Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Political Propaganda Rubbish

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Political Propaganda Rubbish

    Saw a post mentioning the 5KpH makes a difference ad campaign currently polluting our TV. Anyone else notice that the car that hits the truck faster also hits it at the sharpest and worst possible place thus causing huge amounts of damage. And the slower car hits on the flat of the trucks side. Swap the two cars around and watch the slower car get ripped to shreads and the faster cars crumple zones work and save the drivers life. Utter crap.... thought on the side had you seeding like crazy you would have past the intersection before the truck had even got near. [/img]
    Trying to think of a wise and sincere signature quote, but the only words that leap to mind are, "TITTY SPRINKLES"

  • #2
    bullshit tv crap

    well we did this experiment with 2 bikes as per the tv add not only did the bikes stop in half the distance the 5 km/ph made no differance were getting this on the web in the next few weeks

    Comment


    • #3
      y didnt the driver of the car that hit the truck on the corner swerve right and go behind the truck? :?:

      Comment


      • #4
        okay... the add says that in the last 5 metres of braking, you wipe off half your speed... Now think about this... If I'm hypothetically moving at 200km/h, and I hit the anchors... then according to this Professor, then I should be wiping 100km/h off in 5 metres... :shock: unlikely (please remove retinas from visor) Also, there is 27 kms difference in the speeds??? if they were to remain consistent then the second car should hit at around 7 or 8 kper hour... The add is total crap, designed to scare people whpo drive AU Falcons

        Comment


        • #5
          Well its just another one of those adds designed to scare us as you all well know.

          Now I'm no expert but, I do have a reasonably good grasp on my Physics etc, yes another uni student!!.

          They can't lie on TV, so what they have done is found a speed at which they take off half their speed in the last 5 metres. Strictly speaking they are not lying, just twisting the facts to make them sound bad.
          And as with anything its going to depend on the car/bike and braking system, tyres etc.

          Its like comparing my ZX9 to my Patrol :shock: :shock: :shock: doesn't work!!!!
          Life is many different things, just make sure you have one!!

          Comment


          • #6
            Yer gotta look at vehicle and at what speed.

            In the adverts im guessing they are talking about 50/55kmh @ 1600kgs.

            Lot different to a bike.

            Comment


            • #7
              i agree with the TV AD. 5km/hr makes a huge difference.



              at 65km/hr its easier to pick up the front wheel than it is at 60km/hr

              I'm the noob you all pwn!

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: bullshit tv crap

                well we did this experiment with 2 bikes as per the tv add not only did the bikes stop in half the distance the 5 km/ph made no differance were getting this on the web in the next few weeks
                I was considering doing this with my Silvia and another mates but haven't gotten around to it yet....

                As stated it all depends on the vehicle, the brakes and the driver....

                I don't think we should be taught to stop for an obsticle but to slow down and steer around it.....when you are learning to fly you are taught CAT turns (collision avoidance turns) ... something similar should be taught to all drivers and actually tested in the driving test....if it is not reflexively conducted the student should fail and try again.....

                Russ
                Fat kids always win at see-saw

                Comment


                • #9
                  I agree with the TV ad. 5 km makes a big difference. When the students do there emergency stop (dont you all remember?). I get them to go 3 difference speeds 50, 55 and 60 kms and measure each of their stopping distance. That is the best way for them to see the importance of sticking to the speed limit as the stopping distance increases with every 5 kms.
                  ELITE MOTORCYCLE AND DRIVER TRAINING
                  FOR BOOKINGS CALL 0402 127 909 OR WWW.ELITEMCT.COM.AU

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I disagree.

                    I've been in this arguement on this board for years, but it'll put forward my point again...

                    Speeding is not the main factor in road crashes. Inattention combined with any number of other factors: speed, alcohol, inattention, inexperience, etc.

                    Speed (and alcohol) are the only easily quantifyable elements however which is why it is concentrated on the most.

                    Speeding alone will not kill you in the event of an accident, however it will contribute to your reaction time and impact speed.

                    Also the crash in the ad is also far too simplistic. Why didn't the drivers see the truck earlier? Why didn't they react to the situation and adjust their speed (up or down) and or placement on the road?

                    The current speeding concentration of the media and road safety departments encorages drivers to concentrate on the little needle on their dasboard, and the black three legged tax collector on the side of the road, and NOT on the traffic ahead and around them, the road and weather conditions, and most importantly, the GSX-R1000 that's beside them in the next lane.

                    Monkeys.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      It's also very difficult to take the authorities seriously when they misrepresent the statistics. For instance if you T-bone someone who pulls out of a side street without looking this is classed as a speed related incident, regardless of how fast either party was travelling.

                      If you have an accident because of the crappy condition of the road this is also classed as a speed related incident again regardless of speed the vehicle was travelling at.

                      There's lots more situations like the above that really can't be classified as speed related and yet they're counted in the accident stats. Trust the authorities with a political agenda? Maybe in another lifetime.
                      Old age and treachery will overcome youth and skill

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The other part of it is:

                        If that was an old kingswood/volvo/etc going at only 40km/hr it wouldn't have stopped by then at all, would have ploughed right into the truck.

