OT: About Tiger's Leg Injuries

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs
as a result of his accident today.
It's just speculation at this point, but a
dirty little secret with auto airbags are the
knee airbags below the steering wheel.
They have the unfortunate tendency to
break your lower legs when deployed.
Get well soon Tiger~
Needless Knee Airbags May Cause More Harm Than Good, Study Says
In the driver-side small overlap front test â one of five
intensive crash tests that factor into IIHSâ Top Safety Pick
and Top Safety Pick Plus crashworthiness awards â knee airbags
were associated with an increased risk for lower leg and
right femur injuries.
https://www.cars.com/articles/needless-knee-airbags-may-cause-mor
e-harm-than-good-study-says-407384/
Investigation of the Safety Effects of Knee Bolster Air Bag
Deployment in Similar Real-World Crash Comparisons
However, increases in proximal tibia/fibula and foot/ankle
fractures were observed in KBAB occupants
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235365760_Investigation_
of_the_Safety_Effects_of_Knee_Bolster_Air_Bag_Deployment_in_Simil
ar_Real-World_Crash_Comparisons

The relevant question isn't whether knee airbags cause injuries,
it's whether those injuries are less serious than what htey
prevent. After all, steering wheel airbags will break arms, but
that's highly preferable to embedding a steeing column in one's
chest.

The summary notes that further research is needed.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Gary R. Schmidt

2021-02-24 02:30:26 UTC

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs
as a result of his accident today.
It's just speculation at this point, but a
dirty little secret with auto airbags are the
knee airbags below the steering wheel.
They have the unfortunate tendency to
break your lower legs when deployed.
Get well soon Tiger~
Needless Knee Airbags May Cause More Harm Than Good, Study Says
In the driver-side small overlap front test — one of five
intensive crash tests that factor into IIHS’ Top Safety Pick
and Top Safety Pick Plus crashworthiness awards — knee airbags
were associated with an increased risk for lower leg and
right femur injuries.
https://www.cars.com/articles/needless-knee-airbags-may-cause-mor
e-harm-than-good-study-says-407384/
Investigation of the Safety Effects of Knee Bolster Air Bag
Deployment in Similar Real-World Crash Comparisons
However, increases in proximal tibia/fibula and foot/ankle
fractures were observed in KBAB occupants
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235365760_Investigation_
of_the_Safety_Effects_of_Knee_Bolster_Air_Bag_Deployment_in_Simil
ar_Real-World_Crash_Comparisons

The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have to
explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat belts.

Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts are
mandatory, and *worn*.

Cheers,
Gary B-)

--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...

J. Clarke

2021-02-24 03:14:42 UTC

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:30:26 +1100, "Gary R. Schmidt"

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs
as a result of his accident today.
It's just speculation at this point, but a
dirty little secret with auto airbags are the
knee airbags below the steering wheel.
They have the unfortunate tendency to
break your lower legs when deployed.
Get well soon Tiger~
Needless Knee Airbags May Cause More Harm Than Good, Study Says
In the driver-side small overlap front test — one of five
intensive crash tests that factor into IIHS’ Top Safety Pick
and Top Safety Pick Plus crashworthiness awards — knee airbags
were associated with an increased risk for lower leg and
right femur injuries.
https://www.cars.com/articles/needless-knee-airbags-may-cause-mor
e-harm-than-good-study-says-407384/
Investigation of the Safety Effects of Knee Bolster Air Bag
Deployment in Similar Real-World Crash Comparisons
However, increases in proximal tibia/fibula and foot/ankle
fractures were observed in KBAB occupants
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235365760_Investigation_
of_the_Safety_Effects_of_Knee_Bolster_Air_Bag_Deployment_in_Simil
ar_Real-World_Crash_Comparisons

The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have to
explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat belts.
Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts are
mandatory, and *worn*.

Please state your source for the assertion that "airbags in the US
explode so much harder".

Dorothy J Heydt

2021-02-24 03:41:02 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:30:26 +1100, "Gary R. Schmidt"

The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have to
explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat belts.
Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts are
mandatory, and *worn*.

Please state your source for the assertion that "airbags in the US
explode so much harder".

And while you're at it, your source for "you lot refuse to wear
seat belts"? Hal and I always wear our seat belts, which is just
as well because our 1985-vintage pickup doesn't have airbags.
The best of both worlds.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Www.kithrup.com/~djheydt/

Quadibloc

2021-02-24 04:19:02 UTC

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
And while you're at it, your source for "you lot refuse to wear
seat belts"? Hal and I always wear our seat belts, which is just
as well because our 1985-vintage pickup doesn't have airbags.
The best of both worlds.

While the statement is untrue for _all_ Americans, the fact that mask-wearing
during the COVID-19 pandemic is actually *controversial* in the United States
would lead me to suspect that a claim that compliance levels for seat belts are
also lower there than elsewhere is not outrageous.

John Savard

Quadibloc

2021-02-24 04:20:58 UTC

Here we are:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_use_rates_by_country

90% in the U.S., 98% in Sweden.

But only 91% in Canada, and 88% in Switzerland.

John Savard

Ted Nolan <tednolan>

2021-02-24 19:03:32 UTC

On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 8:55:03 PM UTC-7, Dorothy J

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
And while you're at it, your source for "you lot refuse to wear
seat belts"? Hal and I always wear our seat belts, which is
just as well because our 1985-vintage pickup doesn't have
airbags. The best of both worlds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_use_rates_by_country
90% in the U.S., 98% in Sweden.
But only 91% in Canada, and 88% in Switzerland.

Aside from the credibility of Wikipedia on something you yourself
claim is poltically controversial, 90% isn't "you lot dont don't do
this" by any non-stupid criteria.
And still doesn't document that a) air bags in the US "explode
harder" or that this is because of seat belt compliance.

And, of course if they don't explode hard enough, well you can fix that:

Loading Image...

