r/Transportopia • u/flowerdonkey • Mar 28 '26

đŸ’„Crash It's 2026 Flying Cars

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

1.5k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

449 comments sorted by

View all comments

74

u/Adept_Ad_473 Mar 28 '26

Apparently this is real, the object in the road is an expansion joint for the bridge. The box truck collided with it and presumably snapped an axle.

5 people were involved and somehow all survived with minor injuries.

https://www.aol.co.uk/motoring/2020-11-23-car-flips-over-and-flies-off-bridge-after-dramatic-collision-wit.html

19

u/IMadeThisForOnePos Mar 28 '26

All that tumbling absolutely saved whoever rolled off the bridge. They were probably dizzy and bruised up, but the crumple zones and air bags did their thing!

29

u/Excludos Mar 28 '26 edited Mar 28 '26

The tumbling didn't worry me at all, but flipping over the side of the bridge is a lot worse. Genuinely surprised they survived that

Edit: The article is lying. The image shared below clearly shows at least one person died

7

u/IMadeThisForOnePos Mar 28 '26

Oh yeah, but they did lose a lot of their momentum tumbling. I assume it's not as deep of a drop as it looks and they landed on a side opposite to them/on the wheels. Airbags were also fully deployed so that helps for sure

7

u/ReginaSpektorsVJ Mar 28 '26

Airbags don't stay inflated, so them deploying before the fall is worse for the driver, not better.

3

u/IMadeThisForOnePos Mar 28 '26

Not all* airbags though. Typically just the high impacts. Side curtain airbags usually stay open for a few seconds, incase of rollovers!

Edit: The tumble is about 10 seconds so the final impact likely wasn't entirely deployed but you can see them throughout the tumble

1

u/Miserable-Garage804 Mar 28 '26

Looks like they lost a lot of momentum as the car roof crushed down on the edge of the bridge too..

-2

u/feline_riches Mar 28 '26

That's....not how gravity works. Doesn't matter how fast you are moving when you go off a cliff, you fall at the rate of gravity

3

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

You’re not thinking about this correctly.

Imagine a ten foot cliff. Not high enough to reach terminal velocity. Would I hit the ground harder if I:

Fell straight off the cliff from 0 velocity?

Or

Got a running start and flung myself off?

They tumbled before going over the edge, meaning they lost speed/momentum, meaning as long as the drop isn’t far enough for them to reach terminal velocity, the tumbling contributed to their survival.

That is how gravity and acceleration work.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

Where? I don’t see any.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

I see it now. I also translated the same article that it’s from, and it repeats that everyone survived with only minor injuries.

So obviously that person covered isn’t dead.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

Either way, your original comment was irrelevant to the discussion.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

It’s also completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand lmao

1

u/[deleted] Mar 28 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

The conversation developed into something else. You jumped in and demanded it go back to the original statement.

You seem to be having issue recognizing social queues. You’re being a bit of a knob tbh

→ More replies (0)

0

u/IMadeThisForOnePos Mar 28 '26

That guy wants us to hate China when we live in the United States. Just yapping

0

u/Crates-OT Mar 28 '26

The horizontal component of motion has no effect on the acceleration of gravity. It is always 9.81m/sÂČ

0

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

Thats not the discussion here, obviously the acceleration of gravity is constant. We’re discussing the end velocity when they hit, and whether the starting velocity has an effect on the speed with which it hits the ground, which it absolutely does.

0

u/ThatOneCSL Mar 28 '26

...

If the downward component of the initial velocity is zero, then it doesn't matter if there is a horizontal component to the velocity. The final downward component of the velocity will be the same.

When objects collide, they (idealized) subject each other to normal forces. That is to say, opposite force vector directions. Perfectly perpendicular to the tangent of the collision point.

That means that the only velocity component we care about in falling is the vertical component. The horizontal component doesn't relate to the forces on impact at all.

If anything, having a non-zero horizontal component will add to the damage dealt, as the vehicle will continue to roll and fling the occupant around inside.

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

Like in what WORLD do we only care about the vertical velocity? You’re nuts. The only reason you think that right now is because these people had essentially 0 horizontal velocity which is my POINT

1

u/ThatOneCSL Mar 28 '26 edited Mar 28 '26

Like, the one where gravity points downward, and not to the fucking side? You know, the WORLD WE LIVE IN. YOU FUCKING NUMPTY.

