G-Whiz Accident
Discussion
Jakg said:
"imploded".
Did it really, Daily Wail?
It looks a lot like it split apart to me.
"Imploded" - Collapse or cause to collapse violently inward.
If you re-read the article, this time a bit more carefully, it was an eye witness that used this term. The primary source of that descriptor was somebody called Deidre Allen, and the article simply reproduced what the eye witness had said.Did it really, Daily Wail?
It looks a lot like it split apart to me.
"Imploded" - Collapse or cause to collapse violently inward.
Daily Mail article said:
Deidre Allen, who saw the accident, said: ‘I was transfixed, I was shocked at what I was seeing. I have seen quite a few car accidents and the car, its reaction wasn’t logical. It was crumpling, it was imploding.’
So if anything your derisive remark should have been 'Did it really, eye witness Deidre Allen?'.Maybe she was wrong. We don't know.
turbobloke said:
Fair enough, but the description as used in the media in circumstances like this will often have the test tube washer as a leading academic. Not entirely out of kilter these days as you (almost) need a PhD to get such a job.
Beyond that, the ivory tower dweller still exists, as I'm sure you will know.
of course Beyond that, the ivory tower dweller still exists, as I'm sure you will know.
anyone who does science has mad fluffy white hair and a labcoat. no question of it. here is a video on youtube to prove my pointhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zf7xO6oi-Nw
I think they are getting a bit rarer, increasing emphasis on how many papers you crank out instead of how good your science is is driving this. but i'm sure you knew that too
Use Psychology said:
of course anyone who does science has mad fluffy white hair and a labcoat. no question of it.
That's your silly hyperbole, not mine. So, my turn now anyone who does science has mad fluffy white hair and a labcoat. no question of it. 
What would make a supposed 'leading academic' lose their rationality to such an extent that they buy a car like that and then drive it like that? They've either bought into the junkscience of non-existent manmade global warming, or because they want a me-too fashion statement, or because it's cheap at about £7k, or because it's small and easier to park. If safety criteria are absent or low down on the list then leading academics need a wake up call or they'll be risking extinction and copycats won't have the next must-have designer gadget to spunk the mortgage payment on.
turbobloke said:
Use Psychology said:
of course anyone who does science has mad fluffy white hair and a labcoat. no question of it.
That's your silly hyperbole, not mine. So, my turn now anyone who does science has mad fluffy white hair and a labcoat. no question of it. What would make a supposed 'leading academic' lose their rationality to such an extent that they buy a car like that and then drive it like that? They've either bought into the junkscience of non-existent manmade global warming, or because they want a me-too fashion statement, or because it's cheap at about £7k, or because it's small and easier to park. If safety criteria are absent or low down on the list then leading academics need a wake up call or they'll be risking extinction and copycats won't have the next must-have designer gadget to spunk the mortgage payment on.
roachcoach said:
turbobloke said:
Use Psychology said:
of course anyone who does science has mad fluffy white hair and a labcoat. no question of it.
That's your silly hyperbole, not mine. So, my turn now anyone who does science has mad fluffy white hair and a labcoat. no question of it. What would make a supposed 'leading academic' lose their rationality to such an extent that they buy a car like that and then drive it like that? They've either bought into the junkscience of non-existent manmade global warming, or because they want a me-too fashion statement, or because it's cheap at about £7k, or because it's small and easier to park. If safety criteria are absent or low down on the list then leading academics need a wake up call or they'll be risking extinction and copycats won't have the next must-have designer gadget to spunk the mortgage payment on.
Check out the earlier posts! Or, don't, just take it from me that we're in agreement on this, any implicit questions in the above post were purely rhetorical.
Use Psychology may want to take issue with you, or maybe not.
Either way it's too late for this seemingly non-safety conscious lady, a life lost quite possibly on the altar of the false green god. Driving without a safety belt and on the phone in a large German saloon might have had a different outcome, as long as it wasn't in a tunnel in France.
JaybirdUK said:
There's a lot of hate for the G-whizz but I'd guess it's no better in a crash than a Caterham 7
I put my Caterham face first into a wall at somewhere between 50-60mph the other day (in a race on a race track). The only difference between it and a road car is the roll cage, plus my helmet and HANS. The chassis bent and broke, front suspension is history, various other important parts need replacing, but I climbed straight out and walked away. I suspect that wouldn't be the story in a GWhiz
dreamer75 said:
JaybirdUK said:
There's a lot of hate for the G-whizz but I'd guess it's no better in a crash than a Caterham 7
I put my Caterham face first into a wall at somewhere between 50-60mph the other day (in a race on a race track). The only difference between it and a road car is the roll cage, plus my helmet and HANS. The chassis bent and broke, front suspension is history, various other important parts need replacing, but I climbed straight out and walked away. I suspect that wouldn't be the story in a GWhiz
98elise said:
The G-Whiz is not a car, its a Quad.
While I would never buy one I'd rather crash in a G-Whiz than on a traditional style Quad, or Bike for that matter.
True, but I can't imagine she bought a G-Whiz instead of an actual quad though. Surely for most it's a choice of small 'normal' car or a G-Whiz? Of course, she made the wrong decision...While I would never buy one I'd rather crash in a G-Whiz than on a traditional style Quad, or Bike for that matter.
Brigand said:
It's all about the impact speed though.
If both cars are travelling at 12.5mph, then you're fine, otherwise it's bye-bye world and watch your carbon footprint rapidly expand as the emergency service vehicles come to brush up the mechano pieces...
Wonky physics there. At least for 2 similar cars a 30mph head on collision (both doing 30) is the same as one car hitting a wall at 30. All about reaction forces. If both cars are travelling at 12.5mph, then you're fine, otherwise it's bye-bye world and watch your carbon footprint rapidly expand as the emergency service vehicles come to brush up the mechano pieces...
Thing is the wizz is so much lighter than anything else. I think if you hit a wall at 25 you be fine, but even even if a fiesta crashes into you at 20 whilst you are stationary you'd get steamrollered
It's a hateful nasty piece of s
t that G-wiz What a strangely written article:
Is it sponsored by mobile manufacturers? Or does putting in brand names get the online article hits?
Dail Wail said:
Dr Nadal said he took his iPhone from his ear as the line went dead. He then heard the smash and ran to the scene when he could not contact his wife on her BlackBerry.
What's wrong with writing "Dr Nadal said he took his 'phone from his ear as the line went dead. He then heard the smash and ran to the scene when he could not contact his wife on her mobile." ?Is it sponsored by mobile manufacturers? Or does putting in brand names get the online article hits?
I would happily see the G-Whiz banned from UK roads, not because of its faux-hippy credentials but because of it's appalling safety. I appreciate what others have said re: motorbikes and scooters but I really don't think the two are comparable. The personal vulnerability of a being on a bike is far more apparant to the user, I've never been in a G-Whiz (thank god!) but I would imagine for the majority of drivers/passengers they think of it as being much more like a car than a bike in terms of vulnerability and surely this will lead to people not correctly assessing the risks they are taking.
That the woman in the article died is sad - but the reality is that she died after taking massive risks with her personal safety which she either didn't recognise or she deliberately chose to ignore and that makes it hard to think anything other than that she was a fool, despite her obvious academic credentials.
That the woman in the article died is sad - but the reality is that she died after taking massive risks with her personal safety which she either didn't recognise or she deliberately chose to ignore and that makes it hard to think anything other than that she was a fool, despite her obvious academic credentials.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff