Another Accident

Sadly another accident,thankfully the driver will be O.K.

Peterborough,NH

http://www.ledgertranscript.com/home/13900101-95/man-airlifted-antique-car-crashed-after-peterborough-parade

Fog my posterior! Texting was probably the culprit. I see it EVERYDAY no matter where I travel.

What ever happened to the idea that you shouldn't drive into places you can't see. Smoke, Fog, Steam, Dust, Dark.

What's to investigate? To fast for conditions for the Jeep Cherokee.

What ever happened to the idea that you shouldn't drive into places you can't see. Smoke, Fog, Steam, Dust, Dark.

What's to investigate? To fast for conditions for the Jeep Cherokee.

I'm with ya Paul! People even run into cop cars with someone pulled over and lights flashing! I don't get it. I got rear ended 25 years ago by some idiot who says he didn't see me. We are talking a bright red 1937 Chevy coupe! What???????????

Funny but the picture shows him driving the car and I don't see a "fog bank" behind him.

^^ Could be. There are lot's of people out there that shouldn't be driving because their vision is below state's standards. I have first hand experience with people like this.

It may come diwn to if the antique car had proper lighting to be in the highway. We are always very quick to judge the other drivers, but if fog was i deed an issue, this car had no bussiness on the road in it.

Picture taken standing still.....if driving there'd be steam...and someone driving into a "fog bank" blindly is an idiot...bottom line, you hit someone from behind, it's your fault....period....and it'll only cost you $50,000 or so in our silly court system to prove that wrong....

Glad driver is OK, we have to be so careful out there..

Fog my posterior! Texting was probably the culprit. I see it EVERYDAY no matter where I travel.

Easy enough to check phone records and weather conditions prior to the time of the accident.

And again if the antique car doesn't have proper lighting or proper slow moving vehicle sign it could be a whole different ballgame. Let's face it, if you were driving in the fog and driving cautiously and came upon that old car there would be absolutely nothing that you would see until it was too late

Steam, Fog, or whatever...

If you run into the back of a vehicle in daylight at 11:30 am, you are at fault in the crash. I don't care if the the antique car has any lights or not, the other vehicle's operator is clearly at fault in that crash.

Agree 100%, Matt, tailgaters don't seem to understand this concept, if I were a rich man with great insurance would hit the brake hard often....

Son and I did a non scientific poll while driving in traffic on I 83 on our way to Hershey each morning around 7. About 1/4 of all drivers we passed were using a cell phone or texting while driving.

Son and I did a non scientific poll while driving in traffic on I 83 on our way to Hershey each morning around 7. About 1/4 of all drivers we passed were using a cell phone or texting while driving.

That's the norm on any road! Until something is seriously done about that more innocent people will die. Wait until the dummies start driving with Smart glasses on.

Looking at the facts and using a little tool called google maps you can clearly see that the operator of the steam car was not on a highway but rather on a side road.

My guess is the driver of the Jeep was traveling north on the 202 and merged onto Sand Hill Rd that naturally leads around a blind curve to the Northeast. Not breaking a stride or slowing it's no wonder the owner of the Jeep plowed into him.

Forget about lights, if you travel the road NE you will understand you cannot see around this curve due to large trees let alone fog. And correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't steam from one of these smaller cars evaporate fairly quickly, especially at 11:30am ???? Hmmmm...

All I have to say is the driver of the Jeep better have some good insurance

Our prayers are with Eldredge for a complete and speedy recovery.

I know I am the the broken record but, "Eldredge was ejected from the steam car, and landed in the roadway."

One word: Seatbelts

Our prayers are with Eldredge for a complete and speedy recovery.

I know I am the the broken record but, "Eldredge was ejected from the steam car, and landed in the roadway."

One word: Seatbelts

According to the article he is expected to be fine:

"Eldredge’s sister, Jo Eldredge Morrissey, said Monday that Arthur is in “amazingly good condition,” considering the severity of the accident.

Morrissey said Eldredge has no spinal or brain injury. She said his doctors believe Eldredge’s top vertebrae that connects to his skull is cracked. However, she said Eldredge told her Monday he was expected to be up and walking around the hospital later that day."

