MO woman goes 59 miles @ 110MPH because of 'stuck' gas pedal

[Simon_Jester]

She was driving well enough to impress the police, but wasn't thinking clearly enough to shift into neutral or stop pressing the accelerator? Really guys?

Avoiding obstacles while moving at high speed is a reflex action; taking logical steps to stop your car is higher-brain thinking.

That said, "HOLY SHIT I'M GOING 120 MPH OH GOD THERE'S A TRAFFIC JAM AHEAD!" is not a good time to spend five seconds going "Hm, I wonder if I can..."

Sneer at her all you want, but once she got moving I bet her brain was kinda busy with that.

That's true, but, and I know it's anecdotal, when I was nearly in a major accident on my bike I didn't freak out and crash or feel a need to call the police. I slammed on the breaks and hoped like hell I would stop in time. How is that any different than doing the same thing in a runaway car and does doing that make me some bike expert who knows far more than the basics of how to ride a bike?

Jub, I like you well enough, but you're going off on a stupid again.

I don't know what kind of accident you were in, but there's a huge difference between "runaway acceleration" and "panic stop slam on the brakes." The latter is a reflex action, we can literally do it without thinking when our brain isn't actively attentive and we're driving on instinct. The brain sees something in front of itself, it pushes the 'stop' button which thousands of hours of experience have taught it to look for under its right foot. Your frontal brain was not necessarily involved in stopping your bike there, unless you actually had to stop and think "I'm about to slam into something, I wonder what I should do?"

Runaway acceleration is a rare failure mode most people encounter once, if that. And it immediately puts you in danger of crashing into things at high speed, which means you need to pay a lot of attention to where the hell you're going. That is a situation where you need higher brain work, and aren't likely to get it.

Honestly, it seems like most people are morons who shouldn't be driving. I wonder how many lives would be saved if the law saw things the same way...

We'd have to live in a very different civilization, probably one with a lot more taxis.

[aerius]

With regards to sticking the car into neutral or turning the ignition off, I went over this a while back during the runaway Toyota spree which took place a few years ago. The short version is many new cars no longer have a proper ignition key, they use a pushbutton to start & stop the car. When the car is parked you push the button and the car starts or stops. When it's moving, you need to push and hold the button for about 5 seconds or so to get the ignition to shut off and stop the engine, but most people don't know that since they never read the owner's manual. So in a panic they just punch the button repeatedly and nothing happens because that's the way the system's designed; you don't want an accidental button push to shut down the engine when the car's moving.

The next part is you can't shift into neutral when your foot's on the gas pedal. This is a "feature" of many newer cars to prevent damage to the transmission. Shifting into neutral when the engine's under load with your foot on the gas pedal is hard on the entire drivetrain of your vehicle, it puts a lot of stress on the parts and can blow things up and land you with a massive repair bill, so the automakers put electronic controls in the transmission to prevent you from doing it.

I always get skeptical whenever people say "I couldn't turn my car off" or "I couldn't shift into neutral", and especially "I had the brake pedal held down all the way but the car just kept going faster" as that should be completely impossible.

It's very possible if you do it wrong. The brake system in your car uses a vacuum assist which is run by the partial vacuum which the engine creates under closed or partial throttle. When the engine is at or near full throttle (gas pedal most or all the way down), there is little to no vacuum, so vacuum assist under those conditions is limited to none. Without vacuum assist, your brakes don't work nearly as well as usual and you really need to stomp down hard on the brakes to make them work. How hard? Well, park your car somewhere safe and turn the engine off, then pump the brake pedal a few times to use up the vacuum reserve, your brake pedal will now be 10 times harder to push, if not worse.

What do I mean by doing it wrong? In a runaway car situation, you need to stomp the brake hard and keep your foot on it till the car stops, this way you get as much help as possible from the vacuum reserve in the brake system. If you try to brake as usual, you deplete the vacuum reserve at which point you no longer have vacuum assist, and when that happens you may no longer be able to push the pedal hard enough to stop the car.

