From: ron_winn@lineone.net   
      
   I'm interested in the physics of the crash.   
   Distance, Speed and traction = the damage you see.   
   No distance, speed and loss of traction = spin off.   
   No distance because of the limited space from the car's position in the left   
   lane to the pillar and which space has to account for the angle of approach.   
   There is a clear contradiction here.   
   For instance why didn't the car crash through the wide gap between the   
   pillars? This was a precision hit.   
   Computer simulations show it bouncing off the pillar and spinning off.   
   These simulation, obviously have to because that is how the car ended up.   
   In fact these simulations are ridiculous, apart from showing how a car would   
   react to loss of traction. Only IMO the crash damage does not reflect a   
   bouncing off nor a loss of traction.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)