Alan Baker
It isn't hard. Sometimes it was intentional, for fun... other times it was entering or exiting corners too fast, not so fun. One time... it was off a 30' embankment. That wasn't one of the fun ones.
"No velocity is inherently dangerous... or safe".
Do the math on this 3863gpsman The weight distribution effect in the context of this thread is to lower the effective friction coefficient at the highly loaded tires and increase...
It's appears to be safe to travel 650 on the Salt Flats... or escape velocity in the Shuttle... but it's all relative. It's all relatively safe until something goes wrong. Same with flying, skydiving, base jumping, "free" mountain climbing and surfing. (I got my worst surfing injury on the smallest wave I ever rode. It wasn't pretty.)
Racing cars are required to be equipped with oodles of safety equipment, many of which will never see the high side of 100 mph. What do those idiots know that seems to escape the savants here?
unequivocal and based on the laws of physics. The kinetic energy of a moving vehicle is a function of its mbutt and velocity squared
Kinetic energy is dissipated in a collision by friction, heat, and the deformation of mbutt. Generally, the more kinetic energy to be dissipated in a collision, the greater the potential for injury to vehicle occupants.
Because kinetic energy is determined by the square of the vehicle's speed, rather than by speed alone, the probability of injury, and the severity of injuries that occur in a crash, increase exponentially with vehicle speed. For example, a 30-percent increase in speed (e.g., from 50 to 65 mi-h 80 to 105 km-h) results in a 68 plus 1-percent increase in the
-----
Do the math on this 3862Alan Baker Just a late, quick correction here. I think that would really be 179 ft-sec, not mph? In that case at 1g you're looking...
- gpsman