[Jub]

I don't know what kind of accident you were in, but there's a huge difference between "runaway acceleration" and "panic stop slam on the brakes." The latter is a reflex action, we can literally do it without thinking when our brain isn't actively attentive and we're driving on instinct. The brain sees something in front of itself, it pushes the 'stop' button which thousands of hours of experience have taught it to look for under its right foot. Your frontal brain was not necessarily involved in stopping your bike there, unless you actually had to stop and think "I'm about to slam into something, I wonder what I should do?"

Runaway acceleration is a rare failure mode most people encounter once, if that. And it immediately puts you in danger of crashing into things at high speed, which means you need to pay a lot of attention to where the hell you're going. That is a situation where you need higher brain work, and aren't likely to get it.

I'm going to have to conceed because I don't drive, don't even have a license to be honest. It just seems like something I'd expect people to know if they're on the roads; just like turning into a spin, and looking where you need to drive. Then again, if those worst driver shows are representative, then a significant number of drivers can hardly drive in a straight line, park a car, or reverse a short distance.

I avoided he accident thankfully. I was riding down a dirt shoulder and nailed a pothole as the car was passing right close to me. I swear my rear tire tagged the side of his car before I landed and slide to a stop.

[fgalkin]

Why didn't she try turning the car off?

Because she didn't want to be driving at 110 MPH with locked steering?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Dave]

[Random opinion/anecdote]

Just tried putting my car in neutral on the way home (no cars around), and it worked well enough -- however, I had to think briefly about doing it, and at the time the car was not accelerating, just coasting.

(5 speed automatic, keyed ignition)

I can imagine, in this situation, that I would be able to take my foot off the pedal if at any point I had a moment to think (clear stretch of road), but I can't imagine successfully shifting forward into neutral (though my manual states it has a limiter that prevents you from shifting into reverse while in foraward motion on the manual model, not sure about automatic.).

I expect my third move (if taking foot off the pedals doesn't work and I can't seem to brake) would to be attempt to put the car in the first gear (yank the stick all the way back). That should limit the car to 1st gear + rev limiter, which would be, what, 25 mph? 35? Then I might have more time to think about which pedal I'm hitting or if I can shift to neutral.

[Korto]

...I know it's anecdotal, when I was nearly in a major accident on my bike I didn't freak out and crash or feel a need to call the police. I slammed on the breaks and hoped like hell I would stop in time. How is that any different than doing the same thing in a runaway car and does doing that make me some bike expert who knows far more than the basics of how to ride a bike?

Mate, that bolded part proves the point that people in a sudden high-stress situation don't necessarily react in the best fashion, at their full mental ability.
A better thing to do would have been to apply the brakes in such a fashion for maximum braking without locking the tyres (which reduces braking power), and steered yourself (possibly releasing the brakes to assist in controlled steering) around the problem. In fact, right now I can sit here and tell you, after the event, that you should have done this, and you should have done that, and you must have been a moron not to, but I'm not going to since I wasn't there, nearly in a major accident, heart in my mouth, and thinking "Oh my fucking god, I'm going to DIE". It makes a big difference.

If her car had this feature aerius mentioned, where you can't go into neutral when your foot's on the accelerator, and IF there was some kind of car failure making the car think her foot was on the pedal (jam, short, whatever), that would likely mean it would be literally impossible to go into neutral.
There are explanations here of what could have happened to make the obvious things to stop the car either impossible, or apparently impossible to a panicking mind. Exhausted brakes, so they wouldn't work, five second delay on the ignition, so it didn't seem to work either (if on/off is always a quick stab-press, even if you had read "5 second delay", there's a damn good chance you wouldn't remember at the time), and neutral not available due to accelerator malfunction.
The only unlikely thing is the original malfunction, but it could happen. I would prefer if we lay off the lynching for a little while.

