News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by titaniumtown on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:11PM (#38448914)
The sharp angles, high ride height, "nearly impenetrable exoskeleton", and "Ultra-Hard 30X Cold-Rolled stainless steel structural skin".

Cars are meant to crumple and protect those inside and outside the vehicle, not plow through them.

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by fiftyfifty on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @03:07PM (#38450544)
The front of the Cybertruck is actually fairly rounded and has a fairly normal bumper (and I would assume crumple zone) just like any other Tesla. I don't think the front of the Cybertruck is any worse than any other truck or SUV as far as a collisions go. The ride height is a non-issue, the Cybertruck has air suspension, so while it can have as much as 14" of clearance for off-road for day to day driving it is much lower than that, which is, I assume, how Tesla is going to eke out decent range numbers with it. That leaves the back of the Cybertruck, which is indeed full of sharp angles, but mostly up high. It does have a rear bumper that looks functional but it is hard not to think that the sharp angles on the back wouldn't do some serious damage if rear-ended or someone where to back into a pedestrian. It's a case where hopefully the NHTSA did their due diligence.
Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by chrisco255 on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:39PM (#38449443)
Teslas are known for their very high crash safety ratings. I highly doubt the Cybertruck will be much different.

Some cars are designed to crumple when it makes sense for crash safety. Crumple zones primarily affect the passengers inside the vehicle, it doesn't change the amount of energy delivered to the point of impact, they simply extend the amount of time it takes to dissipate the energy.

But higher strength steel is often better for this purpose, and reduces the length that a crumple zone needs to be, as is common for passenger vans.

SUVs, by the way, (which the Cybertruck more closely resembles than a traditional truck), are safer in accidents than passenger cars, by nearly a factor of 8 [1][2].

[1] https://www.carlsonattorneys.com/news-and-update/10-dangerou... [2] https://www.businessinsider.com/most-dangerous-vehicles-smal...

[1] https://www.dlawgroup.com/top-safest-most-dangerous-cars-202...

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by footy on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:46PM (#38449536)
they're talking about safety for people outside the vehicle

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/14/business/boxy-trucks-suvs-ped...

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by chrisco255 on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:57PM (#38449701)
The net death rates of people killed by small cars is still higher overall than SUVs and light trucks.

That being said, even the article mentions the primary factor in pedestrian deaths is the shape of the hood and the height of the hood:

"Even when the hood isn’t that high, a boxy front-end — with a grille that’s nearly vertical and a hood that goes almost straight out from the windshield — is more likely to cause death or serious injury to a pedestrian. In general, vehicles with box-shaped front ends, even when they’re only medium height, are roughly 26% more likely to kill a pedestrian, according to the IIHS."

Seems like it's at least partly a visibility issue (I'm not convinced that height matters as much as the angle a driver sits at from within the truck to be able to see what's in front of it), also the odds of getting slammed under the vehicle rather than rolled over the top of it.

That being said, none of these apply to the Cybertruck, which has an almost entirely sloped frontend with a low hood height and massive windshields for visibility paired with probably the most advanced pedestrian detection systems on the market.

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by Someone on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @03:36PM (#38450933)
> Seems like it's at least partly a visibility issue

I don’t see how that can follow from that article, as it says

“Researchers at the institute looked at records of almost 18,000 incidents in which vehicles struck pedestrians”

That, to me, indicates they looked at P(death|being hit), and ignored P(being hit)

The original article (https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/ref/2294) and its blog post (https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/vehicles-with-higher-more-v...), to me, say the same thing.

That also describe the reasonably well-known reason for the increased risk, once hit: for pedestrians, it’s better to end up on the bonnet than under the car, or, as you phrase it ”the odds of getting slammed under the vehicle rather than rolled over the top of it”

Of course, decreasing P(being hit) also helps, but doing both is the best option.

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by chrisco255 on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @04:27PM (#38451540)
>> Seems like it's at least partly a visibility issue > I don’t see how that can follow from that article, as it says

Very simply, if you don't see a pedestrian approaching from the side due to the limited visibility of the vehicle, then as a driver you have less time to react and slow down. The slower a vehicle is going at the point of collision, the more likely a pedestrian is to survive.

If a vehicle is going 45mph and hits a pedestrian, it doesn't much matter the aerodynamics of the vehicle or even the weight or size of the vehicle, that is an incredible force of impact.

So of course visibility is a factor in deaths and that's why newer SUVs and trucks with collision avoidance systems reduce deaths by 27%.

From [1], "SUVs, pickups, vans and minivans are substantially more likely than cars to hit pedestrians when making turns, suggesting that these larger vehicles may not afford drivers as clear a view of people crossing the road, a new study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety shows". Notably, these types of collisions would not result in a roll over the top of the vehicle in any case as the pedestrians are being struck by the corner of the vehicle at an angle.

"Earlier studies have shown that A-pillars — the struts connecting the roof to the vehicle’s body on either side of the windshield — can create blind spots that can make it difficult for drivers to see pedestrians and that these blind spots grow larger as A-pillars become wider."

[1] https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/suvs-other-large-vehicles-o...

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by bryanlarsen on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:45PM (#38449533)
The sharp angles should make the Cybertruck significantly more safe to pedestrians than an F-150.

When a pedestrian gets hit by a car, it takes out their legs and they bounce on the hood. When a pedestrian gets hit by a large truck, they take the full impact instantaneously due to the large blunt front, and then fall on the ground and get run over. The car collision has much higher survival rates.

The Cybertruck with it's lack of broad flat front, should behave more like a car in a pedestrian collision.

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by theultdev on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:19PM (#38449081)
do you have a safety test reference where cybertruck falls short or is this speculation?
Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by titaniumtown on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:22PM (#38449128)
It's common sense. Hardened stainless steel and pedestrians don't mix. The car has to be proven to be safe, not the other way around. There hasn't been any tests yet.
Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by chrisco255 on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:46PM (#38449548)
It's not common sense. Virtually all car and truck frames are made of steel. But honestly, the metal doesn't matter. Whether a pedestrian is hit by 3000 pounds of aluminum at 45 miles per hour or 3000 pounds of steel at 45 miles per hour, there is going to be a high chance of fatality.

"An IIHS study found that vehicles equipped with automatic braking that detects pedestrians had a 27 percent lower rate of pedestrian crashes than vehicles without such technology."

Teslas typically have the most advanced crash avoidance systems on the market. Virtually all Teslas have 5 star safety ratings in crashes, both in Europe and U.S. [1]

[1] https://www.tesla.com/blog/model-s-receives-5-star-euro-ncap...

Re:Tesla Cybertruck payload capacity 29% less than promised by Retric on Tuesday November 28, 2023 @01:25PM (#38449199)
Hardened stainless steel tell you almost nothing without knowing the thickness and the geometry.

At this point it’s slightly more than marketing puffery.