
Tesla Cybertruck may be unsafe for other road users: Australian safety chief - clouddrover
https://thedriven.io/2019/11/27/tesla-cybertruck-may-be-unsafe-for-other-road-users-says-australian-safety-chief/
======
rasz
"unsafe for other road users" might be one of the best truck advertising
slogans for US market one could imagine.

~~~
dwd
I was in Maroochydore, Australia this morning (I don't normally go near the
shops there) and the number of big American trucks in the carpark surprised
me. In just the section of parking I as in there was a Dodge Ram and two
F250s, all hanging a couple of feet into the road being too long for your
standard car park. A 4x4 Pajaro next to one of the Fords looked small.

I'm surprised a similar point hasn't been made about those models.

~~~
throwaway3563
Ford Rangers are really popular too. This is a recent thing with Toyota, Ford,
Mitsubishi and Holden (GM) all shutting down locally in the last 10 or so
years, therefore all current trucks are US/foreign designed.

~~~
dwd
Very popular. Even they look small next to a F250 - like you shrunk one down
to 3/4 size.

------
knolan
As someone who commutes by bike and has been hit twice by cars, the first
thought that crossed my mind when seeing the CyberTruck was ‘ouch’.

~~~
donjoe
I think this car will seriously hurt the car insurance industry. Just imagine
a car that cannot get scratches and/or mailbox dents which cost thousands of
dollars in repair by simply... not colouring the car and making the surface
more scratch-resistant. Awesome!

As a fellow bike-communter myself I had exactly the same thoughts regarding
pedestrian safety though.

~~~
inferiorhuman
_Just imagine a car that cannot get scratches and /or mailbox dents which cost
thousands of dollars in repair by simply... _

Consider that the reason that the windows shattered in the demo was that the
dent proof doors transmitted sufficient force to the base of the window to
weaken it. I'm sure the insurance industry will price coverage appropriately.

~~~
RKearney
> Consider that the reason that the windows shattered in the demo was that the
> dent proof doors transmitted sufficient force to the base of the window to
> weaken it.

I don't believe that for a second, considering the rear window shattered as
well and was not hit by the sledge hammer.

~~~
inferiorhuman
Take it up with Musk.

[https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Elon-Musk-Tesla-s-
Cy...](https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Elon-Musk-Tesla-s-Cybertruck-
windows-would-have-14860872.php)

~~~
RKearney
I'm aware of what he said to save face. However, if you believe the window
broke because a completely different door was hit than I have a bridge to sell
you.

~~~
lonelappde
If you hit something, the momentum has to get dispersed somewhere. If the
hammer didn't suffer, the car did.

------
empath75
The fact that the body is undentable and glass is unbreakable makes it sound
worse for occupants, too. If it doesn’t crumple, you’re going to be in for a
bad time in a car accident.

~~~
ninjinxo
The other car is the crumple zone

~~~
sdenton4
Works great until the first cyber truck on cyber truck accident...

~~~
symplee
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irresistible_force_paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irresistible_force_paradox)

aka "What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?"

------
gberger
All trucks are unsafe for pedestrians, period.

~~~
ramenmeal
Don't forget the lifted trucks. If one of those runs into the side of my car,
it's bumper directly hitting my face.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Unpopular opinion: Lifted trucks should be illegal.

~~~
varenc
They are in Australia! (Where the ANCAP is from).

Or rather, lifts beyond a few inches require special certification. Same goes
for larger tires and after market bullbars.

~~~
keyle
Heck in Australia I don't think it's even legal to have tyres that come
outside the width of the mud guards.

~~~
grecy
Of course it isn't, that's seriously dangerous.

------
corodra
I wonder... some people claim the "negative press" of the glass shattering was
by design because it creates a larger narrative, that if they handle properly,
keeps the truck in the public's ears and eyes everyday (which is has) and if
they "fix it" makes them look like they care about their customer bases voice.

