Ended up being hit in the middle of the windscreen means BC
totally didn't see him coming when her sight had likely been
diverted to something, say checking of mirrors which drivers should
normally do before and after pulling out from the bus stop...
With the speed of 34km/h after pulling out of the busstop, the
bus was certaingly still accelerating without anyone catching the
attention of the old man crossing... If this is true, it can thus
be the case of his body behind the bus...
Also, taken into consideration that the old man was crossing
with his walkingstick, means he can only cross at slow speed which
high chances are he would have thought the bus would stop before
the yellow box, but as the driver sight was diverted to something
else, bus was coming straight at him, he had not enough time to get
back to the kerb, which would imply how the crash happened right in
the middle of the windscreen...
If we were to visualise from the back of the old man corssing
with the walking stick, was he crossing in a 90 degree angle
perpendicular to the road surface or was he crossing in an actue
angle perpendicular to the road surface?
Because in an acute angle against the windscreen + the speed of the
bus, the victim suffers more impact than at 90 degree...
Yes, I was going to point out this. It was a head-on collision,
not a sideswipe. To be hit the the middle of the windscreen with
such impact, it will be very difficult for the driver to absolve
herself of any blame (especially if she claimed she did not see the
old man) and get off the hook even if the old man was also
negligent.
Compare that to the position and magnitude of damage to the
windscreen of the SBS Transit bus at the Bendemeer Road fatal
accident.
I was not expecting SMRT Buses to put their telemetrics system
to full use so quickly, but this is going to prove immensely useful
in their investigation.