Speed and failure to control your vehicle are the culprits, not seatbelts or the lack thereof....

The Jeep driver blamed a "fog bank" laid down behind the steam car. Having seen videos of steam cars on the road, it appears that the steam plume being heated rises quickly, with only a limited amount descending to grade level. Even at that, the steam plume behind the vehicle quickly dissipates within 20 or 30 ft. behind the vehicle, with vision being only partially obscured. It sounds like the Jeep driver's attention was not on the roadway ahead of him.

Just sayin',

Grog

I have only seen one steam car in operation and it was a Stanley. The steam trail was low to the ground and did not go over the middle of the wheels. I suspect as many do that the Jeep driver was distracted or just plain not paying attention. Although I do agree that even just lap belts are a good addition to any old car, perfection be damned. I have lap belts in my 52 Plymouth and I have to say that I felt very uncomfortable driving it until I installed them. I am a guy who put lap belts in my 54 Plymouth while in high school in 1968 and have never had a car without some type of restraint system.

Funny but the picture shows him driving the car and I don't see a "fog bank" behind him.

Ironically , in the photo is also a Jeep (behind the steam car)

From the Fordbarn, here's a recent accident involving an A coupe. He had belts which saved him and his passenger from serious injury. http://fordbarn.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151935

Our prayers are with Eldredge for a complete and speedy recovery.

I know I am the the broken record but, "Eldredge was ejected from the steam car, and landed in the roadway."

One word: Seatbelts

According to the article he is expected to be fine:

"Eldredge’s sister, Jo Eldredge Morrissey, said Monday that Arthur is in “amazingly good condition,” considering the severity of the accident.

Morrissey said Eldredge has no spinal or brain injury. She said his doctors believe Eldredge’s top vertebrae that connects to his skull is cracked. However, she said Eldredge told her Monday he was expected to be up and walking around the hospital later that day."

Speed and failure to control your vehicle are the culprits, not seatbelts or the lack thereof....

This one made me angry. If you're dead, you don't care if or how much you or the other car was at fault. Three weeks ago I had my near encounter with the Pearly Gates. This happened head-on at 40 mph (both cars) with a 1996 Chrysler that had crossed the line and came right at me:

That thing you see rammed in between the hood and windshield is a tree branch from the 150' of roadside brush my Triumph was sent spinning through by the impact. I saved my own life, and possibly the other guy's, by seeing him coming and driving as far off on to the shoulder as I could and still maintain control. Otherwise that rear fender impact would have been a front fender impact. If you look close you can see that the guy's tire dragged on the front door for about 18" before the major impact into the rear wheel/fender. (You should see the dent in the wheel!) He was still turning left across the road when he hit me.

Obviously the guy who hit me is the "culprit". Who cares! What matters is that I'm still here typing this. That impact should have catapulted me over the windshield, despite my best efforts. I should be dead. The 3 point belt in my TR6 saved my life, and that's a "culprit" I'd love to finger and call out here!

Seat belts, Buy 'em, install 'em, wear 'em. Or die if you want to.

Leave it to spaceman to get completely off topic.

Again !

Anyone ever seen a rear end collision when someone in the front vehicle is sitting still with a 3 point harness on ? Well, I have... and it isn't pretty trust me.

I'm sure that driver would have rather been catapulted instead of what he was served up that day for being "safe" with his seat belt on. It was 6 am on a Sunday and no one on the road but the driver in the front who was stopped at a light (in a Jeep ironically) minding his own business when I tried to get his attention to get out of the way of a drunk driver that was barreling at him at 60mph. No one else on the road but us three... who would have thought a seat belt would have killed him that way but it did....NO it wasn't the seat belt, it was the idiot who plowed into him. My mistake.

Speed and ignorance kills with or without a seatbelt ! Period

Anyone ever seen a rear end collision when someone in the front vehicle is sitting still with a 3 point harness on ?

Yes, and I've seen worse too. So have you.

"Always be careful if you see a person in a Chrysler product when you are driving. They have already demonstrated poor judgement in the past." That's what, car salesman, Ray Caldwell told his kids when he taught them to drive. Jeeps are Chrysler now, aren't they?

