[veyron999]

Originally Posted by amods

Sad incident.

2. I don't test the depth by myself, if vehicles ahead which are similar to mine are wading easily, then follow them with weight on gas pedal and clutch - don't let the engine die in middle.

Probably best to stay away from water altogether, but just in case - I can't help but wonder what would one do in an automatic transmission vehicle.
From what I read, it seems best to keep the engine revving and the speeds low ? That wouldn't be possible in an automatic transmission.

[David Murx]

Originally Posted by aaggoswami

On 31-July-2019, Vadodara city got heavy rainfall.
I had to abandon my Swift and walk around 2 kms. to reach home.
Fortunately, for me my car's electricals were working including wipers, lights and locks, but then my car wasn't swept away or was that deeply submerged in flood but footwell was definitely inundated with water.

The moment I got out from the car after safely parking it on higher ground I realized force of water, and this was in middle of city where many bystanders were just there and around more than 50 cars stranded in water. Furthermore, when I was walking to reach home after a brief help from bus for 200 or may be 300 mtrs., a lesson was learnt about force of water. The energy required to move in water, to displace water and what its force could do. From safety of car which kept me dry to walking in waist high water at places, water has an energy that should never be ignored. With approaching darkness, it became even more difficult to gauge depth of water.

The incident about an individual losing his life in car pinpoints need of emergency equipment in the car cabin that has to be in immediate reach of occupants. Hammer, belt cutter, all in reach.

While my car is performing well as water didn't submerge the seats, my seat belt is not getting unbuckled with ease. If this can happen to my car that started next day with ease and having all electricals intact, just imagine what would have happened when a car gets swept away.

The rains that hit vadodara on 31st July just cannot be forgotten. I remember we had to close the store pretty early but that also happened around 8:30 late evening. After closing store located in Inorbit Mall, the mistake I did was to reach home in my car. The thought of letting my car be parked in mall only as a safety measure hit my mind; but then I gave it a skip and planned to drive back home which I guess was the mistake I did. Without estimating the depth of logged water I plunged my Ertiga on the road and then there was a realisation that I should not have done it. I thought driving anyhow till Rhino circle which is nearly 750 m in distance, but rains that day was so bad that I struggled driving till nearly 3 kms post which I simply gave up. I had to give up not because I could not have drive, but I gave up because it was too much strain for the engine and I did not wanted the car to suffer any damages. So after reaching that distance I saw clear on the main road wherein I had parked my car with other cars as well and went walking home. I guess that was pretty good decision to avoid car damage. During our recent friends meetup got to know that that day one of my friend's colleague had also driven his Tata Nexon with same water level, and water had peeped into his car. Considering this fact I was quite contended as not a single drop of water had peeped into my Ertiga the same day on the same road. Lesson learnt in this situation was never plunged your car without understanding the depth, the strength of gushing water. Also a point to be noted is never take unfamiliar road during flooded water because you are not sure about the road conditions and with water logged it becomes difficult to judge driving.

[for_cars1]

Originally Posted by condor

...must be incident with the Isuzu V-Cross, which was swept away in the floods....could not hear the locals shouting. Or he ignored it and continued...

Originally Posted by SR-71

...A BMW X1 which came soon after ignored the calls of the truck driver ....X1 which was floating
...[*]Never ever try to wade through a water body, you never know how deep it is or how bad the undercurrents are[*]If you do and get stuck, do not bother about the car or try to steer it away. You will never win against the current with a flooded car.

Originally Posted by silverado

.....SUV/MUV can give you a false sense of safety in such scenario's.

In most water logging incidents, SUV users can get into a sense of false sense of security that their vehicles are designed for wading through water and now is the time to put the vehicle to good use (ie., wade through the water).

A very dangerous move given that just 6 inches of water flowing at 10 kmph can destabilize most cars.
One foot deep water is enough to float most cars and just 2 feet of flowing water can carry away most vehicles including SUVs. The force of the water acting on the vehicle is just enormous.

Originally Posted by ike

..I have a seat belt cutter that can smash windows also within reach at all times. I have been thinking about buying one more the rear seat occupants, the only thing I'm worried about is my 2 year old son fiddling with it unnecessarily...

I have the same tool. A 2 year old many not be able to exert enough force to push the tool on a surface and activate the spring loaded metal hammer. However it is quite small so there is always a risk of small children trying to swallow the same.

[hondatoyotafan]

Originally Posted by sweetvar26

Hey guys, I wanted to mention this as I came across this thread.

My friend's brother, around 37, wife and two kids was driving from Hyderabad to Goa. He is meeting up with his wife and kids there as his work is also in Goa. 3 days ago they lost contact as to where he is and they figured out it was in Belgaum area, Karnataka where there were floods. They could'nt identify the location as the area is flooded and there's still rain the past few days.

.

His brother is a mutual friend of mine, it was a very unfortunate incident. I think he underestimated the depth of the stream he intended to cross. Also he was off course due to some GPS error (one more pointer is not blindly trust GMaps).

I remember going through a defensive driving course in the US where they advise you that if you cant see the bottom of the water body dont cross it. Also
there were tips on the water pressure and force required to break the glass

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUD53NZ03zM

[Tom Sooraj]

Originally Posted by Brishti

Seat belts lockup if the car is in a wrong angle that means getting out would be a problem. While driving in Shimla the seatbelts in Octavia also lockup when the car is parked on a sharp angle road "Like Jakhu".

