How to avoid rearend accident?

[irish2]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Best to be able to roll around freely in an impact, reduces the effects of it a fair bit.

Unless you're first in line and the impact pushes you into a busy intersection.

A few posts have said something similar. You do not want to be free wheeling when rear ended if there are cars infront of you. You will be paying an insurance excess if you are.

I just dont stop for red lights so there is no chance of a rear ender.

[Mitch89]

Originally Posted by irish2

A few posts have said something similar. You do not want to be free wheeling when rear ended if there are cars infront of you. You will be paying an insurance excess if you are.

I wouldn't think so, the car that hit you caused you to move forward, not sure how you can be liable for that.

[TheInterceptor]

Originally Posted by dylancox

Why hasn't anybody mentioned BIG DIRTY TOWBAR

Actually i was going to mention rear steel barwork (which you can get on a 4wd but not on your everyday city car ) but...


Yeah it happens, thats why we have insurance. Cant add anything more than what has been added already, except for my story below.

I was on good ol' Parramatta rd, traffic is crawling along towards some traffic lights.. since we were crawling-stopping-crawling-stopping constantly, behind me, the stereotypical lady in her X5 Beemer who's excuse was she was playing with her gps (why those arent banned like mobile phones i dont know why, theyre worse than talking on a mobile) and didnt pay attention, thus kept on driving right into the back of the subaru which was stationary.
Fewl lady, fewl..cant do jack all bout them...
Least the impact wasnt enough to damage bugger all, steel subie and a plastic beemer win.

Ok so, you could have been in a much worse situation, hope it gets sorted ok.

[uranium_death]

In this case, sounds like all you could do was not be there...

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

. Keep the foot off the brake so the impact is slightly lessened,..

Very poor advice in my opinion. Im more interested in minimising personal injury in such instances, money can fix broken cars but maybe not broken necks and backs.

If you keep your foot of the brake, the car can move forwards more easily in the impact, that means you in the car are accelerated forwards at a higher rate, increasing your risk of injury.

While keeping your foot on the brake on a small car hit behind by a truck will make ba difference if hit by a truck, it will make a difference if you are in a similar mass vehicle.

The more your vehicle resists moving, four wheels braked
helps couple you to the earth, the less injuries you will recieve. The trade off is the car will receive more damage, and the person that runs into you will actually experience more deacceleration/injury, sounds a bit selfish, but hey they caused it, Im not that community spirited!

This is one just many of the reasons why not having the car braked while waiting at intersections = fail in any driving test,

[Zero_PSI]

Can't imagine why I don't see twice the rear-enders on the road. The ammount of people I see on busy roads either texting, doing their make-up or some other un-neccesary act whilst being completely oblivious to the fact that they're driving.

The coolest part is, that they have the confidence to sit 2 feet off the rear bumper of the 80,000 dollar mercedes infront of them.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Zero_PSI

The coolest part is, that they have the confidence to sit 2 feet off the rear bumper of the 80,000 dollar mercedes infront of them.

That would be possibly due to the high insurance premiums we are all asked to pay, take away insurance and see how behaviour changes.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Very poor advice in my opinion. Im more interested in minimising personal injury in such instances, money can fix broken cars but maybe not broken necks and backs.

If you keep your foot of the brake, the car can move forwards more easily in the impact, that means you in the car are accelerated forwards at a higher rate, increasing your risk of injury.

While keeping your foot on the brake on a small car hit behind by a truck will make ba difference if hit by a truck, it will make a difference if you are in a similar mass vehicle.

The more your vehicle resists moving, four wheels braked
helps couple you to the earth, the less injuries you will recieve. The trade off is the car will receive more damage, and the person that runs into you will actually experience more deacceleration/injury, sounds a bit selfish, but hey they caused it, Im not that community spirited!

This is one just many of the reasons why not having the car braked while waiting at intersections = fail in any driving test,

Very true.

Not to mention that if you do not have your foot on the brake, if you are then forced into the other car in front of you, you are then responsible for the damage to that car.

[craigrobinson]

Mate, i think most people here have had the right idea. There really isnt much you can do when you are punted from behind. I had an unfortunate incident in my old XR8, two young guys were having a drag race behind me and one of them wasnt going to stop in time so i hit the accelarator and promptly smashed into the car in front because it had stopped.... yep you guess it... i had given the D***head behind me enough room to stop about 10cm from my rear end... so i ended up with the fine..... even took it to court and the judge said that i should be more worried about what is happening in front of me rather than behind...... go figure....!