--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

2021-02-24 20:56:38 UTC

On Tuesday, February 23, 2021 at 8:55:03 PM UTC-7, Dorothy J

Post by Dorothy J Heydt
And while you're at it, your source for "you lot refuse to
wear seat belts"? Hal and I always wear our seat belts, which
is just as well because our 1985-vintage pickup doesn't have
airbags. The best of both worlds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_use_rates_by_country
90% in the U.S., 98% in Sweden.
But only 91% in Canada, and 88% in Switzerland.

Aside from the credibility of Wikipedia on something you
yourself claim is poltically controversial, 90% isn't "you lot
dont don't do this" by any non-stupid criteria.
And still doesn't document that a) air bags in the US "explode
harder" or that this is because of seat belt compliance.

And, of course if they don't explode hard enough, well you can
https://i.redd.it/7188x5gzp1oz.jpg

Depends on how good the adhesive is, really. The part the pretties
are glued to fold away without coming loose from the steering
wheel. Some glues would hold up to it.

But still pretty stupid, though.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

The Horny Goat

2021-03-08 03:01:24 UTC

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:56:38 -0700, Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

And still doesn't document that a) air bags in the US "explode
harder" or that this is because of seat belt compliance.

https://i.redd.it/7188x5gzp1oz.jpg

I sell that type of stone in my store though would never dream of
doing anything remotely like that to my steering wheel.

That image is just nasty.

Quadibloc

2021-02-24 04:26:38 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
Please state your source for the assertion that "airbags in the US
explode so much harder".

I found this:

(begin quote)
Some countries outside North America adhere to internationalized
European ECE vehicle and equipment regulations rather than the
United States Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. ECE airbags
are generally smaller and inflate less forcefully than United States
airbags, because the ECE specifications are based on belted crash
test dummies.
(end quote)

from the Wikipedia article on airbags
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbag

John Savard

J. Clarke

2021-02-24 11:41:52 UTC

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 20:26:38 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc

Post by J. Clarke
Please state your source for the assertion that "airbags in the US
explode so much harder".

(begin quote)
Some countries outside North America adhere to internationalized
European ECE vehicle and equipment regulations rather than the
United States Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. ECE airbags
are generally smaller and inflate less forcefully than United States
airbags, because the ECE specifications are based on belted crash
test dummies.
(end quote)
from the Wikipedia article on airbags
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbag
John Savard

So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's based on
regulators refusing to belt dummies.

Quadibloc

2021-02-24 14:12:18 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's based on
regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.

Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time, American
regulators may have made the wrong decision. And, indeed, I did also
read that in recent years, airbags use less force, as advanced variable-force
airbags are now required.

But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one jurisdiction say to test
airbags with belted dummies, and in another say to test them with dummies
that are not belted... that is because they intend the airbags to protect people
who are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would be a response
to how they expect the people in the car to be in the case of an accident.

John Savard

J. Clarke

2021-02-24 17:26:36 UTC

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 06:12:18 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's based on
regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time, American
regulators may have made the wrong decision. And, indeed, I did also
read that in recent years, airbags use less force, as advanced variable-force
airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one jurisdiction say to test
airbags with belted dummies, and in another say to test them with dummies
that are not belted... that is because they intend the airbags to protect people
who are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would be a response
to how they expect the people in the car to be in the case of an accident.

Alternatively it's a response to getting tired of hearing Ralph Nader
whining.

Paul S Person

2021-02-24 17:38:54 UTC

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 06:12:18 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's based on
regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time, American
regulators may have made the wrong decision. And, indeed, I did also
read that in recent years, airbags use less force, as advanced variable-force
airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one jurisdiction say to test
airbags with belted dummies, and in another say to test them with dummies
that are not belted... that is because they intend the airbags to protect people
who are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would be a response
to how they expect the people in the car to be in the case of an accident.

But how old are these test protocols?

Seat belts were very controversial when they came out. I remember an
ad with two kids ignoring their parents lecture on wearing their "lap
straps". Yes, it was British.

But now, not only do vehicles come with "seat belts" that include
over-the-chest restraints as well, most cars (I would think, by now,
that older cars are mostly defunct) ping at you until you fasten them.
Constant nagging presumably increases compliance.

If the air bag tests in the USA were done first way back when seat
belts could /not/ be taken for granted, then not belting the dummies
would have made sense.

After which, keeping the same test forever is the invariable tendency.

--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

2021-02-24 17:51:16 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 06:12:18 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc

On Wednesday, February 24, 2021 at 4:41:58 AM UTC-7, J. Clarke

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

Lap belsts, without shoulder harness, were . . . problematic in
some ways.

Post by J. Clarke
But now, not only do vehicles come with "seat belts" that
include over-the-chest restraints as well, most cars (I would
think, by now, that older cars are mostly defunct) ping at you
until you fasten them. Constant nagging presumably increases
compliance.

Unless you're gearhead enough to remove the pinger from its socket.

Post by J. Clarke
If the air bag tests in the USA were done first way back when
seat belts could /not/ be taken for granted, then not belting
the dummies would have made sense.
After which, keeping the same test forever is the invariable
tendency.

The wheels of bureaucracy turn slowly, to prolong the pain of being
crushed by them.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Frank Scrooby

2021-02-26 08:32:15 UTC

Greetings all,

Post by Paul S Person
But how old are these test protocols?
Seat belts were very controversial when they came out. I remember an
ad with two kids ignoring their parents lecture on wearing their "lap
straps". Yes, it was British.

In the late eighties a senior (I think titled Chief Constable) member of the Australian police went on record as saying he would rather people drive without their seat belts rather than use "lap straps". Apparently the bulk of traffic accidents in his area happened at high speed and vehicles lacked features like crumble zones to absorb some of the energy before tossing the occupants forward. The lap straps essentially behaved like messing guillotines, cutting (particularly smaller) people in half. And at the time the Ozzie law required a relative or close friend to identify a road accident victim at the morgue, except in the case of severe head trauma, where surviving finger prints would be used. The Chief Constable felt it was much more traumatic for the relative to see the body with a pronounced hole in the middle where the intestines should be.

