134
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Cyclist@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

Wow that's a shitty headline. It makes it seem like the the truck went ED-209 in their ass. As far as I can tell from the article they couldn't be rescued because of the fire.

[-] modeler@lemmy.world 54 points 2 days ago

Well that and the fact the people inside and outside have tremendous difficulty opening a door or window if power fails.

In situations where emergency responders can't open a door, they try:

  1. To smash a window. Which is difficult if the window is designed to stop 9mm parabellum.

  2. Cut the door posts with the 'jaws of life'. Which is difficult if they can't smash the windows, and even more difficult to cut stainless steel bulletproof panels.

Basically the Cybertruck is the only commercial vehicle designed not to be opened.

I acknowledge there are manual ways to do this inside the car, but they are hidden and drivers (let alone occasional passengers) don't practice this, and so don't remember at times of stress.

These are specific points in UK road safety regulations and those are just 2 of the reasons why the UK banned the CT.

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yes it's a horrible thing to have happened, and I'm sorry for the loss of life, but from reading the article it's not clear how the vehicle being a cyber truck was a contributing factor. One person was rescued. To me it seems the real problem was the 19 year old driver that was drunk.

Edit: I hate Elon Musk too guys, calm down.

[-] ZDL@ttrpg.network 26 points 2 days ago

The accident was the drunken driver.

The fact that they couldn't get to the trapped victims was the Cybertruck.

I'm not sure which part of this is confusing.

[-] Hegar@fedia.io 19 points 2 days ago

A preliminary investigation revealed police were unable to extinguish the flames of a Tesla Cybertruck after a crash in Piedmont in November, trapping three and resulting in their deaths

It's explained right under the headline.

Please see this article for more information: https://medium.com/@davidsehyeonbaek/why-tesla-evs-catch-fire-and-why-victims-struggle-to-escape-8ec89e59760c

[-] Snowclone@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I appreciate the information, It just wasn't in the article at all. The part you quoted didn't explain anything. Only stated the make and model. It's not clear why from the article.

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

You're getting downvotes by the anti-Tesla hate. But you are correct.

It being a Cybertruck didn't really have anything to do with it. One person was saved, so clearly they were able to get into the vehicle and to the passengers.

Car fires happen all the time, people die in ICE car fires every day. There are an average of 33 car fires every hour in the US. But only the Tesla fires make headlines all the time.

[-] Hegar@fedia.io 28 points 2 days ago
[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Except at least one occupant was able to be saved from the vehicle... By a random nearby person, not even emergency personnel.

So clearly they were not trapped here, like you want to claim.

[-] Hegar@fedia.io 9 points 2 days ago

It wasn't a random passerby it was a motorist behind the tesla who saw the crash happen and immediately rendered aid - as the article explains.

Even they could only get 1 person out, so clearly the other three were trapped. No doubt by the intensity of temperature preventing further aid, if not because the electrics then failed trapping the other three.

[-] ZDL@ttrpg.network 7 points 2 days ago

Don't waste your breath on the Apartheid Manchild servicers. Especially the ones who can't read.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It wasn't a random passerby it was a motorist behind the tesla who saw the crash happen and immediately rendered aid

๐Ÿ™„

[-] halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

My point was it was a random civilian that helped, not a trained first responder, like I already pointed out.

Or the other three were already dead from the crash itself. We don't know from the article, because yet again, the article doesn't actually mention anything new. There is no new information here that wasn't already obvious in November when this happened.

The Alameda County Coroner's Bureau said driver Soren Dixon, 19, and passengers Jack Nelson, 20, and Krysta Tsukahara, 19, suffocated from smoke inhalation. Burns contributed to the deaths, the bureau said.

this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
134 points (100.0% liked)

Enough Musk Spam

2530 readers
503 users here now

For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.

No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.

Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.

Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.

Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS