Front Brake Lights Could Drastically Diminish Road Accident Rates
Study from TU Graz Reveals Front Brake Lights Could Drastically Diminish
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/424410
Not selling tanks as cars could also help. Especially with fatality rates
People don't even need car tbh. Motorbikes everywhere please. Zip zip, less traffic, everyone pays attention to road or falls and dies.
I live in Maine. Riding a motorcycle in the winter is not only highly unpleasant, it's borderline suicidal.
I'm all for 2 wheeled transport where it works, but anywhere that gets snow for months out of each year it's a non starter as a primary transportation mode
Good luck transporting a couch on a motorbike.
This might be the dumbest comment I have ever read on the Internet. That’s like 30 years of comments.
You would think killing off the stupid would improve the breed. But apparently the real world shows it does not. Besides, I ain't riding a motorbike at -40 Celsius or Fahrenheit or in 30cm/12" of fresh snow or in a thunderstorm.
That's why I bought mine!
Maybe redo the driving test like... At least every 20 years? There are people on the roads who got their licenses when their town didn't even had traffic lights. People who never saw a roundabout in their first 20 years of driving.
Its nice that we restrict young people by making them take more and more driving lessons and paying more for tiered licences, like we do in Europe for motorcycles and trucks.
But maybe also take a look at the 70+ year old grandpa who had two strokes and one heart attack, has two pairs of of glasses but his license says that he's perfectly fit.
Sometimes you see those videos from a dash cam of a truck that hits a bridge, obviously the truck driver was been being inattentive but often so was the recording cars driver. All I can ever think is, "why were you so close behind, it was blindingly obvious that was about to happen", yet to them apparently it wasn't, and now they've got bits of truck roof in their windscreen.
There was an astounding number of people who really cannot drive, and yet they think they're driving safely. They just haven't gotten a crash yet.
Because it wasn't blindingly obvious? I don't know how tall the truck in front of me is, and since I don't drive tall vehicles I know even less about the heights of bridges. Usually commercial drivers are the better ones.
If we limited drivers permits to the 8% or so of drivers who are actually competent we'd solve a lot of problems in several domains.
I self-selected as ineligible to drive years ago, and I've never regretted it. Of course I had to move away from my home country and learn a new language, but those are the shakes.
Reading all such things I'm starting to think "what if I can drive?" I've always thought I can't, but since everyone around who thinks they can drive like suicide bombers, maybe I should find those driving lessons.
Define safe? If everyone drives safely enough that you are more likely to die of suicide than an automobile accident, is that safe enough?
IMO, the big problem is just a matter of standards and practicality. The bar for a DL is "can operate a vehicle" and not "can safely drive a vehicle in public for extended periods of time." I agree with periodic re-licensing though; everything else called a "license" seems to need that for a host of reasons.
At least give them some new info like now it's legal to go the wrong way on a bike if the speed limit is 30 km/h where I live. Guess not a lot of people know about that and a gazillion other things.
I see too many people treat a roundabout like a stop sign when it is clearly empty.
The couple of times they tried out roundabouts in my area, they didn't last long because people were too stupid to figure out how to use them. So instead they just bitched until they were taken out.
I always say there are drivers out there who only survive by the grace of other drivers.
Sure but the second I lose my mobility I will put a deer slug through my head.
So risking everyone else's life around you is worth it?
Another kind of solution. But not needed.
Why not move to a place where low mobility doesn't cut you off from the rest of society?
There's plenty of retirement communities where you can get around with a golf cart. In the 3 biggest cities here in SK, old folk can ride the subways for free, and sometimes you even see them drive mobility scooters on.
Other places I've been have level boarding for buses, but I've never seen someone drive a mobility scooter onto one. Certainly it wouldn't fly in SK.
I'd rather see mandatory rear running lights. The amount of people who can't be arsed to turn on their lights in bad visibility conditions is too damn high.
and on the opposite side don’t turn on your emergency lights while driving in bad weather. you’re only causing confusion by making it seem like you have turn signals on if i can’t see both blinkers.