Is it recommended not to wear seatbelts while driving in hills? I came across a video which explains why one should not wear seatbelts while driving in hills.

https://youtu.be/TUp7GJRMLV4

[Thad E Ginathom]

I don't know what he said. Short in-a-few-words English resume?

It is possible to come up with scenarios in which seat belts might hinder, rather than help. But I doubt that one can say "in the hills."

[BenjiRoss]

Originally Posted by Tom Sooraj

Is it recommended not to wear seatbelts while driving in hills? I came across a video which explains why one should not wear seatbelts while driving in hills.

So he suggests that most accidents when you're driving in hills result in a rollover or fall. If you're wearing a seat belt, you are stuck and your head gets tossed around and injured. If you don't have a seatbelt, you may be thrown out of the car during a rollover and escape.
Bravo! And his subscribers are convinced and lauding his logic.
Better be alive with a bruised head than dead and thrown out of the car.
It's difficult to fault his logic simply because it is incorrect at a zillion levels and we don't have the patience to contradict this logic.
While we acknowledge that seatbelts can hamper getting out of the car or being rescued in the rare occasion, can you really say that his logic holds good in 100% of hill accidents (or even a majority)?
Maybe we should get a good horoscope reader to predict if one will have an accident and if that will result in a rollover and if we'll get thrown out and escape. If the horoscope ticks all these boxes, one can foolishly drive without seatbelts.
Addendum: This discussion is better off in the hill riding thread.

[Roy.S]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I don't know what he said. Short in-a-few-words English resume?

He says that people who drive in hilly areas don't wear seatbelts. Apparently their logic is that if you drive off a cliff you'll be strapped in and go down along with the car. He describes a typical scenario where the car would roll over multiple times before coming to a halt, possibly, in a water body which will finish the job that the cliff started. He also mentions that without a seatbelt you can escape while your vehicle is on its way down and that there are chances that the whole thing could explode if it goes down hard enough.
There are some movie like scenarios he mentions like cars dangling off trees etc. There is a whole lot of "my cousin's bff's uncle's dog once died in such a situation".
Plenty of logical flaws can be pointed out in this argument and the guy in the video may have good intentions but ultimately its bad advice. Reminds me of the anti vaxxer lobby.

[Tom Sooraj]

Thank you @BenjiRoss and Roy.S for your inputs.

IMO, rather than depending on seatbelts, it is always better to be more cautious while driving in the hills, because in case of fall from a cliff, one cannot imagine the amount of damage any vehicle suffers and the severity of injury any person experiences. But it is safe to have our seatbelts on, irrespective of the path of travel.

[Roy.S]

Originally Posted by Tom Sooraj

...it is always better to be more cautious while driving in the hills,..
.
.
. But it is safe to have our seatbelts on, irrespective of the path of travel.

As you said, seatbelts on and be cautious.
I thought that I was too old to get riled up by something I saw on the interwebs but that youtube video really got my goat. I saw a really old print ad possibly released by a car manufacturer (not Indian) that stated that it was better to get thrown out of your car than to remain strapped in. This must have been in response to new government regulation that mandated seatbelts in cars. As we now know it is far better to remain belted in than be thrown around like a rag doll. Of course, seatbelts are relatively new in India and the seatbelt rule is even more recent. Perhaps some of the old beliefs about belts will persist for a bit longer.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Roy.S

He says that people who drive in hilly areas don't wear seatbelts. Apparently their logic is that if you drive off a cliff you'll be strapped in and go down along with the car. ... ... ... Plenty of logical flaws can be pointed out in this argument and the guy in the video may have good intentions but ultimately its bad advice. Reminds me of the anti vaxxer lobby.

Thanks, I thought it would be something like this. And I can imagine occasional circumstances in which it might be true, but it also looks like suggesting that bikers don't do up the helmet strap! I think that anybody that drives off the edge of mountain needs a lot of luck anyway, but I agree with BenjiRoss's understanding (my bold)...

Originally Posted by BenjiRoss

So he suggests that most accidents when you're driving in hills result in a rollover or fall. If you're wearing a seat belt, you are stuck and your head gets tossed around and injured. If you don't have a seatbelt, you may be thrown out of the car during a rollover and escape.
Bravo! And his subscribers are convinced and lauding his logic.
Better be alive with a bruised head than dead and thrown out of the car.

Yep. Better keep that helmet strapped on; better to be inside the car.

It's difficult to fault his logic simply because it is incorrect at a zillion levels and we don't have the patience to contradict this logic.

This is called fractal wrongness!

The state of being wrong at every conceivable scale of resolution. That is, from a distance, a fractally wrong person's worldview is incorrect; and furthermore, if you zoom in on any small part of that person's worldview, that part is just as wrong as the whole worldview

(Thanks, Google)

Addendum: This discussion is better off in the hill riding thread.

I think we can dispose of it here and now.

Oh, and by the way... I wonder if he drives with that phone in his hand

[Roy.S]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

.
.
Oh, and by the way... I wonder if he drives with that phone in his hand

Of course he does. How else is he going to livestream a gloating "see I told you" video as he exits from his car James Bond fashion just before it plummets down a gorge because the tyres were sliced by Oddjob's carelessly thrown hat.

Edit: This is so OT that its gonna see moderator action but that video really annoyed me.