I don't know if he got his way, or when the laws changed to make the over-the-shoulder strap mandatory, but apparently Australia now limits its road death casualties by rigorous anti- drunk driving checks. Practically any alcohol that can be detected without the use of a blood test seems to be illegal.

Post by Paul S Person
But now, not only do vehicles come with "seat belts" that include
over-the-chest restraints as well, most cars (I would think, by now,
that older cars are mostly defunct) ping at you until you fasten them.
Constant nagging presumably increases compliance.

My in-laws own a 1965 Mercedes, made in the good old Western Germany (or was it WEST Germany by then). It left the factory with shoulder-strap style seat belts. So someone was thinking about it even then. That said, the central back seat has a lap belt, and the 'locking mechanism' on the belts buckles are dangerously hard to get off. I would not want to be in that car in the event of a possible submergence or imminent fire. Unless of cause I had a sturdy piece of cutting equipment that could work faster than trying to figure out which sutle angle change the mechanism needed today to work.

Post by Paul S Person
If the air bag tests in the USA were done first way back when seat
belts could /not/ be taken for granted, then not belting the dummies
would have made sense.
After which, keeping the same test forever is the invariable tendency.

In general safety testing in the automobile industry is a mess of "just doing enough to stay out of trouble with the law". The European vehicle safety tests only require testing for passenger safety in up to 60 kph (+- 37.5 mph) collisions. This is in the same economic and legal block that the Autobahn exists in. Individual manufacturers may test their products at higher speeds but they are NOT required to. I don't known what the law is in the US / Canada, but based on the size of the things people are driving there I am forced to believe that the entire motoring population is engaged in some kind of arms race to out mass everything else on the road.

I drive a nice small little car that passed the European safety test with flying colors. But I don't trust that to be worth anything if I get into a collision with an American car. Fortunately the real ones, the imports, are relatively rare here.

Post by Paul S Person
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

Regards
Frank

Hamish Laws

2021-02-26 09:07:24 UTC

Post by Frank Scrooby
Greetings all,

Dubious
They can cause major injuries but cutting people in half seems to be an exaggeration

Post by Frank Scrooby
And at the time the Ozzie law required a relative or close friend to identify a road accident victim at the morgue, except in the case of severe head trauma, where surviving finger prints would be used. The Chief Constable felt it was much more traumatic for the relative to see the body with a pronounced hole in the middle where the intestines should be.
I don't know if he got his way, or when the laws changed to make the over-the-shoulder strap mandatory, but apparently Australia now limits its road death casualties by rigorous anti- drunk driving checks.

We have random breath tests around, saying that I don't think I've been breath tested for a couple of years and I do some driving on Friday & Saturday nights
We also have non-random breath tests near big events (a music festival I go to has everybody breath tested on the way out)

We have speed cameras, radar, red light cameras, unmarked police cars, speed limits in cities are mostly down from 20 years ago etc and a lot of people seem to be realising that stuff is dangerous

Post by Frank Scrooby
Practically any alcohol that can be detected without the use of a blood test seems to be illegal.

Not true, across the nation Australia has the 0.05 blood alcohol limit (learners and provisional drivers can't have any detectable level)

Gary R. Schmidt

2021-02-26 10:53:27 UTC

Post by Frank Scrooby
Greetings all,

In the late eighties a senior (I think titled Chief Constable) member of the Australian police went on record as saying he would rather people drive without their seat belts rather than use "lap straps". Apparently the bulk of traffic accidents in his area happened at high speed and vehicles lacked features like crumble zones to absorb some of the energy before tossing the occupants forward. The lap straps essentially behaved like messing guillotines, cutting (particularly smaller) people in half. And at the time the Ozzie law required a relative or close friend to identify a road accident victim at the morgue, except in the case of severe head trauma, where surviving finger prints would be used. The Chief Constable felt it was much more traumatic for the relative to see the body with a pronounced hole in the middle where the intestines should be.
I don't know if he got his way, or when the laws changed to make the over-the-shoulder strap mandatory, but apparently Australia now limits its road death casualties by rigorous anti- drunk driving checks. Practically any alcohol that can be detected without the use of a blood test seems to be illegal.

This is just wrong.

The ADR's that required lap-sash belts started in 1969
<https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/vehicles/design/second_edition_adrs.aspx>,
and lap-only belts were *never* mandatory here.

Any copper talking about lap-belts in the 1980's may very well have been
a Chief Constable, but more likely in the 1880's, we haven't used that
title in most of the States and Territories since Federation. "Chief
Commissioner" is the usual term.

Visual identification of bodies has never been managed in such a way
that the observer would be exposed to such things as a, "hole in the
middle".

And while the 0.5% BAC has done a great job in reducing road trauma,
many/most of the people directly involved in it are of the opinion that
the increased safety of newer vehicles is the major ongoing cause.

Sounds like you're vaguely recalling some dodgy article from the "Truth"
newspaper back in the day, even "Pravda" had a better reputation for
accuracy that it!!

Cheers,
Gary B-)

--
Waiting for a new signature to suggest itself...

Titus G

2021-02-27 01:44:56 UTC

.
snip wrong stuff.
.

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
This is just wrong.

.
But funny though.

