Featured Tesla Catches on Fire After Collision (Speed possibly a factor)

That seem too high. But a quick search did find a "43%" soundbite:

"Five states — California, Florida, Texas, New York and Arizona — accounted for 43 percent of pedestrian deaths during the first half of 2017, despite being home to just 30 percent of the U.S. population."
Pedestrian Fatalities Remain At 25-Year High For Second Year In A Row : The Two-Way : NPR

Several other quick articles:
Human Errors Drive Growing Death Toll In Auto Crashes : NPR
"The GHSA report indicated that 15 percent of pedestrians killed each year are hit by a drunk driver, while 34 percent of pedestrians killed are legally drunk themselves."

Nearly 6,000 pedestrians killed in 2017, crashes, new report says : USA Today
"U.S. pedestrian deaths totaled nearly 6,000 in 2017 for the second straight year amid mounting signs that walkers and drivers are dangerously distracted, according to a new study.

Although reasons for the recent rise have not been scientifically determined, experts suspect that smartphones and marijuana use are key factors in the deadly trend.

Bottom line: Texting while walking is especially risky in urban environments.

Combine that with drivers who are using their phones or touchscreens while driving, and it's a recipe for fatalities.

In addition, drugged driving and walking are believed to be a growing contributor."

Pedestrian & Bicycle Information Center

 

I suspect bigger cars especially higher ones has something to do with the rise too. A small bit. Think of the times your view has been masked by not being able to see through the vehicle ahead of you as you used to do when same height sedans were the norm. The bigger the truck, van or CUV/SUV the longer your view is masked. Think back to how you get out of a diagonal parking space next to a Youkon. Can you say parking lot accidents. I probably spend an extra ten seconds creeping out in those situations. As someone else is shooting down between the rows at 35-40 MPH on their cell phone. Those vital conversations which, when you hear a snatch, are pure vanity blather. Or walking their kids paying no attention to them while texting. I can't even get my grandkids to look both ways crossing a street even if I've reminded them hundreds of times. Yet the same kid learning to drive looks both ways and repeats before pulling out into the street. Bah people.

 

The timing of this doesn't fit well for it to be a major cause. Most of that vehicle height change happened from the late 1990s to early 2000s.

 

dumb folk with tons of cash easily get behind the wheel of powerfull/fast cars - they'll think they can handle it - then lose it. But backing up a a tesla is always easy to see what's there, & it beeps like crazy if a driver is too dumb or lazy to watch the screen.

Between the two side view mirrors & the 160° rear camera - there's nothing a person can't see unless they're stoned or otherwise incapacitated.
.

 

But now we have 30 years or so of accumulated purchases of higher vehicles to contend with.

Stood next to a Model X yesterday. Was shocked at how huge it was. Tinted windows and good luck seeing through that.

 

I'll add to the speculation that the average heights have dropped some as past SUVs have become more crossoverish in design. The current Rav4 has lost an inch in ground clearance over the 2000 model. The measurement puts it closer to the Camry in value than the older model.

The bumper placement might reflect such changes, which would go along with car designs taking pedestrian safety into account.

 

Don't need to see out the back .... when i back in? The camera compensates great for low light.

See the white tape on the floor? i just follow the 2 tracking lines & BAM - perfect back in.

 

Pictures: Police probe whether Autopilot feature was on in Tesla crash - seattlepi.com

Considering the high rear shelf of the firetruck, that Telsa had good crash protection.

 

I was wrong, it's 46%.

Study examines rising pedestrian deaths

If you'll allow me a bit of leeway to proselytize a bit: back into spaces whenever you can. It's generally much safer.

 

I find it safer to back out.
If I back in, when I drive forward my point of view is something like 6’-9’ back from the aisle.
If I back out, my POV is right at the back bumper, and the lense is slightly fish eyed. It is much easier for me to see around SUVs, vans and pickup trucks.

 

I think so too. It is a bit of hassle though so I look for a spot I can pull into forwards from the back so that I am facing front-wards when I leave.

And perhaps the most useful: I park away from other cars if possible. Less traffic, and most importantly less pedestrians. My view is usually unobstructed too. AND I get a little exercise ;-)
I'm happy to leave the spots close to the entrance for the disabled, decrepit and dying.

 

AAA seems to agree with me (from a Vox article though):

It’s much safer to back into parking spaces. Why don’t we do it? - Vox

 

Interesting.
Without rear view cameras I would agree without hesitation.
The studies in the full article (which was interesting, thank you) do not mention rear view cameras except how they make it easier to back into a spot.

I have backed into perpendicular parking spots, and find I have better visibility when backing out than when backing in.

 

we don't do it because it is more difficult. same with backing into your garage.

 

I tend to park near where the shopping cart should be returned. And I too pull through where I can. I'm an early riser and tend to get there before the lots are crowded but even then I'll forgo a close spot and opt for easy cart return and no car/truck/xUV next to me by parking right next to the cart return aisle.. Even on rainy days. Mama said I wasn't make of sugar and won't melt and she has proven right.

 

I've found a post from the Florida accident on a different forum and came across this:

There is one Tesla only design detail that makes them more prone to catching fire and fire spreading quickly. They put cells in parallel. If one cell is compromised the cells in parallel discharge through it and cause rapid thermal escalation. Made worse is the fact that NMC cells in thermal run-away create their own oxegen, unlike a gasoline fire, making that much harder to put out. Other automakers purposely use larger cells in series strings so that if one cell has an issue it only has to cope with the energy within that one cell. Often electrode poisoning isolates the cell as it heats further reducing the chances of thermal propagation. There is a lot talk in the industry about parallelizing cells. It saves money on BMS and makes for common parts flexibly fitting many physical profiles. But, it comes with inherent built in safety risks when a cell is compromised. Other companies have chosen safety over cost savings. Telsa in my opinion really needs to ask itself if using huge numbers of small cells is the best strategy long term.

NTSB launches investigation into another Tesla crash after it caught fire and killed two teens in Florida

On the California model x fatal accident covered in this thread, an updated story now reports the fire department said the pack re-ignited 3 or 4 more times after the vehicle was removed from the scene before Tesla came and de-energized the pack.

 

That stuck out to me because it sounded like part of the cause in the Uber autonomous car death. The victim in that case crossed the road away from the crosswalk, but design of the median's hardscaping was an enticement for pedestrians to take that short cut; there is literally a sidewalk section crossing the median away from the intersection.

If deaths are increasing mainly in such areas, addressing car design alone won't solve the issue. Street and city design also need change in order to keep pedestrians away from dangerous traffic areas, and to provide accessible pedestrian street crossings.

Is this risk of parallel cell design actually panning out in the real world though?

I admit to being not interested enough to dig into the details of every Tesla fire and crash, but the ones I've heard about that resulted in death sounded severe enough that fatal injuries could have occurred without a fire, or a fire could have resulted regardless of car fuel type. And then not all serious crashes resulted in a death.

In the cases of minor damage starting a battery fire, the fire spread was slow and contained enough to allow the driver to pull over and get out of the car before the fire had a chance to get into the cabin.

 

Oh man, here I am taking your bait again....

Uber Self-Driving Car 'Detected' Pedestrian Killed In Crash, But Decided It Didn't Need To Stop: Report

But nah, it's totally that pedestrian's fault. And the fact that it was totally an SUV had nothing to do with it (can't help but notice how often you seem to defend them). At this point, I'm LMAO.

 

So far, the Model 3 and Model S pack teardowns (search YouTube) have shown a 'whisker' fusible link. The failed cell simply melts the 'whisker' and isolates the failing cell.

Bob Wilson

 

Some parking lots around here have this sign.