Slashdot Mirror
Tesla's Inherent Safety Saves Five Joyriding Teenagers In Germany (arstechnica.com)
According to German newspaper Merkur, one 18-year old and four of her friends lost control of her father's Model S electric vehicle. The car reportedly flew more than 80 feet into a field before it came to a stop. Even though the driver and two of the passengers were airlifted to hospitals, none of their injuries were life-threatening, thanks largely in part to Tesla's skateboard chassis. Ars Technica writes, "The skateboard chassis used by the Model S and Model X is extremely safe, with crumple zones that are unconcerned with engines that can transfer kinetic energy into the passengers during a frontal collision." The images of the crash are not pretty, but one could imagine how much worse they would be if a front-engined internal combustion vehicle were involved instead of the Tesla Model S.
The car is as safe as any other modern car.
but one could imagine how much worse they would be if a front-engined internal combustion vehicle were involved instead of the Tesla Model S.
So like are you looking for volunteers or something? I'm sure we've got teenagers around here that would try for 90 feet. (meters?)
source?
Plenty of cars in that price range have "inherent safety" and would protect its occupants in a similar accident, even though they run on an internal combustion engine.
Here's how you can reduce carbon emissions. Go play in traffic. You produce carbon dioxide. Cars produce carbon dioxide. By playing in traffic, you'll eliminate your carbon emissions plus one or more cars may be totaled and cease to be on the road. That's a win-win for reducing carbon emissions.
Oh how long we've waited for this sign that physics worked exactly how we formulated it would. Think of the possibilities this entails, being able to plan out systems ahead of time using math and sound principles of modeled dynamics. We could call it a new field. I know, since it involved not having an engine in the front, we could call it "engineering!"
We'll build a better world, I tell you!
This forum Sig is licensed under the LGPL.
"(According to comments left at electrek.co, about the only way to fatally crash a Tesla appears to be driving one off a cliff at high speed.)"
I bet crashing it into a brick wall at high speed would be fatal.
Next up: Tesla inherent awesomeness saves puppies.
I have unfortunately been involved in a couple of major accidents and have had 1 of my cars look similar to this, though in my case the rear of the car was destroyed as well. I'm not seeing anything there that would make you think the Telsa was inherently safer. They may not have a front mounted ICE but they do have batteries and electric motors that aren't mass free.
The one where my car ended up looking the worst was when I was rear ended by a semi-trailer that then pushed me into the car in front. I was stationary, he was doing 70kph at time of impact. The car I was driving was a 3 month old Mercedes E200D and was a total write off. I was the driver, wife in the passenger seat and two kids in the back, 1 in a baby capsule. Amazingly we all walked away despite the boot coming in through the rear windscreen.
"one 18-year old and four of her friends lost control of her father's Model S electric vehicle"
They shouldn't all try to control it at the same time. It's dangerous yo.
He made it up, and you're a dipshit for taking him seriously.
Apparently the author of the german article mistook the Model S name as a hint to Sport, and he continuously called the Model S a sportscar in the article.
and not normal people get such protection.
It is news for nerd, at least me as a nerd, interested into security things like crumple zone , doing finite element analyzis etc... And if Tesla is using a different method with better effect then yeah that's highly interesting.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
This advertainment informercial has been brought to you by Tesla; saving kittens the world over.
80 feet... into a flat field, beside a road that's also flat and on the same level.
Sorry, but if your car CAN'T survive that without lethal injury, how the hell has it passed basic safety tests like Euro NCAP ratings?
Next question - what speed were you doing on that unbordered single-lane country road that you lose control and drive 80-feet into a field?
This safety demonstration was brought to you by our sponsor, Tesla, indeed.
They drive with high speed into a field, roll over, and three of them got severe injuries. What is so great about this? I would expect this from any premium car and even for cheaper ones. I'll call it impressive when they get the same result after hitting a tree with the same speed.
.. would have had survived such a crash in a similar manner, because the engineers take the motor into account!
Don't get me wrong a Tesla is nice, but this headline is a master piece of assliquorish shit propaganda for Tesla.