[my_gxl]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

im the same, especially after my ghia got rear ended a month ago, and now im having to use my bike until its fixed. i always stop in a position where i can shoot either between the cars or across the centre line (on coming traffic withstanding of course)

theres one intersection on the way home where its quite narrow, and my only exit would be to dump the bike and try and use the concrete barrier as a safety zone. dodgy

I had to use my bike escape plan once. Had pulled up but saw a car coming too quick down a hill. I moved in between the ute in front, and the median strip. The car only just pulled up where I was-not far behind the ute.

Very happy with my bike skills.

To the OP, +1 for you did what you could. Can't help idiots.

[LTDHO]

No amount of wisdom will get you out of this situation, other than making the other motorisr wiser!

Lack of concentration causes a lot of accidents. There is no way of accuratelu measuring the amount (or lack there of) of concentration someone has.

In this day and age, with cars being incredibly easy to drive and drivers being taught only to watch their speed, not much will change in preventing these accidents from occuring.

Hope you go through a smooth claim process.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Very true.

Not to mention that if you do not have your foot on the brake, if you are then forced into the other car in front of you, you are then responsible for the damage to that car.

While I agree with letting off the brake being a bad idea, I believe as long as you had come to a complete stop when someone hit you from behind, you're not responsible for the damage to the car in front of you if you are pushed into it, brake applied or not.

[XR6_661]

Don't hold your farts in...That's how I avoid them

[In Focus]

Originally Posted by Rodp

While I agree with letting off the brake being a bad idea, I believe as long as you had come to a complete stop when someone hit you from behind, you're not responsible for the damage to the car in front of you if you are pushed into it, brake applied or not.

This is true. I was once hit from behind by a brand new Roller (yes, it's true, but a mechanic was driving it, so I wasn't paid a $100k by the owner as "compensation"). My old XB* was shunted forward onto the car in front of me, which hit the one in front of that, which hit the one in front of that...

Bottom line, is the owner of the Roller was up for every car in the domino chain. Hopefully, that owner then sued the mechanic for the stress etc, not to mention the loss of his no claim bonus.

* XB got away with a few minor marks due to real metal bumpers and a towbar. The towbar punched through the Roller's grille, radiator etc, causing $14k damage (this was back in '92, so it was a fair bit).

[deesun]

Originally Posted by XR6_661

Don't hold your farts in...That's how I avoid them

I can't believe it took 43 posts for this to be said.

[Mitch89]

Originally Posted by LTDHO

not much will change in preventing these accidents from occuring.

Not quite true, car technology is trying to keep up with our stupidity to help mitigate and prevent accidents such as these.

The new Volvo's have an optional safety system that will stop the car from hitting the one in front if you don't hit the brakes. Then there are the radar cruise controls that maintain distance from the car in front and accelerate/brake as necessary.

Obviously it would be better if everyone paid 100% attention, but that's not going to happen, no matter how much driver training is provided, and gruesome advertising aired. As these technologies filter down it will only make things safer.

Originally Posted by In Focus

Bottom line, is the owner of the Roller was up for every car in the domino chain. Hopefully, that owner then sued the mechanic for the stress etc, not to mention the loss of his no claim bonus.

Exactly, the car at the back of the pack caused the initial crash, and is responsible for any of the events following that. If you hit a light pole and it fell on someones house, would the council be liable for the damage to the house? It think not.

[2011G6E]

In a "rear end chain collision" where someone hits the last car and pushes him into the next one and so-on, the guy at the start of the chain (who caused the initial impact at the back of the lineup) is the one who the insurance companies of the other cars will be chasing.

Keeping the foot off the brake...if you are just sitting there, keep your foot on the brake. However, in your situation, if you see someone obviously not going to stop, then keep your foot off the brake!
When the impact occurs, your car will roll forward, lessening impact energies. If your car is all locked up with brakes on, then all the impact energy is transferred to your car.
Hold two toy cars (go on...who hasn't got some Hot Wheels cars around... ), hold one firmly and run the other into the back end. All that energy from the rear car has been transferred to the front car. Now let the front car sit there on the table, and run into it again from the rear at the same speed. You can feel the impact is far less through your hand. The energies are dissapated as your car rolls forward.
This is exactly how it was shown to us as an example in a defensive driving course. It really is amazing.

