New Seatbelt Safety Advert

neodude

neodude

neodude

Soldato
Joined
18 Nov 2007
Posts
3,359
Location
West Lothian
Is it just me, or does this advert make no sense whatsoever?

The advert goes along the lines of a guy not wearing a seatbelt. The pleasant women explains that it was not the man hitting the windscreen that killed him but the fact that his internal organs were still moving forward and they were crushed by his ribcage.

My point is, how would wearing a seatbelt stop this from happening??? Do seatbelts somehow overcome Newtons laws of motion???

:confused:
 
Im not a physist but I imagine it has something to do with the speed you build up when leaving your seat to hitting the windscreen means that your organs will move with more momentum. If you're wearing a seatbelt that movement does occur.

I dont know though.
 
We've had this conversation. Momentum. The seatbelt stops the amount of forward thrust generating resulting in less impact on internals.
 
It's all about momentum and inertia. The seat belt stops him moving forward (and up) in the first place. Without it he is moving and stops very suddenly and his internal organs don't.

Back to school for you Mr OP. :p
 
i actually knew someone who was in a crash with his mate (both in their 30s at the time) he wasn't wearing a seatbelt and his mate was, they hit a post or something and he was thrown from the car, the car blew up and killed his mate, from that day he refuses to wear a seatbelt on the basis that it killed his mate and saved his life
(i wear my belt btw, haven't adopted that approach)
 
CaseyChaos said:
i actually knew someone who was in a crash with his mate (both in their 30s at the time) he wasn't wearing a seatbelt and his mate was, they hit a post or something and he was thrown from the car, the car blew up and killed his mate, from that day he refuses to wear a seatbelt on the basis that it killed his mate and saved his life
(i wear my belt btw, haven't adopted that approach)
Click to expand...

It's like the classic smoker response, "I know someone who's 80 and smoked 20 a day all their life and they're fine."
 
If you watch the advert then you'll see that both cars hit fully head on. Now are you telling me that the Muppet behind the wheel didn't see another car, which happens to be an exact double of his own, coming directly towards him on what looks like a quiet residential street?

 
CaseyChaos said:
i actually knew someone who was in a crash with his mate (both in their 30s at the time) he wasn't wearing a seatbelt and his mate was, they hit a post or something and he was thrown from the car, the car blew up and killed his mate, from that day he refuses to wear a seatbelt on the basis that it killed his mate and saved his life
(i wear my belt btw, haven't adopted that approach)
Click to expand...

I'll take the odds if that not happening to me and wear a seat belt in the same way I still risk using vending machines and putting my trousers on it a morning.
 
Johnny Girth said:
It's like the classic smoker response, "I know someone who's 80 and smoked 20 a day all their life and they're fine."
Click to expand...

yeah that's my point of view on the whole thing, I've told him that fair enough it worked that once, but more often that not it would be the other way around and he would be killed. I guess you have to have been there, if he's actually watched his mate die, that could have a big effect on his mind
 
neodude said:
My point is, how would wearing a seatbelt stop this from happening??? Do seatbelts somehow overcome Newtons laws of motion???
Click to expand...

The setbelt reduces inertia. If the mass in question has more room to move then the product of its velocity and mass will be momentum. The internal organs will have more momentum and would impact more so than not wearing a seatbelt.
 
CaseyChaos said:
i actually knew someone who was in a crash with his mate (both in their 30s at the time) he wasn't wearing a seatbelt and his mate was, they hit a post or something and he was thrown from the car, the car blew up and killed his mate, from that day he refuses to wear a seatbelt on the basis that it killed his mate and saved his life
(i wear my belt btw, haven't adopted that approach)
Click to expand...
That happened to my dad. The pickup slid sideways and the telephone pole sliced through the cab. Dad and his friend were thrown from the truck which saved their lives.

Even so, the chances of that happening are WAY less than of it not happening, so seatbelt is still the wiser choice.
 
iirc it is the rate of acceleration that kills you in a seatbelt (ignoring smashing into a windscreen if you don;t have one on of course).

Im sure I heard off TV somewhere at acceleration at +/- 200m/s^2 just makes all your internal organs fail. However I have no proof to back this up at all.
 
You are meaning metres per second yes? lol That's what I read, now you're squaring it by 2? I want this car. :p
 
The seatbelt slows you down less quickly than hitting a windscreen.

This manifests itself as a reduction in rate of change of momentum, and a smaller force acting on your internal organs.

LeJosh - acceleration is measured in metres per second per second : ms^(-2).
 
ohh ms^ negative 2? Right he didn't have that at first but it has changed. Apologies. :) I just read it differently. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom