Wow talk about a timely post, I just switched the TV to FOX news to see live coverage of a rescue (somewhere in CA) of the occupants of a full size van that flipped down a 200' embankment killing at least 4. Preliminary reports say the van belongs to a NASA jet propulsion lab.
I imagine van safety issues will be in the forefront once again at least for a while. And guard rails installed on that stretch of highway might be a good idea too.

 

Just this on CNN.com
Van Crash and thought the same thing you did natstayl.

~Rob

 

Wow...talking about good (or bad) timing.

 

We have had this policy in place for about 2 years now. I woudn't tow with these vans reguardless. The way we do it, if we have to tow something we usally have a big group going and are takeing the bus anyways, so we tow with the bus, or we take a personal vehicle (usally my truck) and pull the trailer with it. You save on gas mileage and the driver of the truck pulling the trailer gets to ride in comfort and away from all the sights, sounds and smells associated with 10 people in a van or 40 people in a bus.. My church offers to pay for the fuel bill but I usally pay for it my self. (part of my extra giving).

-Kyle

 

Wasn't the chevrolet van the only stable one, because they stretched the wheelbase instead of adding more overall length?

 

The '93 GMC our church has does indeed have more length between the front and rear axles but it has the fuel tanks on the outside of the rails. Further when we reviewed our insurance policy we saw stats. GM van deaths were up there with the rest regardless of fire involved or not.
Nat

 

In my research I never found anything that said that the Chevrolet fan was more stable, but simple physics would tell you that it is. The longer wheelbase, in theory, should help prevent some of the fishtailing that occurs when you get the center of gravity too far towards the rear. That is the kind of van we have...which is the only reason I didn't suggest just selling it.

 

Hoss,

Don't take this wrong - I've served as a deacon and as an elder, so I'm not coming at this from an "anti-church" perspective. If I were sitting on a board considering this question, I would wonder if there isn't a moral dilemma here. If we truly believe this van is dangerous, even a "death trap", can we in good conscience sell it to someone else and put them at risk?

Just a perspective I would have to consider before making a decision to sell.

Rusty

 

Well, fortunately the decision really isn't mine to make. I did some research, consulted with our "risk management" deacon, provided the elders with the information I had obtained and then made a suggestion based on what I learned. It's up to them to decide what is to be done with the van that we have.

 

This is real interesting .... the NG here uses a lot of the vans like this to transport troops to and from Ft Riley about an hour west of us, and they overload them on a regular basis with troops and baggage.
They just bought 5 new ones in October. I may print this out and show it to the transportation officer, thought I doubt he has a say in what is purchased.

 

We use to ride in those on funeral details when I was in Rucker. Use to have fun sitting in the back. Sometimes I'd whistle like a siren and the Sgt would start checking his mirrors. One time I got him at an intersection. He was sitting through a green light until cars started honking and everyone started yelling at him. He drove so slow I don't think we'd have had any problems.

 

There is sufficient evidence of their danger that the 20th Air Force has required that we modify all out 15-pax vehicles.

We've had to remove the rearmost seat and are not allowed to exceed 55mph in one at all. The high center of gravity is the main culprit. Not only are the prone to rollover when control is lost, but they are unstable-- making the loss of control even more likely.

I't s a dangerous 1-2 punch.

 

I looked yesterday when I got to work and the new ones they got are Dodge 2500 15 passengers, 2003 model year...???

 

Anythings safer than throwing the kinds under haybales in the back of a horse trailer on a way home from the fair...

Ahh, good ole' 4-H...

 

I guess I am a disenter here. I grew up with the Dodge vans. I learned to drive in a 1979 Plymouth Voyager Prospector extended body van. It was pretty bullet proof, 360 Auto. I never had any trouble with stability or control, even in the slippery Northern Wisconsin winters. My Dad uses vans for his Antique business. He has had exclusively Dodge vans since 1973. We haven't ever used the 15 pass. model exactly, but that 1979 was used fully loaded from floor to ceiling, front to rear on many occasions, sometimes towing a fully loaded trailer. Proper loading and driving technique important, but is the case with any vehicle.

I wonder if much of the problem with the 15 pass. vans is the type of load, not necessarily the design? Just to postulate: a moving load in the rear (people talking, gesturing, shifting around) might make the load less stable, particularly when an emergency move catches people off guard? I guess I am unsure of the exact trouble. The vans we had were all B250's, some extended, others standard, all 135" (I think) wheelbase. I had an occasion hitting black ice on a drive back to College once, swapped ends a couple of times and never felt like I was going to go over. Once towing a load, I hit ice followed by drive pavement, and the fishtail wasn't any problem at all. Other times, I have towed through Ice and Snow, heavy slush, and hard rains with no problems. I guess that learning how to drive in one of the Beasts probably helped me become a better driver, since they aren't anything like a front drive Honda at all!!

I actually have had more trouble controling front wheel drive cars in slippery conditions than in any rear-wheel drive vehicles I have owned/driven!

Just my own experiences, with vehicles I have personally maintained and driven regularly.