                        Maybe we should have different speed limits for different cars? (joke)
                        (obviously impossible to police)

                        Back to what I always say:

                        A reflex/dexterity/intelligence test would be a start to keeping people off the road that simply should never be allowed behind the wheel.
                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Posted: Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:07 pm    Post subject: Re: bullshit tv crap  

                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           
                          MitchXJR wrote:  
                          well we did this experiment with 2 bikes as per the tv add not only did the bikes stop in half the distance the 5 km/ph made no differance were getting this on the web in the next few weeks  


                          I was considering doing this with my Silvia and another mates but haven't gotten around to it yet....  

                          As stated it all depends on the vehicle, the brakes and the driver....  

                          I don't think we should be taught to stop for an obsticle but to slow down and steer around it.....when you are learning to fly you are taught CAT turns (collision avoidance turns) ... something similar should be taught to all drivers and actually tested in the driving test....if it is not reflexively conducted the student should fail and try again.....  

                          Russ  
                          i agree. theres been three incidents i've been in with my car, where someone has failed to give way at a stop sign or give way sign and pulled straight out in front of me. all three times i swerved (and braked a bit too...) and twice it has helped me avoid an accident. in the third case, the other driver t-boned me (which could have resulted in a must worse outcome for me if it hadn't been at 50km/h). If i'd have braked in all three incidences, it would have resulted in me t-boning all three vehicles, and after one of them another driver for certain would be dead (i would have gone 70km/h into his drivers door....) and i might have been...


                          i'm an engineering student as well, and i've been thinking about this ad recently. I dont like the way that it is worded. I think that MAYBE if the figures are correct, then it wont be the 5km/h difference causing much greater time for braking that causes the second car to impact at a higher speed. and i really cant see you washing off half your speed in a the last 5 metres (just doesn't fit well with me) it's probably got more to do with how far you would travel before you react and brake....


                          really, by their thinking, what occurs is that it takes 5 metres for the car at 55km/h to slow down to 50km/h....
                          No amount of genius can overcome a preoccupation to detail.



                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I find the ads deceptive too... Problem is thats what ads are all about. :evil:

                            I agree with people who said its only focus is braking, without avoidance and situational awareness and general reaction reflexes etc...
                            I also have done some calcs myself - (I'm an engineer and havent forgotten all my physics (yet!) - and there are problems with how its worded and what circumstances it is true for, etc. etc....

                            As the saying goes... "Statistics are like binikis: What they reveal is suggestive, - but what they hide is vital."
                            You can always manipulate statistics to get the unsuspecting audience to infer the wrong thing.
                            BTW - Thats what Ads are about in a non-mathmatical way. :evil:


                            THAT SAID - In trying to get some data on typical deceleration values for bikes vs cars etc - found this very interesting study done in Austria.

                            http://www.uem-online.org/html2/tourism/rs...ecker_pap02.pdf

                            It actually shows that the average rider COULD NOT brake as well as a cage with ABS!!! :shock: I know my cage (nissan 300ZX) has a lot of tyre footprint and pulls up with incredible G force when the ABS kicks in. (only kicked in once so far when not intentionally testing them :oops: )

                            Also of note - the BMW bike with ABS won hands down. Their point is that as cages improve braking systems - average Joe cager is starting to be able to out brake the average rider - very scary. This is because cages are getting real performance improvement through technology that everyone can use, where as bike performance depends very much on rider skill. (which requires continual practice.)

                            The test also showed the average rider acheived a braking deceleration of 6.2 m/s/s where as their eperienced riders performed with an average of 6.8 m/s/s. - yet - some of the experienced riders acheived up to 10m/s/s deceleration. - showing that most people dont use ~50 of the possible braking power of their bikes (which I'm sure we all know - as for those of us who cant do stoppies!) - yet even the experienced riders could not achieve this good braking consistantly! (meaning if they needed maximum braking in an accident - they would only have about a 70 % chance of performing well enough at the time. (not to mention other factors like extra stress and other distractions at the time!) :shock: :shock:

                            I am curious now to do a test between my '92 GSX750F (which really is a heavy beast) compared to a blind brake stamp of the cage.
                            If I dont beat the Z with the bike - it means I would start losing my critical safety margin between me and a cage infront when they slam on their ABS cage. :shock:

                            *goes away to think (and test)*

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re stopping distance

                              I think the point they are trying to make is that every km/h over the limit makes a difference. While I agree that the extra 5 km/h is hardly a cause of an accident, the add does have merit. An example.....I live at Bullsbrook, a small community where everybody knows mostly everybody. Last Friday a young boy (primary school student) ran out in front of a car and was hit. Ambulance called and the kid escaped with grazes and bumps. I believe the car was doing about 40 km/h as posted but had the car been doing 50km/h the kid would not be so lucky, maybe even dead. It's not the speed that causes the accident. it just allows us to avoid some conditions that maybe beyond our control.

                              Dmax
                              Stay Upright

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X