bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

seriously? it's destroyed.

SW17LS

This is one big reason why I like leasing cars.

By the look of it this was an older Sienna, 90s Sienna. You have to ask yourself, if that was a modern van that was designed for small offset crash protection, would it have made a difference? Just maybe?

Obviously everybody has different financial situations and abilities, but theres something to be said about your family always being in a vehicle with the latest safety features.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

heavier and higher vehicle, barring rollover, usually wins in a collision. Thats why in school bus vs car accidents, nearly all the deaths are on the car side over 90%

doesn't matter when crash testing assumes passengers are buckled up. If this van rolled, its even worse when youre not buckled up.

Stormwind

he did it wrong, he should have went Law Abiding Citizen on that drunk, would have been more satisfying.

Corey140

Not really. They cut the roof to get them but most of the van is fine.

Even in a modern car with airbags, they would still most likely have been killed due to the deceleration and being thrown around in the van. It doesn't seem like any of the 4 victims were ejected from the van either. Now, you may be correct, the father may have survived with major injuries due to the offset crash protection but I don't see the girls surviving this at all.

RNM GS3

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

virtue-signalling much? but i hear ya.

good guess, '98 sienna.

doubtful as the girls were tragically not wearing seat belts - something i suspect will haunt the mother forever.

yes and not only that, the older vehicle will likely handle more poorly, potentially have worn tires, sloppier steering, and on and on.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

agree about the roof but 100% disagree that "most of the van is fine" it was clearly and utterly totaled. but regardless, there's a reason you WANT the vehicle to compress and be destroyed to take the forces so they're not transferred to the occupants. that's how modern safety works. people still have this idea that 'old' cars were safer... maybe the CAR didn't sustain much damage because it was a giant iron battering ram, but the occupants sure did.

SW17LS

Its not just about airbags, its about the structure of the car, its ability to dissipate crash forces, etc. It may totally be that sometimes an accident is so severe there is no surviving it, but you just never know.

Was not at all my intention.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

and none of that matters if you arent seat belted crashing into a truck at 70-80 mph. The entire safety of the car is built around everyone being properly restrained. All 4 daughters were not seatbelted.

mmarshall

We've had a lot of talk recently in Car Chat about 85th-percenitile speeds, traffic-flow, what is a safe speed, what isn't, and if one should follow posted limits or not. Severe accidents like this, however, prove one point I made about the law of physics......all else equal, the faster one goes, the more severe a potential impact will be, and the more likely one will be injured or killed.

SW17LS

Oh please. This has nothing to do with speed limits, the guy crossed the median and hit them head on going the wrong way.

mmarshall

Doesn't change the fact that the faster one goes, the more potential energy is involved in an impact. That applies no matter what direction one is traveling. I agree, however, that the issue is not the posted limit, but how fast one is actually going....that is will determine the impact.

I noted your earlier comment about being glad you always have the newest, leased vehicles. I agree from a point of view of the actual safety equipment in the vehicle.....but the seat belt/harness is still considered the primary restraining device, with air bags secondary. For whatever reason, the girls weren't buckled up (maybe we'll never know why, if the poor mother succumbs to her injuries, though she is apparently still alive).

plex

iTrader: (11)

Exactly even if they were both going 55mph it still would be bad since it was a head on from opposite direction just based on the laws of physics. His vehicle weighed significantly more too so even at 55mph the force would be worse from his side.

mmarshall

True.....in general, all else equal, more weight means more impact. As far as 55 goes, unless I just missed it in the article, we don't know what the posted limit is on that stretch of road.