If I agreed/believed that, this could be a part 2 to that plan. I bet a
discussion will come up how government regulations don't allow the public to
have bullet-RESISTANT vehicles (no such thing as "bulletproof", especially if
you don't get 3rd party standardized testing to back up your claim). Along
with trying to rewrite vehicle laws/standards to benefit Tesla.

Personally, don't care either way. But I always get this uneasy feeling
whenever Musk does anything.

~~~
generatorguy
Here is a piece of bulletproof glass used on bullet proof cars that takes 18
rounds and isn’t pierced.
[https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_FN5xzeVluc](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_FN5xzeVluc)

I have a water resistant watch and I understand I can’t go diving with it, but
I feel like maybe this glass is more than resistant enough to qualify as
“proof”?

~~~
hackermailman
Bulletproof is a reason that we will see black pr about this truck because
many places like Australia/Canada have tried to outlaw these mods due to well
known gangsters using them the police are too incompetent to arrest. For
example it's illegal to sell bulletproof vests here. Everytime I read some
critic of this truck it's from a place that has these laws in place, Musk
needs to counter this onslaught of blackPR from 'unfree' countries such as my
own who can't arrest known felons so resort to punishing everybody else trying
to ban or make illegal these features.

~~~
friendlybus
Are you saying that cops would prefer to shoot gangsters through normal glass
than just arrest them at home?

I don't think Australia has any issue banning things, it did guns and cracked
open encryption. You're reaching for a conspiracy.

~~~
hackermailman
Criminals shooting at each other, the politicians here and their PR firms
routinely try to reduce the culture of impunity these criminals have flaunting
in public their status from the safety of modded bulletproof vehicles and
seize them as illegal because they can't ever for some reason just jail the
criminal. It's a reached for conspiracy but they have done blackPR like this
in the past.

------
caconym_
News flash: _all_ trucks and large SUVs are unsafe for other road users.

~~~
threeseed
News flash: The world isn't black or white.

You can have trucks that are safer than others.

~~~
caconym_
What's your point? Do you think the Cybertruck is more dangerous than every
truck and large SUV out there on the road right now?

------
Marsymars
In an idealized economy, the owner of a dangerous-to-others truck would be
paying enough for liability insurance to cover their negative safety
externalities.

Does that play out in reality?

~~~
asdfadsfgfdda
In most of America, the minimum liability insurance is far too low. For
example, California only requires $15k per person in liability insurance. If
someone is killed or seriously injured, there's easily millions in damages.

This effectively is a subsidy to car driving (and bad drivers). But
politically, it seems impossible to fix this. Red states want less government
intervention, and blue states don't want to "penalize" poor people.

~~~
syshum
You know most "Red States" have higher minimums that CA right?

Further the insurance minimums does not limit a person liability just the
amount the insurance company will pay, if you are stupid and dont have enough
insurance then your other assets (like your home) can be seized and your wages
garnished to recover the liability

This is also why one should have good Uninsured and Under insured coverage

However saying all of that, one of the reasons for the Low Minimums on
Liability in some states as they have gone to a "No Fault" system so your
insurance would pay your costs so it is up to you to buy the amount you want
to be covered for, it does not matter what the "other guy" has

~~~
HarryHirsch
What's really worrying is that the cost of uninsured motorist coverage is
fairly close to the cost of liability insurance. This would indicate that most
everyone in this corner of the state does not carry sufficient insurance to
cover the damage that he causes, so people pay extra to shield themselves from
that kind of externality.

------
ananonymoususer
I ordered one last week. I wonder how many of the specifications advertised
will actually be met by the production version. 500 mile range, faster than a
vette, 100cu feet of storage, seats 6, sledgehammer proof body, bullet proof
glass, etc. It all sounds too good to be true for only $70k.

~~~
grecy
When it comes to the key specifications of their vehicles, Tesla have never,
ever under delivered on their key promises.

I have no doubt it will do all the things you listed, likely exceeding some of
them. I won't be at all surprised if it looks a little different - you can
google the original Model S prototype compared to the actual, and the Model 3.