[aerius]

I expect my third move (if taking foot off the pedals doesn't work and I can't seem to brake) would to be attempt to put the car in the first gear (yank the stick all the way back). That should limit the car to 1st gear + rev limiter, which would be, what, 25 mph? 35? Then I might have more time to think about which pedal I'm hitting or if I can shift to neutral.

Good luck doing that in most newer cars. Once again the electronic controls for the transmission will prevent downshifts until the car slows down to a speed which doesn't over-rev the engine so you won't blow the gearbox and engine. So let's say you're doing 90mph in drive and you yank it down to first, in a 5 speed auto that'll drop you down to 4th and it'll stay there, the engine's now doing 5000rpm instead of 3500 and you're still going 90mph. It won't drop down to 3rd, 2nd, or 1st until you get somehow get the car to slow down.

This is exactly what my 2009 car does, if I'm doing highway speeds in drive and yank it down to 1st, it ain't going to into 1st until I hit the brakes and slow the car down to 20mph. It says so in the owner's manual and that's exactly what it does when I tested it out.

[Broomstick]

The short version is many new cars no longer have a proper ignition key, they use a pushbutton to start & stop the car. When the car is parked you push the button and the car starts or stops. When it's moving, you need to push and hold the button for about 5 seconds or so to get the ignition to shut off and stop the engine, but most people don't know that since they never read the owner's manual.

That, and when you're in crisis mode your perception of time becomes distorted. You might think you've held it in for 5 seconds, but you haven't.

I had a shitload of emergency training when learning to fly, thinking through scenarios, understanding how mechanical stuff works, and learning to function under pressure. If I hadn't had that, I'm not sure I would have coped well with my stuck accelerator. Most drivers never have anything other than very basic driver's training, and knowing how mechanical stuff works is not required for getting a driver's license, at least not in the US. Oh, and I'm weird/geeky/nerdy enough to have actually read the owner's manual for both my truck and my car.

As far as stress on the transmission and other stuff goes - if it keeps my alive and intact I'll sacrifice my vehicle. I'd prefer not to, but if it's between me and the machine, well, I'll save the skin and not the tin. If I have to trash my transmission to stop a runaway situation and save my life I will. But then, I made that decision a long time ago, I just hope to avoid needing to implement it. Most people don't think like that. Then something happens, they panic, they're freaking out, swerving through traffic at speeds higher than they've ever driven at before, and they're worried about getting into an accident. Yeah, hard to figure it out when you have that urgent need to piss and are barely coping with steering around the traffic that suddenly seems to be standing still compared to you.

There is a human factor here. How people react/think sitting in one place in a comfortable armchair "driving" their computer keyboard is vastly different than how they react/think going 120 mph and they can't stop, or even slow down. If most drivers are going to react in a particular way under those conditions then we need to design for that, not scold the drivers by saying, no, you should do X instead of Y.

Unless we're willing to make getting a driver's license as arduous as getting a pilot's license. Arguably, there are some good reasons to do that however in the real world that's just not going to happen. Even then, there will be situations where people won't react in a manner anticipated by the designers.

Meanwhile, I'm quite happy to be driving my fuddy-duddy car with the old fashioned key ignition and minimal electronics.

[aerius]

Unless we're willing to make getting a driver's license as arduous as getting a pilot's license. Arguably, there are some good reasons to do that however in the real world that's just not going to happen. Even then, there will be situations where people won't react in a manner anticipated by the designers.

I'm all in favour of doing just that, as a ballpark figure I'd say at least 99.5% of current licensed drivers would never drive again. And that would make me happy even though I might be one of them, but at least I know I won't get creamed by some moron while biking to work.

Meanwhile, I'm quite happy to be driving my fuddy-duddy car with the old fashioned key ignition and minimal electronics.

At least I still have a key ignition in my car, which actually does shut down the engine when I'm driving. And yes I have tested this, and yes I'll still have full steering control if I turn the key one click to the "accessory" position instead of "off/lock" to kill the engine. I'll be really pissed off when I'm finally forced to drive a car with a pushbutton ignition switch.

[Zaune]

Tested that once in my truck, which has ABS. I didn't detect an appreciable difference.

