The fact that people are still trying to drive Dodge RAMs in undercover carparks and down city laneways suggests that failure of design is not the key issue. Fuckwits are the issue.

Designing city’s that encourage social transit over independent transport is one thing. Legislation to prevent people being selfish fuckwits and driving a “Light” Truck into your office job.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

As long as its safe why should the government have any say whatsoever over what vehicle u drive?

[–] unionagainstdhmo@aussie.zone 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The argument is that its unsafe to drive a light truck unless absolutely necessary (necessity doesn't make it safer obviously). The best way to discourage their use would be strict licensing requirements (treat them like medium trucks: 0.0 alcohol) and require they do not enter truck-restricted zones

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

How is it unsafe? Other people feel unsafe? Its not like getting hit by a small car is any leas deadly the relative intertia means the car wins eather way regardless of if its 500kg or 3000kg.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 3 points 11 months ago

Yank tanks are more dangerous for a few reasons.

The shape of their frontal area means that when you hit an adult, instead of being launched over the top of the car thanks to being hit in the legs, they get hit in the chest and go under instead. Far more deadly.

They also have abysmal sight lines. You can fit a dozen children sitting on the ground in front of them in a line before you can see any of them.

So not only is a yank tank more likely to kill you if you get hit by it, it's also way more likely to hit you in the first place, because it's harder for the driver to see you.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You failed physics in school, didn’t you?

Also modern passenger cars have crumple zones and pedestrian protection systems. Light commercial vehicles are legally exempt from these requirements because they are designed to be commercial vehicles. They are not designed to be driven by someone who doesn’t understand that 3000kg is more than 500kg and that changing the velocity of something that weighs more requires more “work”.

This example is also why Sports car brakes and SUV brakes are much more expensive than compact and subcompact car brakes. Popular LCV brakes are cheap because of volumes and fleet discounts.

Dodge RAMs, Ford F150s and Silverado’s all require LCV brakes, but because very few people in Australia are stupid enough to buy them as a daily run-around, there is not the market demand to create lower prices.

This is OK for people legitimately using it as a work vehicle, because they can claim depreciation.

When ignorant private individuals who can’t afford to buy these vehicles, and can’t afford to maintain these vehicles are out driving on our urban and suburban streets, other people in normal sized cars, motorbikes, pushbikes and pedestrians get killed.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It doesnt matter how much work it takes to stop the vehicle u standing on the road will not be enough in comparison to a car if its 10times what u can provide or 50 ur still dead. Also the whole breaks argument relies on people not being able to afford to maintajn there car. So the solution is simply ban poor people from ownjng big cars.

[–] Salvo@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If I have a car barreling towards me, my first instinct is to get out of the way.

What I don’t think I about, but is pretty important are; A) is the driver doing to respond in time to slow the vehicle? B) is the driver assistance system going to respond in time to slow the vehicle. C) is the vehicle braking system going to be effective enough to slow the vehicle. D) how much momentum (Mass x Velocity) is the vehicle going to pass onto me when it hits me. E) where will my head hit the car when it does hit me. All these factors come into effect in modern vehicles.

[–] muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

A and B are irrelevent as that goes for all vehicles. C Australian regulations require all passenger vehicles are tested to an identical standard. Heavy vehicles are tested to a different standard but thats only ones over 4.5 tonnes (thats more than a Humvee). D Damage to a person is based on the Force which is accelleration times mass. Momentum is a measure of a bodies resistance to change in velocity as i said earlyer a small vehicle and a large vehicle have so much relative momentum compared to a person you will make very little effective change. E thats the only good point u got.