They tweak some things, but overall I strongly believe you'll get what you
ordered.

~~~
impulser_
Elon is notorious for broken promises lol. But I guess it depends on what you
mean by key promises.

------
rklaehn
This is just silly. There were not many pictures of it, but the truck has a
massive frunk. This frunk will just be designed to crumple and adsorb the
impact from a front collision.

The structural frame will not extend all the way to the front but end earlier
(about above the front wheel well).

Tesla will want a five star safety rating for this thing, and you can not get
that without also taking pedestrian safety into account.

Edit: About the raised front: the front is not any more raised that my current
main car, a Volkswagen T5 Bus, which is a very common car in europe. So I
don't see why it should have a worse pedestrian safety rating.

~~~
sschueller
To crumble for pedestrians it can't be made completely out of unbreakable
stainless steel. It's one of the other.

~~~
rklaehn
Stainless steel is not some magic adamantium that is completely unbreakable.
You can choose thinner steel for the part that is designed to crumple, and it
will crumple or fold as intended, just like any other material.

I would guess that the bonnet will move backwards and slide over the
windshield, and the other part of the front (up to the front wheel wells) will
be designed to crumple.

------
growlist
So happy to see everyone not jumping to conclusions over what is just a
concept car and will no doubt - like all concept cars - be considerably
different to the retail version /s

------
baby
Is it me or this feels like the automobile mafia at play? They obviously feel
threatened by the introduction of this véhicule.

~~~
askvictor
No, just standards and regulations that are enacted to ensure the general
safety of the population. They're relatively common in the developed world
outside of US.

~~~
baby
If they were really doing their job we wouldn’t have cars driving all around
us. There is obviously more at play here.

~~~
threeseed
The only thing at play here is your pathetic attempt to slur a safety
organisation just because they dared to be critical of the Cybertruck.

Their job is to look after the interests of the general public not any one
company.

~~~
baby
Pathetic until you realize what is really going on? That’s just a theory in
the end.

------
nickpeterson
I think instead of a focus on mpg (which electrics make murky anyway), we
should restrict weight. Eventually the goal is lightweight cars with
reasonable safety features. People who want to drive 5000lb cars should have
their danger to others health baked into their insurance premiums.

~~~
Mountain_Skies
Unfortunately trees, concrete pillars, and brick walls are unlikely to comply
with safety restrictions on weight. Georgia was ridiculed a few years back for
prohibiting trees between the road and the sidewalk under the theory that a
car that wanders off the road can recover its intended path of there aren't
trees in the way. Lightweight cars would still be lethal to pedestrians but
also would make the elimination of trees and street furniture between the road
and the sidewalk more desirable.

~~~
nickpeterson
Wouldn’t hitting a concrete wall, in a lighter car, be safer than a heavier
car, assuming no drastic difference in safety systems in the car, since the
overall force is still less? The frame of the car has to absorb less force.

------
torgian
lol what? This is like complaining for the sake of complaining. It's obviously
a prototype and i have no doubt that there will be some redesigns.

------
_notdan_
I've definitely been thinking the same thing. It's super heavy and has a
massive battery..

------
tus88
I was thinking about this the other day. Will they let a armored tank on the
road?

~~~
modoc
they let armored cars, dump trucks, snow plow trucks, cement trucks, etc... on
the road..

~~~
freehunter
Those things typically require special drivers licenses though.

~~~
symplee
Back to the original post, will they have a dedicated "Tank" license?

------
willmadden
Will Australia also be banning semi trucks?

Collision detection is far more important than body construction in terms of
risk to pedestrians and other vehicles.