Now, when the rear brake line broke, THAT made a huge difference in braking authority, but that's a different story.

I shall have to remember to test that for myself any time I buy a car with ABS, then; I suspect there may have been an interlude between anti-lock brakes being introduced and someone realising that losing brake power if the engine stalls is a safety issue, and who knows how many cars were made during that interlude and are still on the road?

[muse]

Someone also told me once that cars fitted with ABS braking systems tend to lose most if not all brake response if the engine isn't running. I don't know if this is true or not, but it would certainly make me think twice about just turning off the ignition unless I was in the outside lane and had a hard shoulder or a big empty field to swerve into.

Doesn't matter if you have ABS or not, every car with power brakes will do that once the vacuum assist reservoir is used up, which is generally 1-2 brake applications after the engine's turned off. After that the pedal gets damn hard to push and you have to put your whole body into it to stop the car. Unless you drive an early production Lotus Elise or other such car with no power brakes. And no power steering. Or power anything for that matter.

[aerius]

The above was my post, cuddles left the auto login on on my computer. Again.

[Simon_Jester]

I'm going to have to conceed because I don't drive, don't even have a license to be honest. It just seems like something I'd expect people to know if they're on the roads; just like turning into a spin, and looking where you need to drive. Then again, if those worst driver shows are representative, then a significant number of drivers can hardly drive in a straight line, park a car, or reverse a short distance.

Put this way- I instinctively look where I need to drive, have turned into a spin at least once (I think I got that right the time the car skidded; I stopped short of the treeline so all's well that ends well). I have instinctively braked to avoid accidents more than once.

I have never had the accelerator run away from me, nor do I know anyone it's happened to.

I avoided he accident thankfully. I was riding down a dirt shoulder and nailed a pothole as the car was passing right close to me. I swear my rear tire tagged the side of his car before I landed and slide to a stop.

OK, so it wasn't quite what I envisioned- the key is that hitting the brakes to slow down is a reflex action, just like looking in certain directions, avoiding obstacles, and other things a trained monkey could probably do if you taught it to.

I'm all in favour of doing just that, as a ballpark figure I'd say at least 99.5% of current licensed drivers would never drive again. And that would make me happy even though I might be one of them, but at least I know I won't get creamed by some moron while biking to work.

I doubt we'd have enough drivers left for the delivery trucks and buses, let alone the taxis... if we go that way, the solution is driverless cars- but the automation on a driverless car will probably NOT cope well with mechanical failure modes. At least not soon.

[Dominus Atheos]

Someone also told me once that cars fitted with ABS braking systems tend to lose most if not all brake response if the engine isn't running. I don't know if this is true or not, but it would certainly make me think twice about just turning off the ignition unless I was in the outside lane and had a hard shoulder or a big empty field to swerve into.

Doesn't matter if you have ABS or not, every car with power brakes will do that once the vacuum assist reservoir is used up, which is generally 1-2 brake applications after the engine's turned off. After that the pedal gets damn hard to push and you have to put your whole body into it to stop the car. Unless you drive an early production Lotus Elise or other such car with no power brakes. And no power steering. Or power anything for that matter.

If you lose vacuum, then you need to pump the brakes and that will allow your brakes to function.

And once again, I've been in a "runaway" car when I turned the engine off. Braking was difficult, but hardly required my "whole body". Instead of braking requiring very little effort, it just required a moderate amount of effort.

And even if what you said is true, the engine being off while having no brakes is still a whole lot better then the engine being on full throttle with no brakes.

[DPDarkPrimus]

I own a 1999 Chrysler Sebring JX. I can turn off the engine with the car in drive, but I cannot remove the key until the car is in park.

Yes, this is actually the case in my car as well - I was mis-remembering because it's been a while since last I forgot to shift to park when turning the vehicle off.

[Broomstick]

Unless we're willing to make getting a driver's license as arduous as getting a pilot's license. Arguably, there are some good reasons to do that however in the real world that's just not going to happen. Even then, there will be situations where people won't react in a manner anticipated by the designers.