The question is what will happen to the person safety of newer Tesla models targetted at lower prices?
I think everybody should drive a Mclaren F1:
Mclaren F1 - inherrent safety saved rich person
because it has a carbon fiber monocoque and the motor is placed in the back working as a crumple space for tailbumbs and not endangering people during a frontal crash.
(yeah, same bullshit but a car with an ICE)
I would like to see a Tesla under such a condition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
If you fuck off, it'll be marginally more worth reading.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
So saying it is "inherently safe" or that a petrol vehicle would fare worse is pretty absurd. Inherently safe cars don't plant themselves 25m into fields in the first place regardless of their form of propulsion. And that's without even knowing what caused the accident in the first place.
Where it happened, car coming from the left. These roads typically don't have a speed limit lower than the general limit for this type of road, which is 100km/h (60mph for the hicks). I'm going to go out on a limb and say they drove faster than that, because that curve does not look too tight for 100km/h. And while there are no guarantees in high speed accidents, with nothing solid in the way in that location, any car in that price range would be expected to keep the dumbass driver and passengers alive.
You produce carbon dioxide from renewable sources. The carbon you exhale is what your food or your food's food inhaled.
Given that most of the glass is still intact, I'm leaning towards this being either a low velocity impact, or a med/high velocity crash spread over a long distance and time (which also means low impact forces). Which means the fact that the front end shattered like that is really troubling. Perhaps the additional mass of the battery pack (the Tesla weighs as much as an SUV because of the battery pack) contributed to demolishing the front end despite the low impact forces? In an ICE vehicle, the bulk of the mass (engine) is in the front and it absorbs impact forces directly instead of through the structural beams. In a Tesla, the bulk of the mass is in the battery pack underneath the passenger compartment. Since the passenger compartment is designed to remain intact, the kinetic energy of the battery pack has to be fully absorbed by the structural beans in the front or rear.
I would assume Tesla strengthened the beams by a corresponding amount to pass the crash safety tests. But those tests only cover direct front impacts, not a car leaving the ground and impacting the ground at (say) a slight nose-down pitch. The cantilever forces in such an impact due to the additional torque caused by the heavy battery pack behind it could account for the front shattering and shearing off like that.
He referring to this Slashdot story, also posted today:
cientists: Electric Vehicles Produce As Many Toxins As Dirty Diesels
https://hardware.slashdot.org/...
This is a very shaky claim. Although the photos show severe damage to the front of the car, there is little evidence of crumpling in the areas designed to absorb a head-on impact. The extremities of all modern cars are designed to absorb as much impact energy as possible, and this is visible even in less-serious accidents: they fall apart when knocked about. Is see no evidence that the presence of an engine block would have made any difference to the reported outcome of this crash.
... I wonder if the driver survived the aftermath when her father saw what she did to his car. I doubt if the insurers are going to cover the loss.
"The problem with internet quotes is that you cant always depend on their accuracy" -Abraham Lincoln, 1864
for me (having relatives around there) the headline reads: "rich kids speeds too fast, crashes daddys car, noone else there, so nobody's hurt". Sadly the (much more) common headline is: "joyriding kid crashes father's Porsche into , 2 dead, joyriding party gets out unscathed but shows signs of consumption". There's nothing too be proud about this, it only show's that Tesla is not going to be the social-mobile-revolutionary company it pictures itself, but just another toy-maker for the 1%.
Of course even the expensive Tesla did not stop the teen driver from driving recklessly and endangering everyone in the car. Luck played a far more important role than anything the car did. What kind of story would be told if everyone in the car died? Maybe the parents made a bad choice allowing their young driver to drive any car with friends in it? In my state a young driver is only allowed one other to be in the car not related to family. Maybe this could have prevented the accident all together?
flew more than 80 feet
The linked German article (as well as a follow-up) does not mention anything about the car flying... it says the car overturned until it landed back on its wheels (which explains all the bodywork damage in the photo...).