Rear fog lights on all vehicles (some vehicles have them now).
it's forbidden to use rear fog lights under rain (it's more confusing than helpful)
if you live somewhere dry, that's not a concern. But here it rains 1 day in 3
Yes that as well, I love mine and use them a lot. But that's a step above rear running lights. There's no god damn reasons the rear indicators shouldn't be on all the time.
I still think rear signaling could be improved dramatically by using a wide third-brake light to show the intensity of braking.
For example -- I have seen some aftermarket turn signals which are bars the width of the vehicle, and show a "moving" signal starting in the center and then progressing towards the outer edge of the vehicle.
So now take that idea for brake. When you barely have your foot on the brake pedal, it would light a couple lights in the center of your brake signal. Press a little harder and now it's lighting up 1/4 of the lights from the center towards the outside edge of the vehicle. And when you're pressing the brake pedal to the floor, all of the lights are lit up from the center to the outside edges of the vehicle. The harder you press on the pedal, the more lights are illuminated.
Now you have an immediate indication of just how hard the person in front of you is braking. With the normal on/off brake signals, you don't know what's happening until moments later as you determine how fast you are approaching that car. They could be casually slowing, or they could be locking up their wheels for an accident in front of them.
Japan introduced brake lights that increase intensity based on how hard the driver was braking. 20+ years ago. They tested it in the US and drivers found it to be “confusing.”
I suspect because there's no consistency in the brightness of vehicle lights. But that's one of the reasons why I think an incremental light bar would be better, there's no variation between vehicles. You could even make it more informative by flashing the whole bar when you first brake, so someone behind you can more easily see how much of the bar is being lit up.
If Japan introduced that they never caught on, unless it's specific to an area or model of car.
probably because thats a terrible way to do it. It would be noticeable if a car started braking and then started braking much harder, but if they slam on the brakes you don't see anything change, just a normal brake light.
I think that's a neat idea, but we could instead, collectively, just do better at following other cars at a safe distance. I know it's impractical to expect all drivers on the road everywhere to change their behavior, but it's also persistently frustrating as someone who has for years frequently been stuck in traffic to see 95% of drivers insist on following less than a car-length behind. Following too closely to enable decision-making or accommodate other drivers is the cause of like 98% of both traffic accidents and congestion, according to my completely anecdotal and made up research.
I suspect a lot of that has to do with the entitled way people are driving these days. If you leave a car length gap, some kid will wrecklessly attempt to cram their way in because your lane momentarily moved slightly faster.
There's this idea I've been considering for a long time.
Imagine putting a remote controlled firework smoke bomb under the tailpipe, hidden from sight. At best a really stinky one that smells like burned rubber or something.
When someone follows to closely, just fake an engine issue or something by activating the smoke bomb and fill their AC air intake with the smell of burned rubber for weeks. Just to teach them to not follow too closely again.
I think a secondary light that blinks quickly would be a good signal of emergency braking. Like some aftermarket motorcycle taillights that start with a blinking pattern before they stay on, but reverse the order.
So, standard brake light comes on at the standard time, at the first touch of the brake. For stronger braking, the second light comes on. For emergency braking, the standard brake light stays lit while the second light begins blinking frantically.
Edit for consistency
I have seen some cars flash their brake lights when ABS is activated, but this would be better
The EU has approved G-triggered brake lights that do just that, flash rapidly on hard braking. I’ve only seen it on higher end cars so far, but they absolutely exist. Unfortunately in the US people stick brake flashers that blink in patterns every time they touch the brake. Mostly useless as they’re installed to be “look at me, aren’t I cool with my blinky brake lights?” rather than any additional safety.
I see a lot of those on trucks here in the south. Good for when you are towing shit so people can see around all your junk in the trailer.
Does your state not require good lights on the trailers? I just built a new trailer last year, I was required to have full working brake and turn signals along with running lights, but I went the extra step and included more brake/turn lights on the front and rear of the fenders, along with reverse lights plus four marker lights along each side. Trailers are hard enough to see, I didn't want to make it harder for anyone by just sticking with the bare minimum.
Seems much more complicated than having the brake lights rapidly flash during hard braking. But of course we couldn't do that in the US because our turn signals/hazard lights are red
Since we're all throwing random ideas out here, I want to equip my vehicle with an annoyingly loud external speaker so that when someone near me does something dumb, I can personally shame them.