This reads like regulatory overreach to me, and cherry picking.

~~~
analbumcover
That's Australia for you. We're the prototypical "big government nanny state"
that conservative Americans fear. This could also be motivated by the
Australian government's radical opposition to clean tech.

------
elif
Ever since the reveal, all I can think about is the instance where a Tesla ran
into the broad side of a tractor-trailer.

Since the panels of the cybertruck are "scored on the inside and bent", and
the body is the "exoskeleton" in place of a frame, the physics of this
oragami-like interaction seem predictable...

And in my head, I see a grotesque rendition of the ketschup-packet-under-the-
chair prank from middle school.

------
drivingmenuts
It’s just plain ass-ugly, to my eyes. I grew up around pickups and owned one
until it became a pita in a parking garage.

The VW Tarok concept truck is a far better looking pickup than the Tesla
monstrosity. The Neuron T/One looks more futuristic and usable. The Lordstown
Endurance looks more standard (and has a bloody expensive sounding name). The
Atlis XT looks as conventional as it gets (but still way better than the
Tesla).

I think the Tesla is going to be another Humvee, if it goes to market: more
about wasted money and contrarian looks than being actually useful. A toy for
the uselessly rich.

~~~
Mountain_Skies
When I lived in a midrise in the middle of town we had a Hummer driver move
into the building. He started parking in the handicap space on the ground
level because the Hummer's turning radius was too large to be able to make the
corners in the parking deck to his leased parking spot. So much for being able
to go anywhere in the Hummer. It never was a very practical vehicle. Other
than the low polygon looks, the Cybertruck seems inline with the functionality
of trucks in the F150 to F250 range. Probably won't be a problem performing
tasks that those trucks already perform.

~~~
ctdonath
I expect the autopilot parking will be widely used.

------
Silhouette
This was my immediate reaction when I first saw it: how is anything remotely
like that design ever going to be road-legal here in the UK, unless it has
some innovative ways to do better than standard, possibly even legally-
required safety features that don't seem to have been mentioned?

There are certainly reasonable alternatives to things like wing mirrors. For
example, it's not hard to imagine a camera-and-screen arrangement in a vehicle
from Tesla.

However, giving the vehicle a solid shell pretty much implies that the full
force of any impact is transmitted to the occupants on one side and the
impactee on the other because physics, which is going to be a concern given
the great emphasis on the materials used.

Then there's the angular styling, which appears to have edges practically
designed to cause serious injury to anyone vulnerable that might be hit by the
vehicle, not to mention the potential to act as a ramp sending the victim of a
frontal collision up the front or even over the top of the vehicle.

It definitely looks like a case of form-over-function so far, but it's hard to
believe no-one at Tesla has considered these kinds of issues, so surely they
must have something up their sleeves to deal with them (unless <conspiracy
theory>it's all been a very successful publicity stunt and they never really
intended to bring a vehicle like this to market</conspiracy-theory>).

~~~
sjwright
The Ford F-150 is the most popular vehicle in the USA. Despite this, new car
sales of the F-150 outside of North America appears to be negligible. This
disparity is instructive.

Cybertruck is a product designed squarely for this North American market and
isn't going to have mass appeal in any other global markets beyond novelty
factor for a small number of people with excessive disposable wealth.

Yes, the Cybertruck looks like a safety nightmare in many respects—especially
for pedestrians—but I would dare guess that it'd still be safer across the
board compared to its established competitors like the F-150.

~~~
daedalus_f
The United States has a traffic related mortality of 12.4 per 100,000 pop
compared to the UKs 3.1 and well behind the rest of western Europe [1] Its
almost as if there's something wrong with America's road regulations.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-
related_death_rate)

~~~
NickNameNick
While I don't doubt there are shortcomings in the US's road safety regulatory
regime, That's probably not a fair comparison.

I strongly suspect that on both a trip-miles and passenger-miles basis, the US
far outstrips any european country.

*edit

If you sort that table on 'road fatalities per billion vehicle KM' you'll see
the US at 7.3, same as Belgium. The UK is doing better at 3.4

~~~
sjwright
I'd argue it's entirely fair. The fact that people in the US spend a lot more
time in the car is part of the problem.

Fatalities per distance is fine for a technical comparison of road safety
regulations.

Fatalities per population is more useful when comparing the safety of roads as
they are used.

~~~
sandeatr
US spends more time in the car because of lower population density than
Europe. UK is the size of Colorado yet has 10x the population, so of course
they will drive less.

