Overhead Bin - Car crashes in front of moving walkway at Pittsburgh airport "Allegheny County police said the driver was on the parkway when she lost her brakes and ended up crashing her Toyota Prius into the building."
Crashes happen for many reasons, it's easy to blame the car ..... We had a Mazda sedan crash into our building a few weeks ago. The driver didn't speak English and the responding P.O. didn't speak Spanish- so the local PD weren't able to determine how the accident had occurred. No one could figure out how someone could have crashed into a building from making a simple 90 degree right turn onto a common street from a parking lot.. something that you do all day long every day without incident. I got the full story from the boyfriend about a week later- Upon making a right turn from our parking lot onto our street the passenger door suddenly swung open- without stopping, the young driver reached all the way across the cab to try to grab it and close it. That action caused her to pull the steering wheel to the right - she then tried to hit the brakes- but being off balance and out of position she hit the gas rather than the brake which caused the car to accelerate and make almost a "U" turn out from the parking lot apron up onto the sidewalk and almost straight into the building storefront.
I wasn't saying it was the Prius's fault. I just copied the sentence that showed she was driving a Prius. In a case like this, I'm convinced it's operator error. Especially since all she cared about was whether she missed her flight or not....
The problem with your post, though, it sets up the wrong connotation. It's sort of 'hack reporting' where you only report the 'half truth', leaving people to believe only part of the facts, but not all of the facts, making people then drawing incorrect conclusions from it. See, the original title of the article was: Overhead Bin - Car crashes in front of moving walkway at Pittsburgh airport However, you titled the post as: Prius crashed into Pittsburgh Airport Building So when you look at this... First thing to come to mind is "Problem with the Prius, it crashed into a building." You then posted with: You left out the following from the actual article: When citing an article, you need to make sure you put it in a non-ambiguous, hanging situation. In this case, you left it hanging under the belief there was a problem with the Prius in general with the statement of "when she lost her brakes and ended up crashing her Toyota Prius into the building.". But from the rest of the article, one witness impression is that the driver did what some aggressive driver would normally due, ignore proper rules of the road, tried to do something that was not really a good idea, and failed to apply her brakes, crashing into a concrete barrier. Remember, when posting something, you have to remember not everyone is of the same mindset, and it is always important to be sure how the message comes across. The message this original post comes off does give an air of "Problems with the Prius."
Lol, I agree with the OP. There's no "wrong connotation" or "half truth" to the title of this thread. I cant believe you wrote a whole post telling Caryanne how to set up an article thread. Get over yourself man.
I don't have to get over myself. When I first read the post, it can be literally read that way. People got in my face when I mentioned the Tesla's troubles with their batteries, slamming me for making it an FUD when I just wanted to point out that it didn't bode well to hear about the possible bricking of their car over the battery. And initially caryanne never really mentioned the other part until after ny_rob pointed out his case that until they got the full story, no one knew how a person could crash just making a simple 90 turn. The one short blurb, with the title in question sets the impression.
The fact that a car crashed into the airport isn't really relevant in this forum. The fact that a Prius did IS relevant to this forum, even if it was operator error. I'm sorry for misleading you Keiichi, but I did included the link in my original post so that you could read the whole story that was reported, if you wanted to.
I cant believe you guys missed the actual source of the news. News sites these days report what other news sites are reporting. You just need to find the source. And the source said that the driver drove on a flat tire down to the rim because she didn't want to miss her flight. It has nothing to do with failing brakes. Car crashes inches in front of moving walkway at Pittsburgh... | www.wpxi.com video here Car crashes inches in front of moving walkway at Pittsburgh... | www.wpxi.com
My question is why isn't the driver being charged with something? Anything? Reckless Endangerment? Negligence? She admittedly drove on a flat tire, in a hurry to catch a flight, and as a result of this poor decision could of injured herself, and others, and DID cause a huge amount of property damage. I wonder if a drug or sobriety test was administered, because I don't see how any full functioning person makes the decision to drive on rims, and then parlays that bad decision into probably thousands and thousands of dollars worth of property damage that threatened peoples lives. How can they not charge her? Everyone makes mistakes...but this sounds like negligence to me... PS. The fact that it is a Prius, is irrelevant to me. The fact that it was a Prius didn't cause the accident, it sounds to me like at the very least? It was being in a hurry, and being stupid that caused the accident.
Which is the point I am making. When we cite something, we have to present it in the proper context. And caryanne, sometimes people, such as myself, don't want to go to another link with regards to some news, especially with a short blurb because of presentation. While it isn't your intention, the short blurb, with little proper context, can come off as "Yet Another Prius Problem". Like if we were to talk about the Volt and catching fire in a public garage... But left out the part of the driver being a stark raving lunatic and setting it on fire... Some people might take it as "Hey, the Volt is still catching fire..." given the one old reported incident of how a Volt in the NHSTA caught on fire after a crash test and the battery issue. Yes, it seems silly, but again, context is always important.
Actually, if you watch the video news report, the braked did *indeed* fail. AFTER she drove on a flat down to the rim and destroyed her own brakes. Can't believe she won't be charged with something. I hope she never buys a Prius again. The Prius doesn't need to be associated with idiots.
I did watch the video. No mechanic was on hand to verify the brakes have failed. If you see someone laying on the side of the road, can you pronounce him dead if you're not a doctor? Hell, even the CHP can only transmit on the radio as "possible fatality". She said her brakes failed but so did James Sikes. The only thing known for sure was she was driving on a flat tire down to the rims and the brakes wasn't able to stop her car. What caused the brakes not able to stop the car? It could be the flat tire, it could be the effects of driving on the rims, it could be the brake pump, it could be the low clearance had dragged the brake line to a hole and lost brake fluid. No mechanic was on hand to determine the cause of the Prius unable to stop.
Of course, the car is probably pretty trashed right now that the only conclusive evidence would be from the car's onboard computer, assuming it has a record of it.
with over 1 million sold in USA alone, I am sure Prius crashes are quite frequent... should we start posting news of every crash? It has nothing to do with Prius itself but with its driver.
If we're going to play devil's advocate and second-guess everything, then we can't even assume that she had a flat. No mechanic that we didn't see in the snippets of video that we were shown verified that, either. Of course, we don't know if there was a mechanic in any of the video that we weren't shown. But then, if the police aren't going to file charges, then why have a mechanic in the first place. For all you and I know she was texting on the phone that we assume that she had and piled into the building. So we might as well not discuss anything at all about the case, since the whole thing is fraught with unknown unknowns and we don't know whether or not any of the reporting is factually-based..
We're not playing devil's advocate and second guessing everything. The sheriff theorized flat tire. The owner said she had a flat tire. If there was a mechanic on hand that examined the car, the news would have interviewed that person instead of the airport employee. She could've been texting and driving but that won't leave tire marks that the Sheriff used to theorized flat tire. The video didn't mention "failed brakes" only "no brakes" If brake pads had worn down to the metal, it wouldn't stop the car, but the brake mechanics still work. There's nothing to slow down the rotor. Are you going to classify that as failed brakes or no brakes? She drove it down to the rims. Which most likely she tore off the tires completely. There's no tire friction to slow down the car, only the rims. Her brakes may very well works but bare rims just won't have the grip to stop the car.
Was it a Google driverless Prius? Driver crashed in front of moving walkway at Pittsburgh airport! Car crashes near Pittsburgh International Airport moving walkway | Allegheny Co. News - WTAE Home
Dear God, this has degenerated in to perhaps the stupidest bickering I have seen in a thread. So what, a particularly bad driver crashed while driving to the airport. Instead of splitting hairs we should be mocking the driver mercilessly.