Also, 80 feet???? Germany have not used such a unit in a couple of years ^H^H^H^H^H centuries. Might still be in use in the USA, Burma and Liberia. And perhaps the UK and Canada.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
This does not look at all. Depending on what exactly caused the accident and how that car flew into the field, I don't see any reason why the front would be completely disintegrated as we see on the picture. You can see the road behind where ambulances and such are parked, that's basically 30 yards, really not that far. The header should be "30 yards off-road wrecks your Tesla"
".. what your food or your food's food inhaled."
Perhaps you meant 'ingested'?
There are other crashes where the driver walks away and the car loos beaten. Like this audi from 2007
http://www.carscoops.com/2007/03/audi-rs6-abt-crash-yes-he-made-it-out.html?m=1
Anyway, with a bmw she would have been able to keep it on the road >:-)
He raises a good point though. They might as well rename this place ElonDot, or SlashMusk.
Yep, the one where they claim that electric vehicles' brake pads wear more quickly. That should give you a hint about the quality of their research.
... I think my head would explode.
As a native German speaking reader, let me treasure you that the original article has no praise whatsoever for the Tesla car. To the contrary, newest updates make a point of the fact that the car supposedly was equipped with a much smaller engine than previously thought, 236 instead of 700 horsepower. Any odd BMW, Mercedes or Audi car would be in similar shape after such a crash. After all, this is a result of euro NCAP crash test standards.
The driver lost control and the vehicle flipped, probably impacting the ground with several of its surfaces in sequency. An actual front-end collision (car hitting obstacle with its front side, which has to absorb basically all of the energy of the impact) is different.
The images of the crash are not pretty, but one could imagine how much worse they would be if a front-engined internal combustion vehicle were involved instead of the Tesla Model S.
And what about comparing it to a mid-engine internal combustion vehicle? That would be more consistent in terms of center of mass with the Tesla Batteries.
Considering the Tesla S is an up market sports car this is probably reasonable to do, as there are mid-engine cars in that space for comparison.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
They didn't claim that. They assumed brake wear in electric vehicles is negligiable. However, due to the increased weight of electric vehiclese, they are subject to more tyre wear and they cause more road wear. Read the study and stop spreading FUD.
The actual article is behind a pay wall, but the Daily Mail summary unambiguously says:
- That was finding of a study looking at particles from tyre and brake wear
- Made heavier by batteries and parts meaning tyres and brakes wear faster
The Daily Mail article itself continues with multiple references to brake wear. Not once does it mention regenerative braking.
Now I do admit that I should know better than to assume that a Daily Mail article about a paper would be in any way related to the actual contents of the paper, and it's entirely possible that the actual paper, behind the paywall, says exactly the opposite. Maybe it will even say that EVs are cleaner after all.
You're definitely a dipshit for assuming they were taking anyone seriously.
Fine with me; he's the closest thing to an idol we've got and for good reason.
Inherently safe cars don't plant themselves 25m into fields in the first place regardless of their form of propulsion.
You were in the process of making a very valid point when the above suddenly managed to slip out of your asshole...
...it's too bad. Sometimes stupidity needs to be rewarded with a Darwin Award
The car is as safe as any other modern car.
Nope. It actually *is* safer.
Here's why (from the top of my head):
1) The center of weight is notably lower (huge battery pack along the floor, no huge motor up front), making the Tesla Model S safer in handling than other limosines.
2) It has no motor and thus a *way* better crumpling zone in the forward trunk.
3) Right now tt has the best driving-assistance on the streets and in end-users hands.
My 0.02 Euros.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Never in a month of sundays did that car roll.
Wrong. Quote from the accident report:
"Der Wagen überschlug sich und kam schwer beschädigt wieder auf den Rädern zum Stehen."
Literal translation (German grammar, you'll figure what it means): "The car rolled and came heavily damaged on it's wheels to a standing."
So it did roll, at least once. According to the report exactly once.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Seriously, Tesla makes other car makers look bad. The question is , can they do it with model 3, as well as the coming $20k car?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Really? No idol of mine - just another hyped-up salesman. My idols are those that strive to improve the life of others via technology, social work, opposition to extremists of all kinds or just trying to make a difference.
What are the good reasons?
Because he started PayPal - one of the worst companies in history?
