an accident it usually takes several hours for the police to arrive, which is just lovely when the temperature is -20 or -30.

      A previous poster mentioned that whoever gives the bigger bribe gets the better report, and its pretty true. Most road police will accept bribes, even though there was a big purge against corruption in my city a few years ago, things got a little better after that. Having a car video is a definite good idea.

  4. Dash car cams by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The dash car cams is because of a law that allows people to sue the driver if they get hurt. Lots of people pretend and pretty much jump in front of slow moving cars because its one of the easiest way to make money

  5. In Soviet Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In Soviet Russia, plane boards YOU!

  6. Dash cams are in Russia because.. Russia's Russia. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The driving in Russia is absolutely horrible. That's precisely the reason why so many people over there have dash cams.

    As a matter of fact, as with anything else, there are a number of compilations of Russian dashcam videos that show some pretty outrageous things.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlxHPJAONpE
    No wrecks in any other country have anything on Russia. Seriously.

  7. have you never seen this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Russian pedestrians diving under cars to try and get compensated for an accident.
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c12_1349902324

    1. Re:have you never seen this? by mvar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      shit that's insane

  8. Re:russian dashcam videos by Gaygirlie · · Score: 2

    If you watch enough of these videos like I have on youtube, it's a free-for-all driving over there. Signs and traffic lights are pretty much optional.

    I've seen quite a bunch of those videos myself and yeah, it's amazing how EXCEEDINGLY bad drivers there are, it's just god damn horrible. And it's only slightly better when they visit Finland: Lappeenranta here in Finland is a city that's pretty well filled with russians and every time I have to drive there I dread at the sight of russian drivers. Been in many a situation where the russian driver just decides to swerve right in front of me, or pushes me out of the lane, drives straight through red lights and so on and so forth.

    I can't say much about them as people as I don't know any personally, but I find myself wishing they were never given cars or driver's licenses.

  9. Every Russian has a dash cam because.... by Above · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Every Russian has a dash cam because the insurance company and courts there have a history of not paying out a dime unless you have proof. Where Americans seem to think in a "reasonable doubt" methodology from our courts, in Russia it's apparently "any doubt at all" and you lose. So if someone hits you while you're parked and they show up and say you ran into them you'd better have video or witnesses or something or no money for you!

    Other countries seem to have systems that skew that way, and thus more dash cams (China, Taiwan, Korea), but not the quantity of videos. I think that's due to the bad Russian driving, there's simply more wild videos coming out of Russia than anywhere else!

    Over at Jalopnik there is an entire section devoted to Russian dash cams. If you waste the next few hours watching them all it's not my fault!

    1. Re:Every Russian has a dash cam because.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Every Russian has a dash cam because the insurance company and courts there have a history of not paying out a dime unless you have proof. Where Americans seem to think in a "reasonable doubt" methodology from our courts, in Russia it's apparently "any doubt at all" and you lose. So if someone hits you while you're parked and they show up and say you ran into them you'd better have video or witnesses or something or no money for you!

      Other countries seem to have systems that skew that way, and thus more dash cams (China, Taiwan, Korea), but not the quantity of videos.

      That sounds pretty crazy.

      Car accidents never go to court in Australia, one of the two drivers always freely admits to being at-fault and their insurance company always pays out (or else the two insurance companies will sue each other).

      If both drivers claim to be innocent, then it will go to court — and the punishment for lying to a police officer about events during the crash will be so harsh, nobody within a few degrees of separation will ever dare try it again. Jail time for sure.

      If possible, and if there are no injuries, we'll even try to avoid letting insurance companies or police get involved at all. Better to shake hands, give the other person enough cash to repair the car, and walk away from it. Insurance companies are slow, it takes for ever to get the repairs authorised. And the cops are likely to hand one of you a stiff penalty (and maybe even defend yourself in court to avoid loosing your license) for "failing to maintain proper control of a vehicle" or some such.

      If the at-fault driver doesn't have insurance (medical insurance is mandatory but vehicle damage insurance is not), then they'll definitely want to keep it under the radar or else the other driver's insurance company will fleece them.

    2. Re:Every Russian has a dash cam because.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or just realise that you regularly leave your car unattended outside, at the mercy of nature and people in the area, and don't worry about small dents and scratches. Leave the dents there and just polish off the scratches to prevent rust. Cars need to look shiny and pristine only if you're foolish enough to believe everything the marketing department tells you.