J. Clarke

2021-02-26 14:02:02 UTC

On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 00:32:15 -0800 (PST), Frank Scrooby

Post by Frank Scrooby
Greetings all,

In the late eighties a senior (I think titled Chief Constable) member of the Australian police went on record as saying he would rather people drive without their seat belts rather than use "lap straps". Apparently the bulk of traffic accidents in his area happened at high speed and vehicles lacked features like crumble zones to absorb some of the energy before tossing the occupants forward. The lap straps essentially behaved like messing guillotines, cutting (particularly smaller) people in half. And at the time the Ozzie law required a relative or close friend to identify a road accident victim at the morgue, except in the case of severe head trauma, where surviving finger prints would be used. The Chief Constable felt it was much more traumatic for the relative to see the body with a pronounced hole in the middle where the intestines should be.
I don't know if he got his way, or when the laws changed to make the over-the-shoulder strap mandatory, but apparently Australia now limits its road death casualties by rigorous anti- drunk driving checks. Practically any alcohol that can be detected without the use of a blood test seems to be illegal.

I remember when I took my driving test I asked the inspector to put on
his seat belt--this was before seat-belt use was mandatory. He
refused and explained that DMV policy forbade him from doing so. At
16 I wasn't going to argue the point.

Post by Frank Scrooby

In general safety testing in the automobile industry is a mess of "just doing enough to stay out of trouble with the law". The European vehicle safety tests only require testing for passenger safety in up to 60 kph (+- 37.5 mph) collisions. This is in the same economic and legal block that the Autobahn exists in. Individual manufacturers may test their products at higher speeds but they are NOT required to. I don't known what the law is in the US / Canada, but based on the size of the things people are driving there I am forced to believe that the entire motoring population is engaged in some kind of arms race to out mass everything else on the road.
I drive a nice small little car that passed the European safety test with flying colors. But I don't trust that to be worth anything if I get into a collision with an American car. Fortunately the real ones, the imports, are relatively rare here.

Post by Paul S Person
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

Regards
Frank

Paul S Person

2021-02-26 17:15:57 UTC

On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:02:02 -0500, J. Clarke

Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 00:32:15 -0800 (PST), Frank Scrooby

Post by Frank Scrooby
Greetings all,

In the late eighties a senior (I think titled Chief Constable) member of the Australian police went on record as saying he would rather people drive without their seat belts rather than use "lap straps". Apparently the bulk of traffic accidents in his area happened at high speed and vehicles lacked features like crumble zones to absorb some of the energy before tossing the occupants forward. The lap straps essentially behaved like messing guillotines, cutting (particularly smaller) people in half. And at the time the Ozzie law required a relative or close friend to identify a road accident victim at the morgue, except in the case of severe head trauma, where surviving finger prints would be used. The Chief Constable felt it was much more traumatic for the relative to see the body with a pronounced hole in the middle where the intestines should be.
I don't know if he got his way, or when the laws changed to make the over-the-shoulder strap mandatory, but apparently Australia now limits its road death casualties by rigorous anti- drunk driving checks. Practically any alcohol that can be detected without the use of a blood test seems to be illegal.

Perhaps they were trying to "retire" the older inspectors so they
could hire some new ones at a lower rate of pay.

Or they had more than they needed, and wanted to thin the herd.

Post by J. Clarke

Post by Frank Scrooby

In general safety testing in the automobile industry is a mess of "just doing enough to stay out of trouble with the law". The European vehicle safety tests only require testing for passenger safety in up to 60 kph (+- 37.5 mph) collisions. This is in the same economic and legal block that the Autobahn exists in. Individual manufacturers may test their products at higher speeds but they are NOT required to. I don't known what the law is in the US / Canada, but based on the size of the things people are driving there I am forced to believe that the entire motoring population is engaged in some kind of arms race to out mass everything else on the road.
I drive a nice small little car that passed the European safety test with flying colors. But I don't trust that to be worth anything if I get into a collision with an American car. Fortunately the real ones, the imports, are relatively rare here.

Post by Paul S Person
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

Regards
Frank

--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

The Horny Goat

2021-03-08 03:10:47 UTC

On Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:02:02 -0500, J. Clarke

Post by J. Clarke
I remember when I took my driving test I asked the inspector to put on
his seat belt--this was before seat-belt use was mandatory. He
refused and explained that DMV policy forbade him from doing so. At
16 I wasn't going to argue the point.

When my daughter did her road test there was heavy construction
traffic on the road outside the motor vehicle office and the first
thing my daughter said to the examiner just before she turned from the
parking lot onto to the street was "OK with all this construction I
don't see how I >can< exit the parking lot legally - what would you
suggest I do?"

20 minutes later right after he had signed her examination with the
box checked "PASS" he said that he didn't think most kids would be
quick enough to pick up on the awkward situation at the curb and that
the fact she had asked him told him he was definitely going to pass
her unless she did something egregiously dumb on the rest of the test.
Since she didn't she passed with flying colors!

The Horny Goat

2021-03-08 03:03:46 UTC

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:38:54 -0800, Paul S Person

In fairness the beeping thing you're talking about is mostly if the
belts are not done up. If you leave your belt done up when you are out
of the car and don't put it on when you get in but leave it buckled
behind you most North American cars WON'T beep at you.

Paul S Person

2021-03-08 17:34:06 UTC

Post by The Horny Goat
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:38:54 -0800, Paul S Person

Anything can be gamed.

--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

The Horny Goat

2021-03-09 05:57:35 UTC

On Mon, 08 Mar 2021 09:34:06 -0800, Paul S Person

Post by Paul S Person

Post by The Horny Goat
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 09:38:54 -0800, Paul S Person

Anything can be gamed.

As I recall the first time I realized it was when my kids in the back
seat did that and I refused to start the car before they did it
properly..... they would have been about 6 or 7 at the time so it's
simply not that hard to figure out the 'game'

Frank Scrooby

2021-03-09 06:28:18 UTC

Hi all

Post by The Horny Goat
On Mon, 08 Mar 2021 09:34:06 -0800, Paul S Person

Post by Paul S Person
Anything can be gamed.

