Public stupidity announcement

[sAsLEX]

Was watching the new anti-speed ad on TV the other day.

Situation two modern cars heading along a straight road one at 60 the other at 65, truck pulls out and both brake hard. The ad in my poinion is flawwed in many ways.
1. One car crashes into the flat side of the truck for minimal damage , the other "speeding car" catches the rear of the trailer on the windscreen, not quite comparable in my view!!

2. Why dont they turn?? At that speed with ABS, or even without, it would be comparitively easy to turn out of the way of the truck!!

3.Target Fixation, why is this not addressed, this would have to one of the major cause of crashes in this country! People are constantly crashing into the only tree powerpole around for ages all because the only traing they receive through the government and LTSA is for hazard identification, which they duly identify and drive straight into.

Its about time that someone relises that speed alone does not cause half of the major accidents.

[James Deuce]

Was watching the new anit-speed ad on TV the other day.

Situation two modern cars heading along a straight road one at 60 the other at 65, truck pulls out and both brake hard. The ad in my poinion is flawwed in many ways.
1. One car crashes into the flat side of the truck for minimal damage , the other "speeding car" catches the rear of the trailer on the windscreen, not quite comparable in my view!!

2. Why dont they turn?? At that speed with ABS, or even without, it would be comparitively easy to turn out of the way of the truck!!

3.Target Fixation, why is this not addressed, this would have to one of the major cause of crashes in this country! People are constantly crashing into the only tree powerpole around for ages all because the only traing they receive through the government and LTSA is for hazard identification, which they duly identify and drive straight into.

Its about time that someone relises that speed alone does not cause half of the major accidents.

Saw it last night for the 1st time too. I call BS too!

It is a misconception that ABS fitted to passenger cars helps you stop quicker. It is there to allow you to steer while braking as this is a skill out of reach of most drivers. Performance Bikes did a test against an ABS equipped car and even a Valkyrie out-braked the car which had traction control, yaw control, and ABS - IN THE WET!

I think those drivers both deserved a nice big forehead dent for having:

a. A crap reaction time
b. crap reactions and threat id.
c. accepting money from the LTSA to be in one of their BIG FAT LIE adverts.

[White trash]

But in saying that, it is probably the best shot ad I've ever seen.

That guy walking in and out of the cars while they're braking in slow motion is pretty cool.

I like it. Doesn't slow me down though.

[sAsLEX]

It is a misconception that ABS fitted to passenger cars helps you stop quicker. It is there to allow you to steer while braking as this is a skill out of reach of most drivers.

Yeah, got to play with this at the Holden Advanced Driving school, braking hard from 60-80 and turning with and without ABS, and using different braking techniques

[750Y]

yet at the same time they have that alpha romeo ad something about "put your foot down". dam hypocrites. i don't think the establishment are reading off the same page somehow.

[jrandom]

But in saying that, it is probably the best shot ad I've ever seen.

It should be. You paid for it. Glad you're happy.

[Motoracer]

I thought it was a bit silly as well but I reckon their sole purpose was to demonstrate how much difference there is in the impact speed when the intial speeds are different. It goes with their strong message of cuting down on speed alone to begin with. Thats what I thought anyway.

[White trash]

It should be. You paid for it. Glad you're happy.

Fuck it. They're going to spend millions incorrectly to get a message through to people who don't aggree with it anyway. Might as well be entertaining!

[k14]

It just shows one thing, they have too much fucking money. Too many speeding tickets so they have money to waste on these high budget ads, that tell most people shit.

He says that half the speed is wiped off in the last 5m of brakeing, wonder if that is true, or just some more propaganda.

Another thing i thought it showed was that fords suck!!

[spudchucka]

3.Target Fixation, why is this not addressed, this would have to one of the major cause of crashes in this country! People are constantly crashing into the only tree powerpole around for ages all because the only traing they receive through the government and LTSA is for hazard identification, which they duly identify and drive straight into.

Its about time that someone relises that speed alone does not cause half of the major accidents.

Good point about target fixation.

Speed alone may not cause the crashes in the majority of cases but it sure as hell has a lot to do with the damage that results in a crash.

[White trash]

Not propoganda.

Do the test yourself.

Find a big empty carpark, mark a spot. Ride towards the spot at 30kph, hit the brakes on the mark and stop asap.

Measure your distance.

Now perform the same test at 60kph.

You'd think it takes twice as much room. You'll be amazed, I promise.

Now bear that in mind when you're doing 200kph through a blind sweeper on a road you don't travel often

[jrandom]

demonstrate how much difference there is in the impact speed when the intial speeds are different

The point, I think, is more an attempt to demonstrate the implications of the fact that kinetic energy is a function of velocity SQUARED.

If any of you run ballistics software, try inputting the parameters for a 1500kg car moving at, say, 80kph, and compare the go-splat terminal energy to, say, a 750 grain .50BMG projectile at 1 metre from the muzzle. Then you'll understand why getting hit by a car is so hurty.

[edit: if you don't have the software handy and still want to work it out, that's 1500kg at 80kph vs ~50 grams at ~3000kph]

[MD]

WTs right, its an entertaining ad that's got people talking. Any anti-speed ad iritates me but there's no escaping the fact that impact is the killer. Its not the falling off a tall building that kills you - its the sudden stop at the bottom. Thats the point of the add. Nothing to do with ABS, reaction times blah blah - just impact.
Saslex & Jim may have missed the point but you're right, where is the education on target fixation, driving to the environment... and all the other driving habits that are the true cause of most crashes. Speed contributes and certainly determines the seriousness but on it own it doesn't usually 'trigger' the start of a crash.

[k14]

Not propoganda.

Do the test yourself.

Find a big empty carpark, mark a spot. Ride towards the spot at 30kph, hit the brakes on the mark and stop asap.

Measure your distance.

Now perform the same test at 60kph.

You'd think it takes twice as much room. You'll be amazed, I promise.

Now bear that in mind when you're doing 200kph through a blind sweeper on a road you don't travel often

Your exactly right, if you double the speed the energy goes up by a factor of four. So if the conditions are identicle for both runs the distance to stop will be more (but probably not 4 times more, maybe twice depending on brakes and tyres etc).

But what the point that we are trying to make is that the target could have easily been avoided and that it is just a stupid and expensive ad.

They could have spent the money on roads or something constructive.

[Ms Piggy]

I thought it was a bit silly as well but I reckon their sole purpose was to demonstrate how much difference there is in the impact speed when the intial speeds are different. It goes with their strong message of cuting down on speed alone to begin with. Thats what I thought anyway.

Yeah this is wot I thought too.