I am not trying to brake check people and get in an accident but I would very much like a signal for "Please remove your car from my butthole, it's getting uncomfortable."
There are LED bars for mounting in your rear windows to display text to those behind you
Pretend to suddenly avoid a pothole.
I've never done it, but I wonder if turning on the rear fog lights would work. You're not braking, but they might think you are. I don't know what the legality of that would be
You are looking for war
Road rage 5000 initiate
I want to equip my vehicle with an annoyingly loud external speaker so that when someone near me does something dumb, I can personally shame them.
CB radios often had a "PA" switch that sent your microphone audio to a loudspeaker under the hood.
I'd prefer a "FlameThrower" button next to the horn.
Yeah this is exactly what I have in mind. I want to feel like Smokey the Bandit calling people out for bad behavior with a receiver that has a coiled cable attached to it, at a minimum.
CB radios often had a "PA" switch that sent your microphone audio to a loudspeaker under the hood
We used to roll those back in the day. A friend gave my very drunk self a lift home one evening and I used it to give commentary to a group of revellers on the side of the road... who threw a beer bottle at us, and then chased the car which luckily didn't get stopped at the traffic light nearby.
Good times.
Yes, and an oil slick button that drops some oil on the road for the hard of hearing tail rider.
This would seem quite risky to use on US roads. I mean probably elsewhere too, but at least they don't pack the same hardware.
Ah but I don't care about my life
How about reducing the brightness of headlights so I don't feel like the sun is driving at me at night?
Also, if the car is in drive the headlights should go into auto mode. Always see people driving with just parking lights on at sundown.
Yes.. WHY DO CARS STILL HAVE 2 SETTINGS LIKE ITS 1935. it would take basically zero effort to have low, high, stun for headlights so the rest of us who drive normal appropriate cars don't have to be blinded by selfish assholes driving a massive truck alone by themselves that they never used for work once in their lives. Yes, im a car person and despise truck posers.
You say this like those same people won't leave it on stun
Higher up and brighter lights=driver can see more and feels safer. Yes, even if shadows and the area immediately arounds the car are less visible and the vehicle becomes more dangerous for everyone around you.
There are now headlights that can be "high" but block out portions of the beam directed at light sources like oncoming headlights. Can't have them in the US though.
First of all, this would be illegal in many countries.
Second of all: we can differentiate cars by: has red lights, back.
If we lose this option we can no longer differentiate easily if there is a car coming towards us or driving away from us.
Reminded me of this Technology Connections video, in which the dude explained (among other brake-light related things) how some law allows electric vehicles to get away with not using their brake lights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0YW7x9U5TQ
Yeah my electric 208 is kinda like that (if I remember the video well, watched it a while ago) but since it's Europe there actually is a regulation about how much a car can decelerate before break lights come on, so instead of making the system turn the lights on they throttle how much it can decelerate for recharge and still makes you use the break to use full regen (and eventually the actual brakes, of course). So it's not a real "one pedal driving".
‘Here’s an idea: let all those around you know your status.’
‘Revolutionary!’
It’s weird we haven’t already done this, but good.
My status is in a relationship
Don't get any ideas buddy
How do I set my car's status to "It's complicated"?
100% agree, but it's amazing how quickly some people forget their education once they get out on the road, especially after a few years accumulating bad habits. How about less reliance on cars in the first place?
You can pass multiple driving tests, and still be an idiot driver. So many people drive HUA, (Head Up Ass), while thinking they are the best driver on the road that it isn't even funny.
Remember Kiddies, driving should never be viewed as "relaxing" or "enjoyable." It's work, hard work and should be mentally taxing every minute you are on the road.
As someone with ADHD, it is relaxing. And it is super enjoyable. I like thinking about how the weight of my car shifts going around corners. I like trying to be as smooth as possible shifting gears. There is a lot of information and the focus on it all quiets the noise normally in my head.
Leave early enough you aren't stressed about being late.
Just let the asshole aggressive driver in.
Leave more than enough space that you have time to react.
Don't treat it as a competition and it's a pleasurable experience.
