Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Still in Portland, Oregon, for some reason
890 posts, read 3,701,207 times
Reputation: 743
Advertisements
I worked for the local Audi dealer and was assigned to drive their monstrous Q7 SUV for the shuttle service. It was fairly basic and didn't have parking sensors OR cameras. Yet somehow I was able to squeeze that thing in and out of tight spaces with ease. I once parallel parked it in such a tight space that a man and his wife stopped on the sidewalk to watch me perform the maneuver. Once I was done and got out (having hit neither car), they actually gave me a round of applause. It was slightly embarrassing but I got a kick out of it, regardless.
People just need to learn how to drive and I'll say this....all these nanny systems are leading down an inevitable path that will end with the government removing humans (by force I shall presume) from driving duties altogether.
How is adding a backup camera with a radar into new cars an "assinine" (sic)?
Yes, I design these systems that will be put into cars, but even if I did not I would fully support them knowing the damage reduction they provide with minimal intrusion.
What makes you the vehicle safety expert? How many studies have you conducted with NHTSA, Federal Highway or any of the other Auto OEMs? Many of these accidents occur at the last second when a child darts out in back of the car, for whatever reason. Children do silly things that don't make sense, but that does not mean that the deserve to be struck by a car. How many times have you made a decision that wasn't the smartest when you were between 3 and 9 years old? Please get off your "Everyone needs to take responsibility, blah, blah blah" high horse and stop blaming the victim.
The time it takes for a child or animal to run behind a car is can happen in a split-second, when the driver has already started reversing. Scouting around the area beforehand is useful, but definitely not fully sufficient.
Please get rid of this condescending attitude. How many vehicle systems have you designed? Do you have a PhD? For what it's worth, many people who I would venture to say are far more knowledgeable than you are in this area fully support this regulation. We could see it coming for a long time in the auto industry and we decided jointly with the government that this would be a good idea.
Hoffdano: Trying to put a price tag on safety features and divide it by the number of deaths they could prevent is ridiculous? Nobody gave you or anybody else the right to decide how much a human life is worth. You could do the same kind of "calculation" with other safety features such as seat-belts, airbags, crash-worthy structures, ABS, etc, etc and the "cost" would come out high as well. If this was how the auto industry worked, we would all be driving in wooden boxes.
The factsarethat these new unneeded regulations are still for idiot drivers who do not look before backing up. Look at those safety records you mentioned. NOT 1 of the drivers looked behind the vehicle before backing up. That is stupid drivers. And this is more nanny state bs.
Now before you go bashing me, I designed an engine block for the aftermarket, 4 styles of cylinder heads, a direct injection system for gas engines, and an improved wiring arrangement for safer towing in trucks. Oh, btw, I did not waste my money going to idiot school (college).
NOT 1 of the drivers looked behind the vehicle before backing up. That is stupid drivers. And this is more nanny state bs.
.
After getting out and looking behind the car, and down on your hands and knees to inspect underneath, and seeing that nobody has crawled under there, is it possible that a child could get behind your car in the time it takes you to walk back to the door and get in and start your engine and buckle your seat belt and put on your sunglasses, and plug in your cellphone, and turn on your radio and select a channel, and back up? Only if you're stupid, right?
After getting out and looking behind the car, and down on your hands and knees to inspect underneath, and seeing nothing there, is it possible that a child could get behind your car in the time it takes you to walk back to the door and get in and start your engine and buckle your seat belt and put on your sunglasses, and plug in your cellphone, and turn on your radio and select a channel, and back up? Only if you're stupid, right?
Actually, yes. if you've seen how far ingress areas to the spot you're going to be backing in at, you can determine that a toddler running at Usain Bolt like speeds still couldn't get to where you are going to back up. It's simply not that hard. Figuring out angles and speeds for a successful cue shot in billiards is vastly harder and average people are able to do that every day.
And if you are pulling past a spot that you are about to back into, you can indeed see BEFORE any of it gets covered by a blind spot, what might possibly enter that space, from which direction (for example maybe from behind a door, though you should be able to see the door open, but not from though a solid brick wall), and how long it would take at reasonable speeds, for a person or object to get to a location that you would both not be able to see it AND hit it.
Before you back into a space, you scan the area that will be covered by your blind spots as you get oriented to the space, so that then you only have to watch the ingress areas to those blind spots in order to not hit anything. Doing that sort of scan before backing into a space is part of the responsibility of driving.
All of this mandatory "safety" crap just dances around the actual problem, drivers not paying attention, giving unsafe drivers one more thing to ignore isn't going to accomplish anything.
I don't care if it just dances around the problem. If a safety device makes a driver who isn't checking his mirrors less likely to run me over I'll take it.
I don't care if it just dances around the problem. If a safety device makes a driver who isn't checking his mirrors less likely to run me over I'll take it.
Actually, if it were me. I'd just get out of the way. But hey, if you want to base your survival on mirrors, be my guest.
After getting out and looking behind the car, and down on your hands and knees to inspect underneath, and seeing that nobody has crawled under there, is it possible that a child could get behind your car in the time it takes you to walk back to the door and get in and start your engine and buckle your seat belt and put on your sunglasses, and plug in your cellphone, and turn on your radio and select a channel, and back up? Only if you're stupid, right?
No, only if someone is not supervising the child.
20yrsinBranson
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