Bernie

A story goes as an ambulance attendant is lecturing the driver who was involved in a serious wreck. "Look at you!, You're all cut up, your face is bleeding from going through the windshield. Your hands are broken from from trying to hold on to the wheel. Your knees are badly bruised from them hitting the dash. Look at your passenger who was wearing a seat belt. Not one bruise, no blood, not even a broken bone. At least he looks like he's still alive."

Has anyone seen pix of the car?? With all of this ranting about seat belts has anyone considered that the car may have been flipped over and anyone belted to that flimsy old steamer might have been killed, burned or badly maimed? Everyone becomes a CSI, whenever there is a wreck involving an old car

This is an age-old argument: seat belts in old cars.

I, for one, am a big advocate of seat belts in modern cars and I always buckle up--I've seen too many wadded-up race cars with unharmed drivers in them to ever consider not buckling up. You're crazy not to.

HOWEVER, I've given it a lot of thought in my old cars and the bottom line is that in any old car, the accident is going to be very, very bad regardless of the safety precautions you take. I have 6 and 8-year-old kids and we drive our 1929 Cadillac A LOT. We debated seat belts. But given that the body framing is made of wood, the floors are made of wood, and the seat frames are made of wood, there's just nothing to attach a seat belt to that would stand up to the forces in even a modest accident. Some suggest bolting seat belts to the frame of the car, which is certainly sturdy enough, but given that the body is only held to that frame with 6 or 8 bolts, well, if I'm bolted to the frame but the body comes off in a wreck, um, that's probably pretty bad.

So we've decided not to bother with seat belts in the '29 Cadillac and simply drive defensively. A 7-foot-tall green car should be easy enough to spot, but we are always ready for the worst. That's your best defense.

In the case of this wreck, there's just no way seat belts would have made a difference. A little bucket like he was driving has the driver perched up on top anyway. So he's strapped to the car while it's flipping over? I don't see an upside to putting belts on something like this, at least for safety. For keeping you in place while you're driving? Heck yes! But I bet this guy would have been worse off attached to the car during the wreck than being tossed clear as he was. Pure speculation, but on a tiny car like that with a giant pressurized steam boiler under my butt, I think I'd want to be tossed, too.

Just my thoughts. There's no right or wrong answer to this question, you have to weigh the pros and cons and go with what makes you feel safest. Visibility and planning your driving carefully are your best bets, not passive safety devices.

Well said, Matt. It's a matter that requires consideration, especially when hauling other people around.

I agree with Matt Harwood. I have quite a few years of Rescue Squad experience and only had to unbelt one dead body, of the many dead bodies that I dealt with during those days. In over 30 years as a law enforcement officer, I never personally saw a case where a seat belt "caused' a death, although there are some circumstances where that has happened. Statistically speaking, seat belts are a good thing.

In a modern car which is designed for seat belts, (probably after about 1969 or so) I am an advocate for seat belts. Matt Harwood has made the same excellent points that I generally cite when people want to talk about installing seat belts in early cars. In my antiques that did not originally have seat belts, I generally keep them without belts. Others may choose to add belts to earlier cars. They can certainly do that to their cars if they wish.

This particular crash clearly was not one in which seats belts were a significant factor.

Admittedly without the facts it is tough to make a call on fault other than, I believe in just about every state your responsible not to hit anything you are behind regardless of fog, light, dark, rain, etc. I guess one could split hairs when assigning % of blame in a court case, like, were lights on in an accident that took place after dark, etc. But I think two factors come into play here, one, the antique car was hit from behind (most often situation involving accidents with antique cars.) and two, those of us who have owned and driven prewar cars extensively know first hand how impatient and innattentive some drivers are - in fact, lots of drivers. That leads to the conclusions above, Keith.