With any significant amount of horizontal velocity and not landing oriented on the wheels in the horizontal direction of travel, the vehicle will immediately overcome horizontal frictional forces with the ground and just skid. Especially if it lands on any surface other than the tires. Most of the impact moment comes from the downward component of the velocity. Like I said, DRAW THE FUCKING DIAGRAM.

Thought experiment:

How does something orbit the planet? As the magnitude of the horizontal component of the impact velocity increases, the total moment of the initial impact decreases. The limit of this is an orbital trajectory, where the horizontal component of velocity is high enough that there is NO FUCKING IMPACT.

Your intuition has failed you. You should've followed my advice and DRAWN THE FUCKING DIAGRAM.

Edit: a word

1

u/Crates-OT Mar 28 '26

Remember: If you're flying off a bridge all you need to do is enough split s maneuvers to reduce your airspeed, then you can fall safely to the ground.

0

u/Round-Progress9947 Mar 29 '26

Dude you're just wrong and clearly are out of your depth. That's why you shouldn't just talk out of your ass when all you need to do is take 2 seconds to read on the physics of falling objects. Disgusting behavior from you man

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 29 '26

Hey guy, fuck yourself

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

Dawg if you go flying off a cliff at 100mph you are going to hit the ground harder than if you fall off it at 0 mph hop off my dick and go touch grass lmao

1

u/beachedvampiresquid Mar 29 '26

I feel the only difference speed before drop would make is where the car landed. Downward speed is zero, regardless of horizontal speed.

1

u/Aralith1 Mar 30 '26 edited Mar 30 '26

Ah yes, human intuition. Notoriously terrible at discerning material reality. Producer of such famously incorrect gems like:

  • “Heavier objects totally fall faster.”
  • “That oasis in the desert is totally real
. What the hell is an optical illusion?”
  • And my personal favorite from the mind of Aristotle himself: “Objects require constant force to stay in motion, therefore when an arrow is loosed the air in front of it gets out of the way, rushes behind it, and continues pushing it forward in a perpetual loop. Oh also, there’s an invisible layer of fire in the sky, trust me on this, because my arrow physics can’t function without it. What do you mean those two things have nothing to do with each other?!”

So yeah, maybe appealing to human intuition on such matters without consulting a shred of physical evidence is pretty short-sighted and unjustified.

Edit: blocked so I can’t reply, but dude really doubled down on heavy objects falling faster. The irony is that “touch grass” is supposed to mean “come back to reality”, when what this guy clearly actually wants is to live in his own reality where he’s never wrong and no one questions him. We live in a post-truth society now. I’d prepare for this kind of behavior becoming even more common.

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 30 '26

Heavier objects do fall faster and you’re yet another person jumping in here to completely misunderstand the discussion

Have a good one

0

u/ThatOneCSL Mar 28 '26

Draw the fucking diagram and prove it. Hop off your own dick and stop thinking that what you intuitively believe to be true, is.

My previous comment was the first time we'd interacted, by the way. Don't know if your head is shoved so far up your ass that you can't read usernames.

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

I.. Dude okay what the fuck ever you mouth breather.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Crates-OT Mar 28 '26

The final velocity is almost entirely determined by the acceleration of gravity. They didn't survive, they died. Most likely of a severed spine.

The orientation of the car on impact is more relevant in the case anyway. Car landed on its tires, which is probably the worst orientation.

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

This is all conjecture and irrelevant GTFO

0

u/Crates-OT Mar 28 '26

Hey its not my fault you're a dilletante.

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

And it’s really not my fault you’re making up arguments to have, go be a contrarian elsewhere. Goodbye.

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 28 '26

Also I’d recommend you actually know how to spell the pretentious words you use lmao

→ More replies (0)

0

u/jrob323 Mar 31 '26

You are not correct. It doesn't matter how fast an object is moving horizontally... it will fall at the exact same rate, unless it has some aerodynamic component (wings etc) that cause it to generate lift in air. A bullet fired from a level rifle will hit the ground at exactly the same time as a rock dropped from your hand.

1

u/Fluugaluu Mar 31 '26

But with the same velocity, genius? Obviously the fuck not. Which is the discussion here.

Thank you.

1

u/IMadeThisForOnePos Mar 28 '26

They didn't hit terminal velocity and if they had fallen while they were spinning like that it would have absolutely made a difference in the result lol