I'm all in favour of doing just that, as a ballpark figure I'd say at least 99.5% of current licensed drivers would never drive again. And that would make me happy even though I might be one of them, but at least I know I won't get creamed by some moron while biking to work.

I doubt we'd have enough drivers left for the delivery trucks and buses, let alone the taxis...

Nonsense. A pilot's license isn't that difficult, the average human being is quite capable of earning one. The trick is most aren't motivated enough to get through the difficult bits. It requires you to actually learn what the hell you are doing and something about the machine you are operating, including emergency procedures and, just as importantly, how to react to emergencies.

We'd probably have ample professional drivers, as they would have the motivation to go through the program (have to make a living, make money, etc.). What we'd have a lot fewer of are the casual drivers.

After all, Europe doesn't seem to have a problem with getting professional drivers. Europe does have a lot fewer private drivers when compared to the US. You'd still have some folks going out to get a personal driver's license.

if we go that way, the solution is driverless cars- but the automation on a driverless car will probably NOT cope well with mechanical failure modes. At least not soon.

That's an issue in aviation right now, actually - some airplanes and routes have become so automated the human pilots are losing their problem-solving skills. Given that a major reason humans are still in the cockpit is because we deal with the unexpected better than computers do, it's sort of a problem.

[Tsyroc]

Doesn't matter if you have ABS or not, every car with power brakes will do that once the vacuum assist reservoir is used up, which is generally 1-2 brake applications after the engine's turned off. After that the pedal gets damn hard to push and you have to put your whole body into it to stop the car. Unless you drive an early production Lotus Elise or other such car with no power brakes. And no power steering. Or power anything for that matter.

That would be someone like me. 1989 B2200 Mazda pickup. No power steering, no power brakes, and a manual transmission that is very easy to put in neutral no mater what speed I am going.

[TheFeniX]

Good luck doing that in most newer cars. Once again the electronic controls for the transmission will prevent downshifts until the car slows down to a speed which doesn't over-rev the engine so you won't blow the gearbox and engine. So let's say you're doing 90mph in drive and you yank it down to first, in a 5 speed auto that'll drop you down to 4th and it'll stay there, the engine's now doing 5000rpm instead of 3500 and you're still going 90mph. It won't drop down to 3rd, 2nd, or 1st until you get somehow get the car to slow down.

Not to mention that if it actually engaged 1st gear (which I'm sure is almost impossible considering the speed difference, I know I couldn't even get my manual into first gear if I was above 50mph, even with the clutch depressed), the "lurch" from the power wheels essentially locking up would likely cause a wreck. Even before that, you would be smashed against your seatbelt fairly hard. I had this issue in my old shitbox Ranger. Sometimes when shifting into 4th at about 45 mph, I would miss and get into second gear. Not fun and I quickly learned to never "drop" the clutch when shifting into 4th.

At least I still have a key ignition in my car, which actually does shut down the engine when I'm driving. And yes I have tested this, and yes I'll still have full steering control if I turn the key one click to the "accessory" position instead of "off/lock" to kill the engine. I'll be really pissed off when I'm finally forced to drive a car with a pushbutton ignition switch.

You'll lose power steering which isn't actually a huge deal considering you only need minor steering-wheel movements to drive on the highway. A hard curve at 90mph would be fun though. The problem with the brakes is the same problem with these new fancy ignition systems: for years after ABS came out, people were still "pumping" their brakes to perform a quick and controlled stop. Car manufacturers had numerous warnings (and sometimes even stickers on the dash) in new cars specifically stating that with ABS you do not need to pump the brakes.

Now that ABS is pretty standard, people forget (or have never known) that pumping the brakes is useful if and when you A. lose power brakes (like if your front power belt snaps, been there) or B. your ABS fails because your piece-of-shit 2007 Dakota computer randomly decides to shut-off all electronics in the vehicle (I'm just glad headlights and blinkers are still controlled by a fucking hard-switch).

