Comments on: Smash!

Smash!

dersins — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:16:01 -0800

Crash tests. Exactly what it sounds like. Double-Link-YouTube-Filter.

By: DU

DU — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:23:22 -0800

Neat. How do they crash test an airliner, or was that a real crash? Also, note to future youtubers: Your favorite amateur soundtrack sucks.

By: jaimev

jaimev — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:31:00 -0800

Mmmmm...giant wiener crash test.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:33:25 -0800

Soon, this kind of thing (minus awful music) will be featured in the bottom corner of cable news channels next to the scrolling headlines. People crave it.

By: uandt

uandt — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:37:49 -0800

Watching these videos together with a more ambient soundtrack such as the new Album Leaf record was a very soothing experience. Here is a more complete video of the NASA plane crash test. Lots of dummies burning to death in that one.

By: Burhanistan

Burhanistan — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:41:45 -0800

Here is a more complete video of the NASA plane crash test. Lots of dummies burning to death in that one. Alfrunk (6 days ago) Marked as spam I actually masturbated to this. Think of all the friction and heat - God, that heat... babymama mmmmmmm. (Reply) (Spam) What can be said about YouTube comments that hasn't already been said?

By: elpapacito

elpapacito — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:59:13 -0800

Out out daemon of stupidity ! That should be, including the strack, a mandatory video before getting a driver licence. Also in the back of every driving school a nice crashed car ! Yet everybody is obsessed by speed, therefore the security theater of speed limit, while I guess most of these test were done at a speed of just 50 Km/s demostrating how utterly insecure ANY car is , unless one is driving at traffic jam pace. But hey ...why advertise the truth of mortal crashes in graphic display ? That'd reduce sales and driving, maybe ? That's the same as showing what is real effect of an ak47 round on a human body, instead of advertising how effective is for polar bear hunting in Florida.

By: MtDewd

MtDewd — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:47:54 -0800

I don't know if 'people' crave it. Dave Barry might say 'if you don't like this, then you're probably of the female persuasion.'

By: chococat

chococat — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:57:35 -0800

I object to the gratuitous beaver shot at 1:08 in the first link. wtf?

By: Plutor

Plutor — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:01:07 -0800

DU: "Neat. How do they crash test an airliner, or was that a real crash?" The first one they showed in the first video was the Controlled Impact Demonstration, a test of a fire-retardant additive. They didn't crash the way they wanted to (they meant to crash with the wings flat, because obviously that's how planes always crash). But it's cool! I don't know what the second plane crash is from.

By: Plutor

Plutor — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:24:05 -0800

The second plane crash was a test of a Lockheed Constellation performed in 1965 by the US military. A video including a couple extra angles.

By: DU

DU — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:37:23 -0800

My real question was how they crashed it without hurting anyone (short answer: remote control(!)) but the story itself is kind of funny. Not only did they crash the plane wrong, the additive didn't work either. N

By: brooklynexperiment

brooklynexperiment — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:08:31 -0800

according to this article, crash tests for cars cost $300K a pop, and gm performs 600 of them a year. ford and gm are also working on digital crash tests. (not quite as awesome as two trains crashing into each other, but still kind of cool.) here for video (you have to sit through some ads to get to the goods).

By: maxwelton

maxwelton — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:10:21 -0800

Some of those cars simply dissolved. I drive a lot of similar older machinery. If you reduced the mass of all of the cars on the road, everyone would be safer. But if it's heavey vs. light, heavy often carries the day.

By: marvin

marvin — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:31:44 -0800

"But if it's heavey vs. light, heavy often carries the day"- not necessarily so.

By: Mach5

Mach5 — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:32:11 -0800

Many of the cars you see in the 2nd video that absolutly fail were from crash tests of (IIRC) a chinese car company that makes really really cheap vehicles (and it shows!).

By: puke & cry

puke & cry — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:56:39 -0800

I doubt they were testing what happens when you run over a car with a tank, but I could be wrong.

By: weathermachine

weathermachine — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:10:49 -0800

In most of those, the airbag seemed to be completely unnecessary. I guess the crash speeds where high. Those cars utterly crushed. I imagine I will drive more slowly for the next few days.

By: CitrusFreak12

CitrusFreak12 — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:25:59 -0800

I put the audio on mute and watched both videos with Sabre Dance on a loop. I would especially recommend that song for when the cars are passing by the 747.

By: Dataphage

Dataphage — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:26:04 -0800

Marvin: The more and more suddenly you change your direction of travel, the more you die, (Brain smashing into skull, heart continuing forward and ripping itself from arteries). This is generally blamed on Newton. Based on the videos of the Smart, and the picture you link to, I would bet the pick up came to a gentler stop, facing roughly the same way it was facing before the crash while the smart bounced all over the place. I beleive the main advantage of the smart in a high speed crash (the smart is designed for urban use, with lower speeds), is to make it easier to recover the corpses.

By: marvin

marvin — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:43:00 -0800

Dunno. Looking at the way the Smart rolls all over the place dissipating energy (and components) it looks like a safer bet than that truck right at the beginning.

By: marvin

marvin — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 13:51:11 -0800

I could add that from experience rolling a Fiat Uno several times, starting at over 90mph down the M4, shedding major components, then having to crawl out of it, parked upside down on its roof, all I got was a grazed elbow (road rash from when the side windows burst) The police told me afterwards than when they towed it off the road it would only stand on three wheels. Something to do with energy dissipation I think. (And youthful stupidity)

By: invitapriore

invitapriore — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:28:26 -0800

I like how in the first video, with the line of cars that gets hit by the large truck, the first two cars disintegrate almost entirely. I want to know what the hell those are so I never get in one.

By: twine42

twine42 — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:05:03 -0800

invatapriore: The first car is a red Citroen 2CV (1948-1990) and the second is probably a Fiat 127 (1971-1983). I think about half of the non-NCAP type footage there has come from Top Gear.

By: dhartung

dhartung — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:26:20 -0800

See also: Coudal's Crash Ballet Contest (which used some of the same public domain NASA video).

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:50:18 -0800

The little car at 3:08 is pretty friggin' impressive.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:53:28 -0800

Damn, those smarts are tough motherfuckers.

By: Skorgu

Skorgu — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 22:37:38 -0800

People don't grok high-energy collisions. Look at the whole 9/11 collapse theory debacle, the way things behave when squllions of tons of mass is moving at speed is totally different from our everyday life. You know how trucks are the big men on campus? Yeah, compared to a freight train they're candy. But go ahead, run that crossing, you'll totally beat the train.

By: M.C. Lo-Carb!

M.C. Lo-Carb! — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 08:12:09 -0800

So if my wife ever sees these, my Volkswagen van dreams are pretty much fucked.