My mom is a doctor and once was called to the site of a frontal crash that happened at 100 km/h (two cars moving at 50). Only to examine the bodies, there was no one left to save.

This system doesn't support two-way roads though, so a frontal collision is unlikely.

Mythbusters found that two cars colliding at 50mph is not equivalent to one car hitting a brick wall at 100mph. It resembles one car hitting a brick wall at 50mph.

Was this work published and peer reviewed?

Think of it this way: the two cars (if they’re the same weight) create a virtual immovable object at the impact point.

“Brick wall” is doing a lot of work there - note that it’s not the same as hitting a stationary car at 50mph, that car would move. We rarely encounter actual immovable objects on or near the road, which is why a 50+50 head-on is more violent than a 50+0 collision into something softer.

It makes sense as well. If we assume each car has the same mass, and picture the collision from the side, it would appear as if each car was hitting an invisible brick wall that separated them. Or, picture hitting a stationary car while driving 100km/h (perhaps on some frictionless surface) - afterwards, both cars would be sliding at 50km/h.

Nowadays it depends on how new the car is, as newer cars are magnitudes safer than anything 20+ years old.

https://youtu.be/C_r5UJrxcck

Deadly crashes are not uncommon on half that speed, and risk does not grow linearly.

Crashes at 30 km/h will kill cyclists and pedestrians outside the car. The occupants of modern Mercedes-Benz cars will survive 100% of the time.

What are they doing on a controlled access highway?

Exiting their car after it caught on fire in a live lane.

They should walk in front of their car then where no other cars would be.

For sure not in a S-Class or EQS.

seems you're both thinking in absolutes