Shut up nerd
Maybe introducing driving lessons on the read and done by professionals all over the world would already change a lot. That and the introduction of better road systems like roundabouts, reducing road traffic by adding public transport and walkable/bikeable area's etc.
as with a lot of tests, the thing a driving test is the best at measuring is how well you can take a driving test.
Don't worry, my fellow americans, we'll still manage to fuck it up.
The combined indicator/brake light thing you guys do is fucking stupid, so there's a precedent.
Agreed. Are they turning, or just braking periodically with a taillight out? Who knows!
I also love the front turn signals that turn off that headlight. Dumb as hell for everyone.
Also, animated signals should be banned. On or off, no flashing, glowing, or sliding.
Clearly it's your fault for both breaking and going around a corner at the same time. Who does that?
I've always hated that. I feel like I'm seeing it less and less on newer vehicles, though, so maybe manufacturers are also realizing that it's stupid as hell.
Or maybe it's just not worth the cost to have two different but mostly identical versions of a very expensive and highly integrated modern taillight housing for different markets.
They'll likely give those front brake lights an amber color
It's possible. Red really is only supposed to be on the back to indicate the rear of the vehicle.
It's why on stretches of road where passing in oncoming lanes is legal, they tell you to turn on your headlights (daytime headlights section.) Its so that there is a distinguishing feature between the front and rear of the car.
As a pedestrian this would be huge and make me feel so much safer.
Definitely make it easier for people on crosswalks to start walking. Knowing that they are slowing down.
In order to be most effective it would need to be dynamic rather than a fixed on/off like rear brake lights. Stopping doesn't mean stopped. So perhaps a progressive light bar that starts lighting up at 20mph and adds a light for each 5mph drop until the whole bar is lit indicating a full stop. That would give pedestrians a sense of rate of deceleration.
I don't understand this at all. Why do I, as a person in front of a vehicle, care whether or not it's braking?
Say you're a pedestrian and a car is coming toward you as you're entering a crosswalk. Being able to see if they are braking or not could save your life.
If a car is braking it rides differently from one that isn't. A car is normally rather level and leans "forward" when braking.
Besides that, YOU SHOULDNT GET IN FRONT OF ANYTHING YOU ARENT SURE IS STOPPING. If it's moving fast enough that you need this, you shouldn't be trying to get in front anyways.
Ah. I see. They are emitting a green light, so I know they're braking, and it's OK to cross.
But, it turns out that they're planning on turning into a driveway past the intersection, and not into the intersection I am crossing.
That's OK. I can check "impersonate a hood ornament" off my bucket list.
We already have this problem with turn signals: there are circumstances where it would be confusing and dangerous to use them in the manner prescribed by law, and to avoid dangerous ambiguity, they should actually be used much later than the law specifies.
for example, say you are waiting to make a left turn, it would be nice to know if oncoming cars are braking or not. if they are stopped and you see their brake lights turning off, you can judge if you should hurry up or not turn at all.
The key detail is that, like with rear brake lights, they extinguish when the foot is removed from the brake pedal. So it's not so much the presence of the brake light, but the presence of an inactive brake light that would, serve as a warning that a car is about to start moving. This would be very helpful to drivers on a road when other drivers are pulling out too early from a side road or driveway. That little bit of extra warning is, in many situations, enough for you to pump the brakes, hit the horn, or both.
If anything I think they would have to use a green light that turns on when accelerating/not braking. It would be way more dangerous in the future when people are trained with "No green = braking" but older cars don't have the light at all.
It's important to consider how a transition like this would even work. I personally think this is a little too drastic of a change, and is incompatible with existing vehicles and habits.
I get what you're saying — so it's about the subconscious awareness of the state change that happens after the driver decided to go, but before the car starts moving. I can see some amount of value in that.
I still can't help but think it's going to be interpreted by many as a sign that it's safe to proceed and ignore the car rather than be prepared for any eventuality, though.
Sounds like it can help oncoming traffic as well as traffic to either side of the vehicle
Yeah, the only thing I could think of is that I'm driving down a country road, and I see the front brake light ahead of me because someone stopped for a deer in the road or something.
Otherwise I cannot fathom what benefit it brings. Anything that ultimately becomes "if you see this light, it's safe to [X] in front of this vehicle" is going to get people killed.