[new2ford]

My sister came across a real Mr Niceguy years ago, in front of her at the traffic lights. The dopehead put his car in reverse when the lights went green and accelerated full bore back into my sister's car. He was all apologetic offering to fix everything up etc. The next thing she heard from the insurance company was that the driver claimed she ran forward and rear-ended him so she didn't get a cent. I love the way society is full of scumbags!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

In a "rear end chain collision" where someone hits the last car and pushes him into the next one and so-on, the guy at the start of the chain (who caused the initial impact at the back of the lineup) is the one who the insurance companies of the other cars will be chasing.

Keeping the foot off the brake...if you are just sitting there, keep your foot on the brake. However, in your situation, if you see someone obviously not going to stop, then keep your foot off the brake!
When the impact occurs, your car will roll forward, lessening impact energies. If your car is all locked up with brakes on, then all the impact energy is transferred to your car.
Hold two toy cars (go on...who hasn't got some Hot Wheels cars around... ), hold one firmly and run the other into the back end. All that energy from the rear car has been transferred to the front car. Now let the front car sit there on the table, and run into it again from the rear at the same speed. You can feel the impact is far less through your hand. The energies are dissapated as your car rolls forward.
This is exactly how it was shown to us as an example in a defensive driving course. It really is amazing.

I am under the understanding that liability for the car in front changes when there is a lack of evidence that you had your brakes on at the time. I may be wrong but you do have an obligation to have your brakes applied.

As for the hot wheels scenario, now do the same test with no retention of the front car, same speed for the rear car and a toy truck of x20 the mass and x4 times the speed traveling through the simulated intersection. In this case it is better to take the hit in the rear from a car of equal mass and lower speed than get pushed forward and take a side impact of a vehicle of huge mass and much greater speed.

At normal suburban speeds, a rear impact is the safest impact you can have, in fact I have never been to a fatal or even a serious injury crash from the car hit in the rear. I personally would take the hit in the rear rather than risk getting pushed into the intersection and taking a side hit.

[Mitch89]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I am under the understanding that liability for the car in front changes when there is a lack of evidence that you had your brakes on at the time. I may be wrong but you do have an obligation to have your brakes applied.

That doesn't work, what if you had released your brakes to start moving and were hit from behind, pushing you into the car in front?

The driver who hit you was responsible for your car moving into the one in front. If they didn't hit you, you would not have hit the car in front.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by MY270

That doesn't work, what if you had released your brakes to start moving and were hit from behind, pushing you into the car in front?

The driver who hit you was responsible for your car moving into the one in front. If they didn't hit you, you would not have hit the car in front.

Maybe not, assessment of your collision will show that you were moving and hit the car in front, traveling too close.

I will ask the other half, she used to work in insurance but I am pretty sure in a multi car prang, nose to tail each car is responsible for the car in front.

Besides, releasing the pressure on the brakes and hitting the car in front is full of dangers in terms of crash dynamics and injury patterns but I do not have time to explain at the moment (have to go to work), I will post up later if I get a chance.

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Not to mention that if you do not have your foot on the brake, if you are then forced into the other car in front of you, you are then responsible for the damage to that car.

No you're not.

[FgNewbie]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

... Hold two toy cars (go on...who hasn't got some Hot Wheels cars around... ), hold one firmly and run the other into the back end. All that energy from the rear car has been transferred to the front car. Now let the front car sit there on the table, and run into it again from the rear at the same speed. You can feel the impact is far less through your hand. The energies are dissapated as your car rolls forward.
This is exactly how it was shown to us as an example in a defensive driving course. It really is amazing.

I must be doing something wrong, it turns into a projectile when I try.

Damo refers to free rolling, others suggest less or no brakes. Applying these principles, if someone smashes your rear at 30 kph, what distance is required between you and the car in front to avoid smashing their rear?

I remember the guys talking on the company two-way at an accident in the 80s where they had to help lift a car off a pedestrian. Gory. The driver claimed when they were hit their foot slipped off the brake pedal onto the accelerator (automatic).