The problem is: no one teaches you this shit. I consider myself lucky that, for a while, Texas allowed parents with X amount of driving experience to train their kids to pass the exam. My mom made sure I came out knowing how to not kill myself or someone else, then again, she had the time and means to do that for me. When I actually took the exam and defensive driving later, it's all "RED MEANS STOP." They literally do not train you in handling anything out of the ordinary, just textbook style shit people already know. "Abstract" (for lack of a better term) driving concepts have to be learned on the road, which is a pretty terrible system.

[Simon_Jester]

Unless we're willing to make getting a driver's license as arduous as getting a pilot's license. Arguably, there are some good reasons to do that however in the real world that's just not going to happen. Even then, there will be situations where people won't react in a manner anticipated by the designers.

I'm all in favour of doing just that, as a ballpark figure I'd say at least 99.5% of current licensed drivers would never drive again. And that would make me happy even though I might be one of them, but at least I know I won't get creamed by some moron while biking to work.

I doubt we'd have enough drivers left for the delivery trucks and buses, let alone the taxis...

Nonsense. A pilot's license isn't that difficult, the average human being is quite capable of earning one. The trick is most aren't motivated enough to get through the difficult bits. It requires you to actually learn what the hell you are doing and something about the machine you are operating, including emergency procedures and, just as importantly, how to react to emergencies.

I was thinking off that 99.5% figure. Which, yes, is exaggerated.

[Magis]

Someone also told me once that cars fitted with ABS braking systems tend to lose most if not all brake response if the engine isn't running. I don't know if this is true or not, but it would certainly make me think twice about just turning off the ignition unless I was in the outside lane and had a hard shoulder or a big empty field to swerve into.

Doesn't matter if you have ABS or not, every car with power brakes will do that once the vacuum assist reservoir is used up, which is generally 1-2 brake applications after the engine's turned off. After that the pedal gets damn hard to push and you have to put your whole body into it to stop the car. Unless you drive an early production Lotus Elise or other such car with no power brakes. And no power steering. Or power anything for that matter.

If you lose vacuum, then you need to pump the brakes and that will allow your brakes to function.

I hope you're not serious. When you lose vacuum, pumping the brakes is the worst thing you can do.

And once again, I've been in a "runaway" car when I turned the engine off. Braking was difficult, but hardly required my "whole body". Instead of braking requiring very little effort, it just required a moderate amount of effort.

This is because you still would have some vacuum left. That gives you a couple or three applications of the brakes before it's depleted. Once the vacuum is completely gone, it will be incredibly difficult to operate the brakes - typically power assist braking systems add the equivalent of 300 lbs of additional force to the brake pedal.

And even if what you said is true, the engine being off while having no brakes is still a whole lot better then the engine being on full throttle with no brakes.

Yeah except that without the engine you also don't have steering. Good luck handling that.

Everything aerius has said in this thread is correct. Many (read: most) modern vehicles have interlock systems designed to prevent the very "common sense" remedies that people have been suggesting. Shift to neutral? Nope. Turn of car? Nope. Apply brakes? Maybe - in a car with anti-locks that don't feature a throttle/brake switch, this still won't work.

[TheFeniX]

Yeah except that without the engine you also don't have steering. Good luck handling that.

Power steering is only really useful when actually turning around a corner. While on the road, you don't need it and many systems reduce the effect of power-steering on the highway to cut down on people over-correcting during an event. The problem comes when you turn the engine off, but don't put the ignition back into the "on" position. This locks the steering wheel in place.

Everything aerius has said in this thread is correct. Many (read: most) modern vehicles have interlock systems designed to prevent the very "common sense" remedies that people have been suggesting. Shift to neutral? Nope. Turn of car? Nope. Apply brakes? Maybe - in a car with anti-locks that don't feature a throttle/brake switch, this still won't work.