And the negative state of "the lack of this light means that the vehicle could be moving" is exactly what we have now.
Yeah, and then you have the distraction of people looking in the mirror because of lights behind them. Especially seeing lights behind you at night thinking it’s a police car
My main thoughts instantly come to someone in the opposing left turn lane, if they are not applying the brakes they are likely starting to turn and if they do it right in front of you, you have more of a heads up than just them starting to turn and can set yourself in a better position to hopefully stop in time. Driving is all about judgment calls and having more info quicker is important to those calls.
But isn't that exactly the situation we're in now? If there's a car in the opposing left turn lane, they might start to turn in front of you.
The only thing the light does is say "right now, they're braking". It doesn't say whether they're moving or stationary any more than the headlights, and it doesn't say anything about their intentions or whether it's safe to enter the intersection.
Can I have indicators that are in the same place on all cars and not buried in the headlight? That'd be cool.
I was having a very hard time seeing any possible benefit of a front brake light, since nobody accident prone ever looks in their mirrors.
I suppose in today's world of automatic transmissions that move the car forward whenever the brakes are released, they might serve some purpose at a four-way stop adding information about immediate intent of the other parties, but even there... that's more of a Darwinian situation where people who get into crashes at four way stops are sorting themselves out from the rest of reasonably competent drivers. If they're going fast enough for injuries at a four way stop, they deserve what they get. If they get a minor fender bender - that's a lesson to read the other traffic better next time.
Id love then to know when someone is slowing down to turn when I'm trying to pull out. So few use turn signals, and even those I don't really trust until the car is noticably getting slower.
You're right about turn signals.
A lot of people have "target fixation" and telegraph their moves somewhat. I look at where the car is tracking in the lane and what their head is doing (if I can see it). Most people drift left or right on the highway before they change lanes, exit, or turn. It's no excuse for bad manners, but it helps.
Turn signal or not, you shouldn't be pulling out in front of them. You should be assuming they are turning into a driveway after the intersection, or that they mistook your intersection for the next one down the road, or that they left their turn signal on from a lane change 5 miles back.
Turn signals are lies until conclusively proven otherwise.
That's actually another good use, a kind of passive turn signal - though if they're really turning you should be able to notice their reduced speed without a light - and drivers who start depending on the front brake light to read intent to turn might actually have more accidents instead of less.
Just yesterday I watched a car pull out into an intersection less than one car-length in front of a car driving straight through the intersection, slowly. I can't know what they were thinking, but I would guess they assumed that the slow car going straight was about to turn, then they quit paying attention and pulled out just in time for the collision to be un-avoidable.
I can't trust a car even with its turn signal on unless I see it actually slow down because I see them misused too often. The lack of signalling though is the biggest problem. People who suddenly change lanes right in front of you without warning are the worst. Then you have people who force you to wait because they can't be bothered to indicate if they are turning or going straight at intersections.
Also, don't start signaling as you are turning. I see you turning so you are just indicating what I'm already seeing. Signal before you turn.
Accidents aren't isolated though, they will sort themselves out by hitting good drivers and people.
Well, around here "good drivers" can "read" the bad drivers' intent, and in a setting like a four way stop they can usually avoid getting hit by yielding, regardless of right of way circumstances.
Like someone said in the hnews comments, this might work for auto transmission but with manual gearing you've got people using engine braking on hills.
Also like stated in the article the colouring is going to be an issue and trying to see some green lights whilst the headlights are on (full beam fog lights perhaps too?) doesn't seem practicable to me.
with computers these days an acceleration based system should be achievable for all types of cars. hybrid/electric cars already do it with regen braking.
hybrid/electric cars already do it with regen braking.
Not all of them. It is becoming more common, but for a while Hyundai and Kia didn't do this, and I know my older Ford doesn't.
Probably just in the US, since brake lights are only required when pressing the brake pedal. Mercedes illuminates them but then turns the brake lights off once the vehicle comes to a stop using regen.
Possibly, and I'd be interested in some sort of 360° LED on top of a vehicle to indicate to pedestrians and other drivers alike of its (de)acceleration.
But jamming some non standard colours in what is a long term understanding on the front of a vehicle I can't really get with and would like to see the impact to people with partial / colour blindness with using such a system.