I grew up in much simpler times (no, not the 60s). When I was 6 or 7 car seat belts for rear seat passengers were not compulsory in South Africa (I think they had only JUST become compulsory for the driver and front seat passenger). If however I had gotten into a vehicle that had rear seat seatbelts and I had not used them properly my Dad was certain to have stopped the car, dragged me out and given me a warm backside that I would not have forgotten in a hurry (like ever). Simpler times, not necessarily better times.

It wasn't that he was a bad parent, he just didn't want the people sitting behind to become a projectile that would hit him in the event of an accident. I know he kicked at least one of my uncles out of his car when said uncle refused to buckle up in the front seat.

On a side issue, a friend of my wife had a beautiful luxury vehicle that had the seat belt alarm thingies. Only problem: the sensors were sensitive enough to detect the mass of a Chihuahua dog. So the seatbelt had to be plugged in while the chihuahua rode on the passenger seat. Only it was a destructive little beast with a leaky bladder, so after it chewed a hole in the seat belt it urinated over it's good work causing an electrical fault that the auto-electricians at the vehicle's agents couldn't fix. The vehicle was eventually sold with one seat belt missing.

Regards
Frank

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

2021-02-24 17:49:31 UTC

On Wednesday, February 24, 2021 at 4:41:58 AM UTC-7, J. Clarke

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

Or one set of standards dates from a time when fewer people were
wearing belts and hasn't been updated since, and the is from a
later date or has been updated.

Or, as is far too common, both are subject to political pressures
that have nothing to do with facts. The US could be the NTSB bowing
to the wingnut brigade's refusal to toe the line, and Europe could
be the NTSB equivalent bowing to the moonbat brigade's social
engineering to convince people that if they don't wear seatbelts
hellfire will rain down from the heavens, cats and dogs will be
living together together and someone will kick their children.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Ted Nolan <tednolan>

2021-02-24 19:01:37 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

I just wish someone had been honest beforehand about the: "It will
turn you into chauffers -- no more kids in the front seat" aspect.
I think there would have been a lot of heat had that not just been
revealed as a done deal afterwards.

--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

Jonathan

2021-02-24 22:48:46 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

I hope most realize child seats should be placed in the
middle of the rear seat. That's due to the fact most
front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards
when the car is hit from the rear to cushion the impact
on the front seat occupants.

A child seat behind the driver is the worst place of all.

--
https://twitter.com/Non_Linear1

Alan Baker

2021-02-24 23:25:53 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

Ummmm... ...no.

The standard for front seat strength in a rear collision may be
insufficient (appears to be in fact)...

...but front seats are not design to collapse backward.

Jonathan

2021-02-26 04:48:05 UTC

Post by Alan Baker

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

Ummmm... ...no.
The standard for front seat strength in a rear collision may be
insufficient (appears to be in fact)...
...but front seats are not design to collapse backward.

It should be noted the research on knee airbags showed
that the right lower leg suffered greater risk of
being broken by the airbag. Tiger's right lower
leg had the rod inserted.

The Dangers of Collapsing Vehicle Seat Backs: What Can You Do?

You may have seen or heard stories about vehicle front seats
collapsing in crashes. In some cases, drivers and backseat
passengers—including children—have been killed by vehicle
seats that collapse in moderate to severe rear-impact crashes.

The National Highway Transportation Safety Administration and
vehicle manufacturers have been aware of this problem for decades.
CBS’s 60 Minutes first tackled the issue back in 1992. According
to one of the recent CBS reports, back in 1992, a man named
Paul Sheridan was in charge of a minivan safety team at Chrysler.

He knew about the problem of seats collapsing and tried to take
steps to research and correct it, but Chrysler instead dismantled
his team and withheld evidence. At the time (remember, this
is 1992) NHTSA said it would look into the issue.
Nearly 30 years later, nothing has changed.

https://carseatblog.com/38404/collapsing-seat-backs-what-can-you-do/

--
https://twitter.com/Non_Linear1

Alan Baker

2021-02-26 05:02:01 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

Ummmm... ...no.
The standard for front seat strength in a rear collision may be
insufficient (appears to be in fact)...
...but front seats are not design to collapse backward.

Sorry... ...but you just don't get it.

The fact that seat backs do sometimes collapse is in now way proof that...

"most front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards when the car
is hit from the rear to cushion the impact on the front seat occupants."

You get that that is your actual quote, right?

Jonathan

2021-02-26 12:13:16 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

Ummmm... ...no.
The standard for front seat strength in a rear collision may be
insufficient (appears to be in fact)...
...but front seats are not design to collapse backward.

Sorry... ...but you just don't get it.
The fact that seat backs do sometimes collapse is in now way proof that...
"most front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards when the car
is hit from the rear to cushion the impact on the front seat occupants."
You get that that is your actual quote, right?

That's the way they've been designed for decades, why else
would they design them that way? Because they're dummies
and it never occurred to them the dangers of a weak
seat back?

They design them that way because they know frontal impacts
are far more likely. They've made a deliberate decision to
design them that way based on a statistical analysis that
it'll do more good then harm.

And people should be aware such trade off risks exists, just
as with knee airbags, the can help protect knees but
lower legs suffer.

--
https://twitter.com/Non_Linear1

Alan Baker

2021-02-26 17:25:18 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

Ummmm... ...no.
The standard for front seat strength in a rear collision may be
insufficient (appears to be in fact)...
...but front seats are not design to collapse backward.

Sorry... ...but you just don't get it.
The fact that seat backs do sometimes collapse is in now way proof that...
"most front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards when the
car is hit from the rear to cushion the impact on the front seat
occupants."
You get that that is your actual quote, right?

That's the way they've been designed for decades, why else
would they design them that way? Because they're dummies
and it never occurred to them the dangers of a weak
seat back?
They design them that way because they know frontal impacts
are far more likely. They've made a deliberate decision to
design them that way based on a statistical analysis that
it'll do more good then harm.
And people should be aware such trade off risks exists, just
as with knee airbags, the can help protect knees but
lower legs suffer.