This is why I'm not a huge fan of most newer vehicles. Thankfully, the cheaper cars and many light trucks tend to stick with "tried and true" system because there's nothing wrong with them and most of these new features are for "cool effect" or to prevent damage rather than actually making the vehicle any safer. The idea that I could shift my transmission into "N" and still have the car in gear is idiotic in so many ways. A little off-topic, but this is also why I despise electronic transfer cases on 4x4s.

I just hope they aren't messing around with the parking brakes. If all else fails, you can slowly lock the parking brake down and (especially if combined with the pedal brakes) stop yourself fairly quickly in a controlled manner.

[aerius]

Power steering is only really useful when actually turning around a corner. While on the road, you don't need it and many systems reduce the effect of power-steering on the highway to cut down on people over-correcting during an event. The problem comes when you turn the engine off, but don't put the ignition back into the "on" position. This locks the steering wheel in place.

The problem with power steering is that if you lose engine power, the hydraulics & stuff that make it work will make the steering wheel harder to turn than if the vehicle had no power steering in the first place. In other words, lose power and the power steering mechanism works against you. It's actually not too bad as long as the car's moving at a decent speed, but if you haven't practiced it it's another thing that can catch you unaware and screw you over in an emergency situation.

[Enigma]

I've been in a runaway car type scenario in my 1992 Pontiac Grand Am (back in 2001, I had then recently purchased the car) and fortunately managed to carefully pull the car off to the side of the road by putting it into Neutral and then coast. As the car continued to rev, I put it in Park and checked the pedal. Found out that the previous owner had placed a bunch of newspapers under the floor mat and they got caught in the gas pedal. Tore off the newspapers and all was well. I had a moment of panic as this happened during rush hour.

I've also been in a couple of scenarios in which I've lost brake pressure. Once in the Grand Am and another with my father's old 1990 Aerostar. In both scenarios, I learned of the loss while I was still moving slowly. But in each case, even though I had lost all brake fluid I still was able to stop both vehicles, albeit I had to press the brake pedal all the way down for the brakes to engage. Even with no brake fluid I never lost the ability to stop the vehicle. But as mentioned before, the vehicles were moving slowly when I braked. Fat chance of them working if I was driving fast. (With the Grand Am, I managed to slowly drive the car to the shop which was less than 5 klicks away. Took only the side roads with my hazards on. With the Aerostar, I managed to slowly drive it home which was about half a klick away from where I lost the brakes.)

In both occasions, I lost brake fluids because of broken hoses.

[Alyeska]

Power steering is only really useful when actually turning around a corner. While on the road, you don't need it and many systems reduce the effect of power-steering on the highway to cut down on people over-correcting during an event. The problem comes when you turn the engine off, but don't put the ignition back into the "on" position. This locks the steering wheel in place.

The problem with power steering is that if you lose engine power, the hydraulics & stuff that make it work will make the steering wheel harder to turn than if the vehicle had no power steering in the first place. In other words, lose power and the power steering mechanism works against you. It's actually not too bad as long as the car's moving at a decent speed, but if you haven't practiced it it's another thing that can catch you unaware and screw you over in an emergency situation.

Serpentine belt breaks, power steering goes out. I've experienced it twice myself. Such fun trying to drive a car with a draining battery, overheating engine, and no power steering.

[Magis]

But in each case, even though I had lost all brake fluid I still was able to stop both vehicles, albeit I had to press the brake pedal all the way down for the brakes to engage. Even with no brake fluid I never lost the ability to stop the vehicle. But as mentioned before, the vehicles were moving slowly when I braked.

That is actually not possible. You may have been low on fluid, but there was still fluid in the system. If the fluid was gone then the brake pedal would be completely physically detached from the braking mechanisms and they would be impossible to operate except via the emergency brake, which is cable operated. When a car loses all its braking fluid, the pedal simply falls all the way to the floor under its own weight, with no resistance.

Also, having low brake fluid is a totally different scenario than having a loss of power assist. Low fluid will involve having to depress the pedal further than usual before brake force is applied, whereas the loss of power assist increases the force needed to depress the pedal by several hundreds of pounds compared to normal.