I think the EV Hummer is going to be interesting test case. It's something like 9 thousand pounds and a thousand horsepower, 0-60 time of 3.5 seconds.
Society generally accepts small, fast sports cars and slow, heavy trucks, but fast, heavy trucks are something new. Sports cars are accepted I think in part because they're not designed like battering rams. If a sports car is in a wreck it'll probably take severe damage, and the driver is at a pretty high risk of injury too even if the car has sophisticated safety features. With this new Hummer, someone could sneeze and plow through three lanes of traffic and come out unscathed. The consequences of risky behavior are falling disproportionatly on the people who don't drive big trucks.
(This argument applies also to EVs like the Model S to a somewhat lesser degree. They're also fast and heavy, but they at least don't look like something you'd smash through a roadblock in some action movie with, so they kind of get a free pass.)
Requiring a CDL for certain vehicles that are heavier, more powerful, and with high risk of damage or injury to others seems like a reasonable option to me.
"Larger pickups and SUVs should have much more stringent licensing requirements akin to a CDL."
Why only them? The basic driver test is a joke. They should make the testing more strict for everyone. The license requirements for a CDL are probably more strict than you think (health, alcohol, etc).
I'm aware of the requirements. I think it would be completely reasonable that you should be required to not be on the verge of going into a diabetic coma and not have BAC of .07 while driving an F-450.
BAC need to be under .04. It's worth mentioning that any marijuana use is instant disqualification, even if it's prescription. All sorts of medical conditions can be disqualifying. Even stuff like high blood pressure or COPD.
Then you have things like one must be 21 to cross state lines, and 18 to get a learner's permit. Some criminal history, like felonies, will prevent you from getting a license.
So it's a bit more than not being on the verge of a diabetic coma. And if those restrictions are a good idea for personal vehicles, then why not do that for everyone?
Totally agree. My dad bought an airstream and an F150 big enough to tow it. Driving that thing scared me. The thing was huge, visibility was poor, and consequences of error were magnified.
Driving an F150 super crew may seem scary at first but as someone who bought one 4 years ago (first truck) coming from a CRV, I found no problems with visibility.
Take a driving class then? If driving a truck scares you because you’re not used to it, how is that any kind of argument against other people driving them?
If you think the vehicle requires a special class to drive it well, then it seems like you agree with TheCoelacanth that more stringent licensing is required.
I currently drive a pickup - my first truck in the 25 years I’ve been driving. There’s no need for more stringent licensing - people just need to pay attention to the road and stop behaving like they’re on a formula 1 track. My soon to be 15 year old daughter has been learning to drive my pickup (crew-cab F-150) and has no difficulties at all driving it responsibly.
Driving and texting in a full size car or a crossover isn’t any less dangerous to pedestrians than texting and driving in a truck. Full blackouts (the effect of driving and texting) means full speed hits and reduced visibility is irrelevant.
> More mass means more force to impart at the same speed.
technically yes, but the effect of more mass in a vehicle-pedestrian collision is asymptotic. a small (3000 lbs) sedan is already 15-20x the mass of a typical human. the vehicle loses a very small fraction of its initial velocity to momentum transfer. it really doesn't make much difference if you double or triple the mass of the vehicle.