Because he hijacked Tesla from Martin Eberhard, who started the company before Musk was involved and was later "asked to leave"?
Because he takes an existing ideas like a maglev train running through a vacuum tunnel, gives it a naff names like Hyperloop, and then claims he invented the idea? The media and malleable minded public then get all excited over the idea, even though it's been around for ages:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vactrain
Because he builds a battery factory, calls it a Gigafactory and the media and malleable minded public once again get all excited again?
Because he's a publicity whore? Remember when he put out a press release to say he'd "solved the iron man problem" and created a gesture based 3D design tool. When his video came out a few days after his press release it turned out that all he'd done is bought a Leap Motion and plugged it into his computer. He'll take any sort of attention though, even if it's from a pathetic display like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNqs_S-zEBY
Because he's trying to colonise marks using rockets? Rockets are an obscenely expensive way of getting mass into orbit and the high price will never allow you to get enough equipment into orbit to colonise Mars on a large scale. The only way we will colonise Mars is to use an approach that allows us to cheaply put mass in orbit, like a Lofstrom Loop. Space X is going nowhere beyond resupplying the ISS and launching a few satellites.
Musk's primary talent is ultimately that of self promotion and he uses that talent to promote his businesses and gain a cult like following. There's no denying he is good at what he does, but I fail to see why a grand master in self-promotion should be considered an idol to technology enthusiasts.
The images of the crash are not pretty, but one could imagine how much worse they would be if a front-engined internal combustion vehicle were involved instead of the Tesla Model S.
You can imagine all day, but as long as you're only using your imagination and not crashing testing or computer modeling, you're just being a stupid ass.
The fact is that the Tesla is not at all unique in its ability to protect the occupants from harm in a ridiculously major collision. Look at Audi A8 crash photos sometime. There have been a fairly high number of incidents in which the car was very well mangled (even to the point of "what part is that?") and yet all the occupants walked away. You can expect this to be true out of basically any of the truly modern premium vehicles, that is, made out of Aluminum or better. That's because they don't have to make poor tradeoffs for crash safety, they just cost more money. But mind you, lots of the really scary-looking crashes I'm talking about were in the original A8, which was finalized way back in 1993 and appeared as a 2004 model.
The idea that the essential design of the vehicle protected these passengers better than would another car in the same price range is specious at best.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Probably the shameless and extreme lie currently on display here:
https://hardware.slashdot.org/...
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
"The problem with internet quotes is that you cant always depend on their accuracy" -Abraham Lincoln, 1864
Except in this case we can.
The Internet was invented in the 1980s by Tipper Gore, so Abraham Lincoln could not have said this, no matter how big his Tyrannosaurus.
Really? No idol of mine
Then go find a site that worships your god.
"However, due to the increased weight of electric vehiclese, they are subject to more tyre wear and they cause more road wear"
I can't recall anyone making much fuss over the many, many, many F-150s, other trucks & SUVs that have been causing excessive tyre & road wear since the 80s, or acknowledging that 18-wheelers & buses should bear the burden of paying for most of the road repair since they cause, by far, most of the damage.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
So skateboards are inherently safe, got it.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
"... Model X is extremely safe, with crumple zones that are unconcerned with engines that can transfer kinetic energy"
The word "unconcerned" makes no sense here. I'm guessing they may have meant "unaffected" or "unconnected" or "not affected".
ENGRISH MUTHAFUGGAH, dew ewe speek it??
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Must be nice to be rich.
You obviously don't know a lot about South Africans. Try living there and working with them for awhile. Really get to know them. You'll see your boy Elon in a whole new light, and not a very pretty one at that.
that can transfer kinetic energy into the passengers during a frontal collision.
WTF? That's NOT what you want to happen during a crash. Where did this come from? From TFA:
can effectively dissipate the kinetic energy of a crash
That's a more accurate description of crumple zones function. Editor could have just copy/pasted this and not been so horribly wrong.
PS. Photos of the wrecked Tesla with unbroken windows demonstrate how well the passenger compartment was protected during the crash.
Have gnu, will travel.
Muskdot? News for swinging off Elon's nuts.