Like, does the average pedestrian know what the green and red lights mean on an aircraft? I bet not.
Automatics also allow for engine braking. From a quick search, it sounds like a toss-up as to whether that triggers brake lights. Regardless, the article mentions the benefit is not only from cars slowing down, but also from indicating that a car is preparing to stop or "that a stationary vehicle might initiate movement". Neither of those can be done by an engine brake, so front brake lights would still have a benefit even with a driver that likes engine braking.
Last I heard something like 98% of new cars/trucks sold in America have automatic.
I think they should have it so there's a type of "slow down" light that supplements the brake light for when your deceleration is from taking your foot off the gas.
Please allow me this opportunity to jump in and complain about the minority, but not insignificant number, of people that don't seem to be aware that that is even an option (just taking your foot off of the gas/accelerator to slowly decelerate).
Every couple weeks or so I seem to find myself behind someone that's always either accelerating, or braking, with the brake lights repeatedly flashing on momentarily for no apparent reason. It's like they realize that they're going just a little faster than they want, and definitely don't want to accelerate any more, so the only thing they know to do is hit the brake, instead of just taking their foot off of the accelerator. So they've hit the brake and now they're going too slow, so foot moves off the brake and back to the accelerator. Rinse, lather, repeat.
End rant. Thank you for this opportunity to vent.
These people might be two-footed drivers. My mother used to do this and you'd see the brakes flash on and off while following behind her because she'd be hovering her foot on the brake pedal while also hitting the accelerator.
Every couple weeks or so I seem to find myself behind someone that’s always either accelerating, or braking, with the brake lights repeatedly flashing on momentarily for no apparent reason.
In many EVs and Hybrids the "letting off the accelerator" engages the regeneration drag which slows the car. A number of vehicle makers with particularly aggressive drag (which gets higher regen rates) automatically illuminate the brake lights. So if you're behind one of these it will look like they are braking when they may have no foot on any pedal (brake or accelerator).
Brake light activates before the brakes engages, so they could just be resting their foot on the brake while coasting. Pretty normal defensive driving technique. People tend to do it in heavier traffic or when people are tailgating them. Gives a way faster brake response.
Please allow me this opportunity to jump in and complain about the minority, but not insignificant number, of people that don't seem to be aware that that is even an option (just taking your foot off of the gas/accelerator to slowly decelerate).
😂 I feel your pain
Perhaps a short paragraph of text elaborating on the driver's intentions
Now that's taking things too far.
But the slow down thing can actually catch drivers by surprise, especially with electric vehicles.
Risk Compension predicts that drivers would simply use this new information to drive more aggressively, negating any possible safety benefits.
The classic example we already have of this is when you are stopped at a side road about to enter the main road, and a car coming towards you on the main road signals to turn in.
Many people take the fact the other car has their turn signal on as a guarantee that it's safe to emerge, but any good driving instructor will tell you to wait until the car actually begins to turn before you yourself emerge.
They had their signal on but that doesn't mean they're actually going to DO what the signal said they would.
Same with the front brake light. It would be like "Well their front brake light came on, so I assumed it was safe to step into the crosswalk" NO. They could have just tapped the brake a second, doesn't mean they saw you, or they will actually stop.
This sure riled people up.
I read the article and the next one comes up: "Mouse Sperm Structure Unveils Asthenozoospermia Mechanisms" and my co-worker was like wtf are you reading.
The Wilcot solution was adopted by Morris for the 1933 range, except the cheapest car in the range, the Minor. In essence, on either side of the car, was a block of three lights looking very like a traffic light with red, amber and green elements. The idea was that the colour or combination of the colours, showing on one or both sides would guide adjacent traffic of the intentions of the Morris.
Combinations were more complex, inevitably, than just flashing orange lights. Ahead of a need to indicate, the driver would activate the system which would start with both left and right amber lights flashing, like modern hazard warning lights, meaning “Caution”, ahead of an indication being given.
The system was controlled by a knob inside the car, with a spring based plunger acting as a time control for any selection. To indicate turning right, the driver would then request the system to show red on the right and green on the left in a way that almost echoes nautical practice; bearing right was amber on the right and green on the left.