I may be a glutton for punishment going from a Packard (bigger, more power) or my Model A (capable of most speed limits, and I never felt comfortable on highway so I avoided it, IMHO a responsible decision for a stone stock "A") to a "T" but expect limited and thoughtful road use. I drove my "A" around locally - a lot. People tailgate, pass in no passing zones, and sometimes are so intent on looking at your car that they start "aiming at you" - not to mention texting/glued to cellphone mentality today. I am guessing Keith has not experienced that with his cars, as our 60s - 80s collector cars behave essentially the same as a modern vehicle in most traffic situations. But experiencing that regularly leads us prewar guys to reach the above conclusions - you know, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, you know the rest....

So the steamer driver wasn't acclaimed as a hero for putting himself between the parade and the oncoming Jeep?

The idea of defensive driving is pretty much lost in today's "Me first" society. I have a friend who is a "professional" driver and he has been in a number of accidents where the other person caused the incident by not doing what they were supposed to do.

When I taught my son and daughter to drive, I asked each if they understood the right of way. They did. Then I told them both that their right of way was revoked. If someone does something stupid in front of them stop, avoid, of whatever it takes because when you are sitting in a wrecked car saying "I had the right of way" you are not getting much sympathy from me. If you can't see don't drive was a pretty strong instruction during that training; as well as a few other apparently un-obvious tidbits.

On a long, open stretch of Interstate near us I showed my son that he could go as fast as he wanted with no traffic and clear vision, as long as he knew if he got caught it was his fault. As soon as we came to a wooded area in the median, I told him "Slow down here. There could be deer or police in there. Its pretty dumb to have a run in with either when you can't see."

Last weekend we were driving my '60 and a car approached from a side road. As we drove past I said "You could tell I didn't trust him, couldn't you?"

When it comes to all of those seemingly minor decisions we make during the day, the best action, no matter how young or old, is the one you'd tell your Dad if you had dinner with him tonight.

Bernie

Let's keep to the subject at hand, guys. Every state has their own laws to go by. Besides that speculation about who, what, and where about this accident is only that- speculation!

Just for the record I believe in seat belts in my modern vehicles.

I would like to know when are modern vehicle drivers that plow into antique drivers going to be held accountable to those of you in the hobby who preach seat belts ?

Just because the man driving the steam car was going much slower doesn't give any of us a waiver to just run his a*% over with or without a seatbelt !

Again, go to google maps and view the route at street level and tell me you could not have seen this man on the road ahead of you at 11:30 am (IF you were traveling at safe speeds). You will clearly see there was plenty of time to stop if you were traveling at a safe speed. While your on Sand Hill Rd on google maps continue on the road going N/NE and notice how many driveways are at the roads edge. If it wasn't the steam car, my guess is the driver of the Jeep may have broadsided someone pulling out of their own driveway.

Failure to control your vehicle is the main point in all of this, to call out the owner of the steam car for not wearing a seatbelt or turning this into a "seatbelt" issue is futile.

Ultimately the owner of the steam car should have used better judgment when deciding to travel on any modern road in a steam car. Common sense could have prevailed but that still does not give any of us a right to plow into someone who is going slower than us... whatever the reason.

I would like to know when are modern vehicle drivers that plow into antique drivers going to be held accountable to those of you in the hobby who preach seat belts ?.

When lawyers are involved in a court of law! Which will certainly happen in this case.

Ultimately the owner of the steam car should have used better judgment when deciding to travel on any modern road in a steam car. Common sense could have prevailed but that still does not give any of us a right to plow into someone who is going slower than us... whatever the reason.

Was this on a parade, or organized event? Either way, we have to be aware of our surroundings when driving slower vehicles on the public highways.

Wayne

Wasn't it said that this happened after the parade on his way home?

Just would like to add that it was too bad that someone didn't volunteer to follow the Steam Vehicle with a car or truck with Lights On and 4-Ways Flashing. Not exactly like this case, but I have been in similar situations where we took that pre-caution. Maybe that would have been enough to make a difference.

Glad to see that the man is doing well. Hopefully everyone was well insured. It's too bad the car is in the rough shape that it is...

Either way, we have to be aware of our surroundings when driving slower vehicles on the public highways.

Wayne

When I drive, no matter what car I'm in, it seems I'm looking in my rearview mirror more than looking forward. I just don't trust people today.