Look up "circular argument" and get back to me.

Kevrob

2021-02-25 04:50:14 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

I hope most realize child seats should be placed in the
middle of the rear seat. That's due to the fact most
front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards
when the car is hit from the rear to cushion the impact
on the front seat occupants.
A child seat behind the driver is the worst place of all.

Were you an only child?

When I was a kid, any outing of the whole family included my two
parents, my 8 siblings and myself. 3 in the front (1 kid between
Mom and Dad,) 4 in the middle and 4 more in the "way back."
I have zero children, but if I ever had to carry a few around along
with child seats I'd need a much larger vehicle than the old Chevy
or Plymouth station wagon.

Perhaps we would have all survived any crash by virtue of
"the Sardine Effect?" (.....or not.)

How does one decide which of the triplets get the "death seats?"

--
Kevin R
a.a #2310

Alan Baker

2021-02-25 17:54:28 UTC

Post by Kevrob

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

I hope most realize child seats should be placed in the
middle of the rear seat. That's due to the fact most
front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards
when the car is hit from the rear to cushion the impact
on the front seat occupants.
A child seat behind the driver is the worst place of all.

Were you an only child?
When I was a kid, any outing of the whole family included my two
parents, my 8 siblings and myself. 3 in the front (1 kid between
Mom and Dad,) 4 in the middle and 4 more in the "way back."
I have zero children, but if I ever had to carry a few around along
with child seats I'd need a much larger vehicle than the old Chevy
or Plymouth station wagon.
Perhaps we would have all survived any crash by virtue of
"the Sardine Effect?" (.....or not.)
How does one decide which of the triplets get the "death seats?"

When we were kids my whole family (mum, stepdad, three boys) would go
camping with my brothers and I in the back of a station wagon with the
back seat folded down.

There was one accident where my stepdad made a cold-blooded decision to
hit the oncoming car (a Chevy Corvair that came over the crest of the
hill fully in our lane) rather than the Canadian Shield. With Max hard
on the brakes, we hit corner to corner with it in our Ford Falcon
station wagon. The braking slid us right up against the front seats, and
then it was the sardine effect that kept us safe.

Jonathan

2021-02-26 04:52:02 UTC

Post by Kevrob

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

I hope most realize child seats should be placed in the
middle of the rear seat. That's due to the fact most
front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards
when the car is hit from the rear to cushion the impact
on the front seat occupants.
A child seat behind the driver is the worst place of all.

Were you an only child?
When I was a kid, any outing of the whole family included my two
parents, my 8 siblings and myself. 3 in the front (1 kid between
Mom and Dad,) 4 in the middle and 4 more in the "way back."
I have zero children, but if I ever had to carry a few around along
with child seats I'd need a much larger vehicle than the old Chevy
or Plymouth station wagon.
Perhaps we would have all survived any crash by virtue of
"the Sardine Effect?" (.....or not.)
How does one decide which of the triplets get the "death seats?"

Male or female~

It shouldn't matter, but...

--
https://twitter.com/Non_Linear1

The Horny Goat

2021-03-08 03:25:45 UTC

Post by Kevrob

Post by J. Clarke
So it's not based on people refusing to wear seat belts, it's
based on regulators refusing to belt dummies.

That's one way to look at it.
Since even Americans are wearing seatbelts 90% of the time,
American regulators may have made the wrong decision. And,
indeed, I did also read that in recent years, airbags use less
force, as advanced variable-force airbags are now required.
But to me, it is obvious that if the regulations in one
jurisdiction say to test airbags with belted dummies, and in
another say to test them with dummies that are not belted...
that is because they intend the airbags to protect people who
are belted or not belted, respectively, and therefore that would
be a response to how they expect the people in the car to be in
the case of an accident.

I hope most realize child seats should be placed in the
middle of the rear seat. That's due to the fact most
front seats are designed to easily collapse backwards
when the car is hit from the rear to cushion the impact
on the front seat occupants.
A child seat behind the driver is the worst place of all.

Were you an only child?
When I was a kid, any outing of the whole family included my two
parents, my 8 siblings and myself. 3 in the front (1 kid between
Mom and Dad,) 4 in the middle and 4 more in the "way back."
I have zero children, but if I ever had to carry a few around along
with child seats I'd need a much larger vehicle than the old Chevy
or Plymouth station wagon.
Perhaps we would have all survived any crash by virtue of
"the Sardine Effect?" (.....or not.)
How does one decide which of the triplets get the "death seats?"

My most notable experience driving with my children was the Sunday
morning I took the kids to church while my wife was under the weather.
As usual my eldest was in the front seat with me while her two
siblings (then 3 1/2 and 1 1/2) were in the back seat. #2 kid had just
graduated from child seat to car seat while her brother was still in
car seat. Rounding the corner something gave way and the car seat
flipped over. My son was safe and sound in his car seat but hanging
upside down in the harness. He was not at all in distress but was very
calm but surprised. Needless to say I had immediately pulled over and
fixed the straps so his car seat was stable.

As soon as we were in motion again I told the kids that their mother
must never hear about this.

I eventually told her about it when my son was 13 and just a hair
taller than his mother.....he got teased about it 5 years later when
we visited Cape Canaveral and announced to the family that he thought
he'd do fine in that space flown Mercury capsule just outside the gift
shop at the NASA history center. Thing is the first Americans in space
weren't Shepherd and Glenn but two chimps and this was one of the
chimp capsules - which to his sisters proved what they knew about
their brother all along...("Johnny is a monkey Johnny is a monkey!")

