Associate
- Joined
- 31 May 2008
- Posts
- 1,011
Only 8 Months, damn should still be in prison
Just as an aside, if the insurance case is still going on it might be prudent to remove the close up pic of the tyre and the speed you were doing?
Yes it is? Two objects travelling towards each other at 80 close in at 160. If they are identical objects it is like hitting an immovable object (not generally a wall) at 80.
Its going through the insurance's still.
They drag their feet every time they can so my solicitor has to keep giving them 14 days to reply to every letter she sends. Then on the 14th day in the afternoon she receives a faxed reply
Just as an aside, if the insurance case is still going on it might be prudent to remove the close up pic of the tyre and the speed you were doing?
I was pulled out of my car by a vehicle coming behind me whilst mine started to catch fire.
The guy in the audi? well he got out and had a cigarette, I remember it so clearly.
I never said the crash damage was like one travelling at 100mph in to a wall. I said the speed with which the distance between them is being reduced (the closing speed) is like driving towards a wall at 100 mph. I even went so far as to say it's only useful when thinking about reaction speeds.I think the point is actually that the crash damage is not the same as one car travelling 100mph into a wall, the closing speed might be the same as two cars at 50, but the damage is so much worse.
If you watch the whole clip, the car that hits the wall at 100 is practically pancaked, the two cars at 50 have the same damage and g forces as one car and a wall at 50, and is much more intact.
Isn't that what I said? I.e. two vehicles at 80 with a closing speed of 160 is very different to one large vehicle at 155 and another small vehicle at 5, even though that too has a closing speed of 160.There's a significant difference in the amount of energy involved in a 80mph vs 80 mph and 150mph versus 10 mph crash. Dissipating energy is the name of the game and there's a lot more energy to dissipate with the latter example.
The "combined speed" of a crash doesn't really mean anything. There's a closing speed that's useful when thinking about reaction times - two objects heading towards each other at 80 mph a piece is like one object moving towards a stationary object at 160 mph. However, it doesn't mean much in terms of what happens when they collide - that is all down to the mass, shape and respective speeds of the colliding objects. If I am driving at 155 mph in a Mercedes S-Class and hit a Mini travelling at 5 mph, it's still a combined speed of 160 mph, but the S-Class will more or less drive through the Mini.
theres always one isnt there
Your about 6 months too late. Do you really think the insurance company havent already inspected the car in great detail ?