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by MY270

NThe new Volvo's have an optional safety system that will stop the car from hitting the one in front if you don't hit the brakes. Then there are the radar cruise controls that maintain distance from the car in front and accelerate/brake as necessary.

Indeed. Works brilliantly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNi17YLnZpg

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

I will ask the other half, she used to work in insurance but I am pretty sure in a multi car prang, nose to tail each car is responsible for the car in front.

Having been in that situation, the insurance company only wanted to know if I had come to a complete stop. I was in the middle of the car sandwich and was deemed not at fault.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

When the impact occurs, your car will roll forward, lessening impact energies. If your car is all locked up with brakes on, then all the impact energy is transferred to your car.
Hold two toy cars (go on...who hasn't got some Hot Wheels cars around... ), hold one firmly and run the other into the back end. All that energy from the rear car has been transferred to the front car. Now let the front car sit there on the table, and run into it again from the rear at the same speed. You can feel the impact is far less through your hand. The energies are dissapated as your car rolls forward.
This is exactly how it was shown to us as an example in a defensive driving course. It really is amazing.

To me they're not really observing the laws of physics.

Hotwheels cars don't count, they don't have the ability to absorb an impact. Will your body experience more G's if you had brakes applied, the car absorbs more of the impact and you move at a slower speed forward and a lesser distance or will it experience more G's if it moves farther forward at an increased speed?

What if you were pole position at a set of lights, you're more likely to be pushed into the intersection and possibly into the path of a vehicle moving through it.

Don't really care what a defensive driving course would tell me, I don't see how it's safer for your body to withstand higher G's as well as your car possibly being pushed into the path of another car travelling through an intersection.

[Mitch89]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Indeed. Works brilliantly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNi17YLnZpg

I never said it would solve the problem, but help reduce the number of incidences.

I saw first hand the system in action at the local S60 launch and tried it myself, it works well most of the time, but not 100%. That's why they were using inflatable cars and people instead of a real ones. They obviously learned from the mistake you linked to

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Keeping the foot off the brake...if you are just sitting there, keep your foot on the brake. However, in your situation, if you see someone obviously not going to stop, then keep your foot off the brake!

NO, I Have taken the trouble to correct you here:http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...5&postcount=35 and previously, http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...3&postcount=42 where you have presented some very dangerous and dodgy physics.

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

When the impact occurs, your car will roll forward, lessening impact energies. If your car is all locked up with brakes on, then all the impact energy is transferred to your car.

If the car is allowed to accelerate forwards the energy is still transferred to the car, it changes into kinetic energy.

If the car is prevented from moving, more of that energy is used to deform the panels and another portion of it is used in changing the speed of the body the car is partially anchored to, in this case the earth.

Injuries dont result from the car getting crushed, they result from sudden changes of speed of the car, or blunt trauma injuries.

Perhaps think of what would happen if the car that was hit was parked in front of a brick wall and couldnt move, it would be sandwiched from both ends, provided the passenger cell stayed in tact, the occupants wouldnt suffer any speed change at all and would walk away unscathed, putting the brakes on isnt as effective as having a brick wall in front of the car, but it helps.

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Hold two toy cars (go on...who hasn't got some Hot Wheels cars around... ), hold one firmly and run the other into the back end. All that energy from the rear car has been transferred to the front car. Now let the front car sit there on the table, and run into it again from the rear at the same speed. You can feel the impact is far less through your hand. The energies are dissapated as your car rolls forward.
This is exactly how it was shown to us as an example in a defensive driving course. It really is amazing.

One of the problems with defensive driving courses(if that's what they really claimed), understanding of simple physics isnt a prerequisite for being an instructor......simply the industry is unregulated and there are no standards/requirements/qualifications.

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by davway

What a stupid post - honestly.
Regardless of if the cars in front have moved or not, you should be in first and ready to by the time the light turns green - which it had already.
The only is you.

You can't move off, when you've got another car in front, regardless how quickly the lights change. EDIT......You can if you want to rear end them for being a slow ***.

I was always taught, make sure the traffic has stopped at the lights, before moving off. Saves getting slammed into by some fewl, that wants to run a red light.

So what the OP has mentioned, they had no way to avoid the rear ender.

[FgNewbie]

Ms Jam what design was the median strip?