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

2021-02-24 17:39:13 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:30:26 +1100, "Gary R. Schmidt"

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs
as a result of his accident today.
It's just speculation at this point, but a
dirty little secret with auto airbags are the
knee airbags below the steering wheel.
They have the unfortunate tendency to
break your lower legs when deployed.
Get well soon Tiger~
Needless Knee Airbags May Cause More Harm Than Good, Study
Says
In the driver-side small overlap front test â one of five
intensive crash tests that factor into IIHSâ Top Safety
Pick and Top Safety Pick Plus crashworthiness awards â knee
airbags were associated with an increased risk for lower leg
and right femur injuries.
https://www.cars.com/articles/needless-knee-airbags-may-cause-
mor e-harm-than-good-study-says-407384/
Investigation of the Safety Effects of Knee Bolster Air Bag
Deployment in Similar Real-World Crash Comparisons
However, increases in proximal tibia/fibula and foot/ankle
fractures were observed in KBAB occupants
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235365760_Investigati
on_
of_the_Safety_Effects_of_Knee_Bolster_Air_Bag_Deployment_in_Si
mil ar_Real-World_Crash_Comparisons

The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have
to explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat
belts.
Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts
are mandatory, and *worn*.

Please state your source for the assertion that "airbags in the
US explode so much harder".

And that this is because so few people wear seatbelts. When
seatbelt laws first went into effect, it was only an "add on"
ticket; you couldn't be pulled over for it.

That is no longer true anywhere that I'm aware of.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Dimensional Traveler

2021-02-24 04:25:32 UTC

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs
as a result of his accident today.
It's just speculation at this point, but a
dirty little secret with auto airbags are the
knee airbags below the steering wheel.
They have the unfortunate tendency to
break your lower legs when deployed.
Get well soon Tiger~
Needless Knee Airbags May Cause More Harm Than Good, Study Says
In the driver-side small overlap front test — one of five
intensive crash tests that factor into IIHS’ Top Safety Pick
and Top Safety Pick Plus crashworthiness awards — knee airbags
were associated with an increased risk for lower leg and
right femur injuries.
https://www.cars.com/articles/needless-knee-airbags-may-cause-mor
e-harm-than-good-study-says-407384/
Investigation of the Safety Effects of Knee Bolster Air Bag
Deployment in Similar Real-World Crash Comparisons
However, increases in proximal tibia/fibula and foot/ankle
fractures were observed in KBAB occupants
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235365760_Investigation_
of_the_Safety_Effects_of_Knee_Bolster_Air_Bag_Deployment_in_Simil
ar_Real-World_Crash_Comparisons

The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have to
explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat belts.
Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts are
mandatory, and *worn*.

Airbags explode at the speed they do because they have to in order to be
inflated and able to do any good in such a short interval.

--
I like living in the suburbs of Sanity. I can commute there when I need
to be serious or mature but otherwise I can do as I please.

Titus G

2021-02-24 05:09:43 UTC

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs
as a result of his accident today.
It's just speculation at this point, but a
dirty little secret with auto airbags are the
knee airbags below the steering wheel.
They have the unfortunate tendency to
break your lower legs when deployed.
Get well soon Tiger~
Needless Knee Airbags May Cause More Harm Than Good, Study Says
In the driver-side small overlap front test — one of five
intensive crash tests that factor into IIHS’ Top Safety Pick
and Top Safety Pick Plus crashworthiness awards — knee airbags
were associated with an increased risk for lower leg and
right femur injuries.
https://www.cars.com/articles/needless-knee-airbags-may-cause-mor
e-harm-than-good-study-says-407384/
Investigation of the Safety Effects of Knee Bolster Air Bag
Deployment in Similar Real-World Crash Comparisons
However, increases in proximal tibia/fibula and foot/ankle
fractures were observed in KBAB occupants
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235365760_Investigation_
of_the_Safety_Effects_of_Knee_Bolster_Air_Bag_Deployment_in_Simil
ar_Real-World_Crash_Comparisons

The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have to
explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat belts.
Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts are
mandatory, and *worn*.
Cheers,
Gary B-)

You have forgotten that the US and especially Texas has it a lot harder
than the rest of the third world because there are so many more roads
and obviously far more cars so answers aren't as obvious as such facts
as no such phenomena as climate change, Covid-19 is no worse than
Woodstock 'flu and freedom includes the right to freeze as well as the
right to impale oneself with a steering column.
The concept that a car that you OWN, will, on interfering Government
decree and against your will, explode an airbag and break your bones is
an acceptable cost of venturing away from home could only be held by a
returnee from the new Dumbass Democrat initiated re-education camps. And
here was I thinking that Jibini was absent due to being chased away by
the Baker. Isn't life strange?

Michael F. Stemper

2021-02-26 00:11:49 UTC

Post by Titus G
You have forgotten that the US and especially Texas has it a lot harder
than the rest of the third world because there are so many more roads
and obviously far more cars so answers aren't as obvious as such facts
as no such phenomena as climate change, Covid-19 is no worse than
Woodstock 'flu and freedom includes the right to freeze as well as the
right to impale oneself with a steering column.
The concept that a car that you OWN, will, on interfering Government
decree and against your will, explode an airbag and break your bones is
an acceptable cost of venturing away from home could only be held by a
returnee from the new Dumbass Democrat initiated re-education camps. And
here was I thinking that Jibini was absent due to being chased away by
the Baker. Isn't life strange?

I am in awe.

--
Michael F. Stemper
Zechariah 7:10

Titus G

2021-02-27 01:42:22 UTC

Post by Michael F. Stemper

I am in awe.

Better to be in awe than in Texas!

Quadibloc

2021-02-27 23:35:07 UTC

Post by Titus G
answers aren't as obvious as such facts
as no such phenomena as climate change, Covid-19 is no worse than
Woodstock 'flu

I was going to comment on this, but now that I look more closely at this
post as a whole, I think you may have been writing in jest.

John Savard

Moriarty

2021-03-01 02:01:05 UTC

Post by Titus G
answers aren't as obvious as such facts
as no such phenomena as climate change, Covid-19 is no worse than
Woodstock 'flu

I was going to comment on this, but now that I look more closely at this
post as a whole, I think you may have been writing in jest.

Congratulations!

-Moriarty

Titus G

2021-02-24 05:25:59 UTC

To reduce harmful vehicle emissions, US Government applied permissable
standards to different types of vehicles, most restrictively to cars.
To reduce compliance costs, vehicle manufacturers introduced a new urban
'truck', the SUV, which was prone to roll. And still is.

BCFD36

2021-02-27 22:54:17 UTC

[stuff deleted]

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have to
explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat belts.
Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts are
mandatory, and *worn*.
Cheers,
Gary B-)

In most states, seat belts are mandatory. Definitely California. And in
my time on the FD, I never saw anyone's legs broken from airbags and I
have seen many deploy. We had one cute young thing in very short shorts
get burned from the air bag due to the hot gasses being expelled. And a
bit of run burn on the nose in others.

--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Probably Retired)

J. Clarke

2021-02-28 01:48:18 UTC

Post by BCFD36
[stuff deleted]

"run burn"? Do you mean "rug burn" or is that a term of art with
which I and I suspect most of the rest of us are unfamiliar?

There's only one state that doesn't require seat belt use for adults.

BCFD36

2021-02-28 22:02:29 UTC

Post by J. Clarke

Post by BCFD36
[stuff deleted]

"run burn"? Do you mean "rug burn" or is that a term of art with
which I and I suspect most of the rest of us are unfamiliar?
There's only one state that doesn't require seat belt use for adults.

Yep, I meant RUG burn. I suffer from fat finger syndrome.

--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Probably Retired)

Robert Carnegie

2021-02-28 23:09:56 UTC

Post by BCFD36

Post by BCFD36
[stuff deleted]

"run burn"? Do you mean "rug burn" or is that a term of art with
which I and I suspect most of the rest of us are unfamiliar?
There's only one state that doesn't require seat belt use for adults.

Yep, I meant RUG burn. I suffer from fat finger syndrome.
--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Probably Retired)

I'm puzzled because I don't see how a rug is involved.

For instance:

<https://www.rugtraders.co.uk/how-to-treat-rug-burns/>

Is air bag material... rugged?

J. Clarke

2021-03-01 01:04:25 UTC

On Sun, 28 Feb 2021 15:09:56 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by BCFD36

Post by BCFD36
[stuff deleted]

"run burn"? Do you mean "rug burn" or is that a term of art with
which I and I suspect most of the rest of us are unfamiliar?
There's only one state that doesn't require seat belt use for adults.

Yep, I meant RUG burn. I suffer from fat finger syndrome.
--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Probably Retired)

I'm puzzled because I don't see how a rug is involved.
<https://www.rugtraders.co.uk/how-to-treat-rug-burns/>
Is air bag material... rugged?

Is the issue (a) that you are unfamiliar with rug burns, or (b) that
you do not believe that airbag material generates sufficient friction
to produce one?

BCFD36

2021-03-01 18:40:13 UTC

Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 28 Feb 2021 15:09:56 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie

Post by Robert Carnegie

Post by BCFD36

Post by BCFD36
[stuff deleted]

"run burn"? Do you mean "rug burn" or is that a term of art with
which I and I suspect most of the rest of us are unfamiliar?
There's only one state that doesn't require seat belt use for adults.

Yep, I meant RUG burn. I suffer from fat finger syndrome.
--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Probably Retired)

I'm puzzled because I don't see how a rug is involved.
<https://www.rugtraders.co.uk/how-to-treat-rug-burns/>
Is air bag material... rugged?

Is the issue (a) that you are unfamiliar with rug burns, or (b) that
you do not believe that airbag material generates sufficient friction
to produce one?

Airbags will definitely cause rug burns on the face. I've seen them on
noses, foreheads, cheeks, and chins. And first degree burns on legs and
(maybe) arms from the hot inflation gasses.

--
Dave Scruggs
Captain, Boulder Creek Fire (Retired)
Sr. Software Engineer - Stellar Solutions (Probably Retired)

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha

2021-03-01 17:29:10 UTC

Post by BCFD36
[stuff deleted]

Post by Gary R. Schmidt
The biggest problems with air-bags in the USA is that they have
to explode so much harder because you lot refuse to wear seat
belts.
Much less damage is done in civilised countries where seatbelts
are mandatory, and *worn*.
Â Â Â Â Cheers,
Â Â Â Â Â Â Â GaryÂ Â Â B-)

In most states, seat belts are mandatory. Definitely California.
And in my time on the FD, I never saw anyone's legs broken from
airbags and I have seen many deploy. We had one cute young thing
in very short shorts get burned from the air bag due to the hot
gasses being expelled. And a bit of run burn on the nose in
others.

I had my glasses knocked off by an airbag. Found them in the back
seat. Aside from that, I believe one wrist was a bit achy, but not
debilitatingly so.
--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration
(May 2019 total for people arrested for entering the United States
illegally is over 132,000 for just the southwest border.)

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

Scott Lurndal

2021-02-24 15:24:59 UTC

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs

Did you accidentally post this to the wrong newsgroup?

Jonathan

2021-02-24 16:39:48 UTC

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs

Did you accidentally post this to the wrong newsgroup?

It's OK to hate me, I know I'm annoying as can be sometimes.

But as my musical hero once sang so well...

Make Your Own Kind of Music ( Mama Cass Elliott )

--
https://twitter.com/Non_Linear1

Wolffan

2021-02-27 23:57:14 UTC

Post by Scott Lurndal

Post by Jonathan
It's reported Tiger has compound fractures in both legs

Did you accidentally post this to the wrong newsgroup?

It wasn’t an accident.

BCFD36

2021-02-27 23:26:38 UTC