This article is about 18 year olds. There's no such thing as "enabling [them] to be riskier". No matter how safe or unsafe something is, kids that age will test its limits and generally exceed them.
The most expensive part of rockets is having to build a new rocket every time, so Space-X's plan is to return the stage 1 rocket to a platform (they have successfully tested this technology). Refurbishing stage 1s was attempted previously by NASA with the SLS system, but it was just as expensive as building new ones due to the salt water damage that came from landing them in the ocean, thus the idea to land on platforms.
Then all you are left with is minor refurbishment of stage 1, new stage 2, some overhead, and rocket fuel. Much cheaper than traditional rocketry. Now all they need to do is pull it off.
> unconcerned with engines that can transfer kinetic energy into the passengers during a frontal collision
this is literally irrelevant unless they were hit by another car, and it happened to have an ICE, which DID NOT HAPPEN
The carbon was originally consumed by a plant, which IIRC don't typically have stomachs.
I get paid for every negitve post about electric cars.
Rockets aren't expensive, if they are reused*.
Rocket fuel is cheap to make, if power is cheap. (IMO all the more reason for fusion research and power.)
* A system like the shuttle where there are so few flights that you have to basicaly tear it apart to inpect everything, is not too conductive to it. The shuttles were designed to launch alot more frequently, but yay budget cuts to NASA.
Without teenagers we'd never have found out how a Tesla will behave in a real-world crash situation because the only people who can afford to actually buy one are loaded old geezers who drive like their grandmas.
Now we know.
licet differant, aequabitur
Look at the pictures - do you see 'crumple zones' or do you see explosive deconstruction of a vehicle?
Here's a clue: aluminum has a much lower shear point than steel. Most vehicles are still constructed of steel.
The reason why the Tesla does so much better than most cars today is because most cars no longer have a 'frame' - this has been compromised for weight savings, instead you get a folded, tucked, and extruded steel underbody of variable thickness.
By switching to aluminum, and using a rigid subframe, they are able to use a thicker frame and come out ahead on the weight versus a steel subframed vehicle without compromising much. You'll see the same thing when comparing a Tesla to a subframed truck, really - or for instance, the F-150 Raptor. Granted, the Tesla has what appears to be a remarkably good subframe (similar to what people might weld up for off-road buggies), but it isn't anything miraclulous or all that significant. Arguably, it's going to fare notably worse than some I-beam constructed vehicles... from almost 40 years ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaXlbAcFqYQ
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
What if you don't give a shit about the environment and just think they are sweet cars?
Also, worth mentioning that climate change is a much bigger issue than strip mining. Strip mining is no worse the natural geologic processes the Earth goes through reshaping itself every day.
So, some kids wreck their parents' car, and survive. Why was this such a big deal? There aren't many details of the crash. We don't even know if the front end was damaged by a head on hit, or sheared off sideways during the flips/rolls. The other details (flying through the air, rolling), aren't that big a deal. In my area, a mother and daughter flew down a very steep hill far more than 80 feet (at highway speeds, no less), and walked away from the wreck. My wife flipped her car on ice into a ditch, and everybody walked away. Some of the kids in this accident were AIRLIFTED to hospitals. Why was Tesla's performance in this crash so spectacular that /. had to post it?
The "Little Brown book of Contemporary Trolls - volume 5".
So he isn't trying to improve the lives of others through technology? Long term, electric cars will be a benefit to us all, and he is leading the way here. Cheap satellite launches will likely be a benefit to us as well.
He is more than "just another hyped-up salesman". Sure, he is over-hyped, and he encourages it as it helps him get funding to achieve his goals. But he isn't just a salesman, what he has achieved with SpaceX and Tesla is impressive.
I'm not saying you should idolise him, but you shouldn't be so dismissive of him and his achievements either.
"If you're going to quote me, do it right." -Abraham Lincoln, 1866
I think he means self-driving cars. Those don't try to recreate GTA in real life and are inherently safer.
HEY! Who the heck are you to push anyone off this site?
Thanks for clarifying.
The word would then be 'absorb' as plants don't typically have lungs.