QUOTE(Subang Nuclear Reactor @ May 16 2017, 03:01 AM)
'aren't necessarily the norm', it meant it is not normal
'it isnt rare' because it is a problem due to be fixed by these car makers in a high speed crash
and, i myself is an engineer holding M.Eng from world top 100 university, and currently a PhD candidate, i believe in datas. Until proton's engineer show us the simulation or mathematical model, it's just syiok sendiri self claimed since the engine didnt hit anyone, they can get away with it
Also, it doesn't take an engineer to figure out that a flying 200kg metal block is dangerous.
It should be detached, yes, but guided at an angle, below the car. It can only be easily achieved when your engine is built with a decline towards the undercarriage as shown
below is subaru's design
this is mercedes's design
another approach to detached engine is like volvo, build the engine as part of shock absorbent and just let it crumble between the firewalls
Proton is the first car maker that is proud of their running wild flying engine, when it hit someone, the CEO is going to be in deep shit
Oh my goodness. Your basic comprehension is so bad. It makes my head spinning.
if im not mistaken so far only 1 death for preve which is a police officer speeding without wearing seatbelt
QUOTE(darosha @ May 16 2017, 09:49 AM)
why still no polis death in preve in the list? i kind of remember there's a case preve police car speeding get accident and one policeman death because not wearing seatbelt and ejected out from the car. that's not counted?
No such case as policeman ejected out of the car. There are currently a few Preve's accidents that resulted in death. I will update the STAT COUNTER on the first page once I'm done posting all accidents here. I'm barely scratch the surface.
apasal me, I small ciku je who sometimes share whatever little I know.
Your discussion with Subang Nuclear Reactor is interesting, never really read about concerns of flying drivetrain components in a collision..... please don't let me interrupt
Oh and it's boy96 you're looking for, he is sifu level
Oh by all means, please interrupt. Your insights are much appreciated.
Well, this guy is trying to take things out of context a bit, keep ignoring main points "roll-over" and "spinning" and keep insisting on the engine must stick like a glue in all circumstances.
QUOTE(Subang Nuclear Reactor @ May 16 2017, 03:01 AM)
'aren't necessarily the norm', it meant it is not normal
'it isnt rare' because it is a problem due to be fixed by these car makers in a high speed crash
and, i myself is an engineer holding M.Eng from world top 100 university, and currently a PhD candidate, i believe in datas. Until proton's engineer show us the simulation or mathematical model, it's just syiok sendiri self claimed since the engine didnt hit anyone, they can get away with it
Also, it doesn't take an engineer to figure out that a flying 200kg metal block is dangerous.
It should be detached, yes, but guided at an angle, below the car. It can only be easily achieved when your engine is built with a decline towards the undercarriage as shown
below is subaru's design
this is mercedes's design
another approach to detached engine is like volvo, build the engine as part of shock absorbent and just let it crumble between the firewalls
Proton is the first car maker that is proud of their running wild flying engine, when it hit someone, the CEO is going to be in deep shit
I can sense a lot of boullshits going on here. You hold Master of Engineering? Currently pursuing a doctorate degree? You can't even differentiate between a single "datum" and a plural "data". How many of your publications have appeared in Q1 journals? or at least in Q2?
This article that you have cited:http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/features/a4916/features-web-originals-anatomy-of-a-high-speed-car-crash/. IIHS never said such engine ejection is ABNORMAL. It was the conclusion of the article's author himself. It was not coming from IIHS. Even your comprehension is problematic. You, a PhD student?
QUOTE
'aren't necessarily the norm', it meant it is not normal
'it isnt rare' because it is a problem due to be fixed by these car makers in a high speed crash
Your attempt at English semantics is comical: "While engine ejections and explosions aren't necessarily the norm, they aren't as rare as most of us would guess." - As someone who has to deal with hundreds of English-written legal documents every single day as part of my job, what this line basically means is that engine ejection doesn't always occur, but it does occur anyway, albeit in small numbers. It has nothing to do with abnormality. This interpretation is consistent with existing "data". Within the context of our discussion, there were only two reported cases of engine ejection ever happened. It's not an ANOMALY that needs solution.
You have taken this discussion out of context. You choose to ignore the main thrust of my points: "ROLL-OVER" and "SPINNING" accidents.
Your answers and the direction they are going are the classic example of "if you can't convince them, then confuse them"
All of your replies never dealt with these keywords "ROLL-OVER" and "SPINNING".
All the things you were whining about were "FRONTAL COLLISION"
All of these photos referred to "FRONTAL COLLISION" - what happened in the accidents involving two Preves in which their engines ejected, was not just about FRONTAL COLLISION:
1. This Preve's engine ejected after it hit a big tree (FRONTAL COLLISION), then the car spun (SPINNING). Due to this spun, the engine was thrown to the other side of the road.
2. In this case, the Preve hit highway's divider (FRONTAL COLLISION), then the car turned upside down (ROLL-OVER) a few times. This had caused the engine to detach and it landed a few meters away.
May 17 2017, 06:38 PM
Quote
apasal me, I small ciku je who sometimes share whatever little I know.
0.0313sec
0.55
6 queries
GZIP Disabled