  10. Dashcams by zyzko · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apparently, dashcams are as popular as GPS devices in Russia, and you can get a basic model for an equivalent of about 40 euros, and an advanced model is as pricey as an advanced GPS is (with nice features). And the reason to get one can be seen in Youtube, if you are pretty much run into by a car with government plates you better have some hard evidence that you were not the culprit. As the traffic is often worse than in southern Europe (where there is a lot of honking and hand-waving, even "pushing it through" but people are used to minor dents in cars in cities and they don't often care) compared to the fact that there is a lot of high-priced cars in Russia and insurance money is big factor, plus as an added bonus police can be corrupt and the one with biggest handout on the scene gets the money from the insurance because of the police report.

    I live near a pretty busy skiing resort in Finland where there are a lot of Russian tourists this time of year. Most of them do drive responsibly. And I urge you to do so here abroad (we have a pretty decent police who can write accurate reports if there is an accident and are not for sale) as well as home. There is no rush here, just relax on the Sunday-traffic off the resort. Don't be a jerk in traffic, really.

  11. And what's with dashcams in every Russian car? by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

    Obviously to record that the crash of the landing gear into your car wasn't your fault.

  12. I think we can all agree by nimbius · · Score: 3, Funny

    this could have been a lot worse. Air Canada would have charged them a service fee for shuttling them to the nearest ground transportation.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  13. Re:Over reactive driver - added to the tragedy by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Added what to the tragedy? The cam-driver didn't do any additional damage to anything, and the driver in front didn't lock up their brakes or turn the wheel, as far as I could tell. And based on US data, locked wheels stop much faster than the average American driver (why cars like Mercedes are adding brake assist, where a quick application of the brake triggers a stronger stopping force than requested because American drivers don't stop nearly as fast as possible in their cars, rarely beyond what you get sliding along on melted rubber.

  14. Re:Over reactive driver - added to the tragedy by Lost+Race · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The driver lost control because the car was hit by flying debris not visible on the dash-cam. After that he actually did a pretty good job of not making it worse.

  15. Re:Exaggeration by PNutts · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you watch it in slow motion, you see an intact jet fuselage disappear (probably into a ditch) and then see the results of it slamming into the other side with debris flying up and over. That was the real crash, not the plane 4 wheeling off-road after overrunning the runway. I assume there were some kind of arresting barriers but if those wheels were from the nose gear the barriers sure didn't do much. The moments before this video were probably boring with the plane simply continuing on past the runway. The final impact was the money shot. Another angle would have been Hollywood perfect but in real life you take what you can get.

  16. Re:Exaggeration by PNutts · · Score: 3

    The real question though is, did they fine the pilot for littering?

    Considering the pilot was killed, no. A fifth person died so keep the jokes coming.

  17. Re:russian dashcam videos by jamesh · · Score: 2

    If you watch enough of these videos like I have on youtube, it's a free-for-all driving over there. Signs and traffic lights are pretty much optional

    It's probably unfair to judge russian driving by video's uploaded to youtube. I mean if you record your driving 365 days a year and come across an idiot doing something really stupid on one day of that year, which days video is going to get put up on youtube? "driving to work. everyone behaving themselves. nothing eventful happened" is hardly going to get a lot of hits.

  18. Re:Over reactive driver - added to the tragedy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He didn't lock the brakes, he was hit in the rear passenger side with large debris. You'd have heard it in the video if you'd have had your sound on. It caused his rear end to skid to the left, so he steers into the skid to keep the car going relatively straight. Good work by the driver. After all that, hitting another plane part lying on the road doesn't even matter.

  19. Re:russian dashcam videos by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

    Damn. If the Fins say your a bad driver then you are. They know all about bad drivers.

    Kind of like when the Mexicans have to tell you to calm down.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  20. Two words: Car Computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    "I'd hate to have someone entirely at fault for hitting me try to claim contributory negligence on my part based on my own recorded evidence".

    Well I hope you drive a pre 1980's car then, because if a fatality is involved the authorities will take a dump from your car computer which will tell all.

    So you really don't have a reason to be paranoid, because your car's computer is there to rat you out anyhow.