--
Morris threw a tantrum after the MoT approved the use of blinkers on rival Ford cars and vowed never to install them. The MoT ordered the Wicot "traffic robots" removed and so Lucas trafficators were used exclusively in the UK until Morris was sold to Pressed Metal Holdings in the 1950s (in Australia and Canada blinkers were required by law).
The thousands of unusable traffic robots were used in the foundation for a new factory in Cowley. Also used were used brake pads and used sump oil to keep the dust down.
This will lead to people braking momentarily to slow down, and others turning in front of slowing down traffic.
Little benefit, but the cost of adding front brake lights would be passed on to the car buyers.
It would also help to know whether or not I'm going to get smushed.
They would probably just use the existing amber lights so noone would know if you were turning or not. I'm not bitter.
Would speed up crosswalks a lot too. Whenever I cross a crosswalk with my dog I don't want to risk me misjudging the braking of cars so I tend to really wait until I'm sure they're stopping.
This is stupid
Struggled with this for a second, then I figured it out...
The brake light coming ON isn't the important part, like the rear brake lights... it's the brake lights turning OFF that's important in the front.
So maybe, now hear me out, MAYBE we need to invert that. Have front brake lights that are on ALL the time, and pressing the brake turns them off to indicate safety?
I'm salty because nobody took my front-blinker serious 😤 but we should embrace front brakes?! 😔
Whatever makes things more safe 🌞!
Once we have proper self driving cars none of these recent "innovations" like that or the speed limiting would matter.
Ideally self driving cars would also be without a steering wheel and just be half width with a single seat or two seats facing each other to reduce energy requirements. You could just develop this with a manhattan style project and test it in a single city banning all other private cars except delivery vehicles.
Might as well ignore all attainable goals that would benefit society in the short term in favor of sci-fi pipe dreams that are perpetually delayed as we endlessly run into stumbling blocks.
Forget solar/wind/geothermal/etc. development as well, fusion power could happen any day now so why bother with any of that comparatively inefficient junk?
Proper self-driving cars? Do you mean a bus?
Sounds reasonable. Personally I just want front turn signals to be visible from the opposite side again.
And also like, used at all.
Here's an idea. How about we zap the drivers after they make a turn if they didn't use a turn signal beforehand? 😀
Not sure if I read that correctly, but I don't think this has ever been the case?
I mean when a car is coming at me from a cross street, I want to be able to tell if they're turning or just an asshole not using their signal. On some cars, the turn signal is mounted so far to the side that if they're approaching from my right and turning right onto the same street as me, I can't see that turn signal. Sometimes combined with the roundness of the nose exacerbating the problem.
I think what he wants is the front turn signal to wrap around the front, so I can see the left signal from the right quarter.
I'm not aware that this is not the case, but I don't know that I would have noticed if it was not.
Theres a saying in computer stuff that applies nicely here. PEBKAC, problem exists between keyboard and computer...turn signals have to be turned on, no amount of engineering can fix bad driving.
Heads up, it’s actually keyboard and chair, not keyboard and computer
I've always heard it as "PICNIC"
Problem In Chair, Not In Computer
I've actually always found it weird with all the automation vehicles have, that blinkers aren't linked to the wheel. it already automatically disengages when turning, it shouldn't be too hard to have it auto engage as well when turning
How would you do that so it isn't ugly as hell and isn't prone to misunderstanding?
same way we do with lights now, design them attractively. It is not always successful and that's on the manufacturers.
what about it is confusing? green = not coming at you so it's okay to turn left (or whatever).
sliding light or arrows
I've seen newer cars turn the headlight off while the turn indicator is on, so you get a sort of double-blink effect.
I don't see any reason why we can't just have the whole headlight blink yellow as well with the turn indicator. LEDs are everywhere and can handle changing colors really easily, so it's not hard to require that for all new cars.
< and > for turns. X for brakes.
Honestly, we should focus on functionality rather than aesthetic.
So it sounds like you're checking to see when the light turns off, to know that the car is going.
Sounds like what we actually need is a green accelerator light on the front of the car.
Some of the new Kias have the rear indicators in the bumper. Why are they hiding them?
Because the designers and marketers were given priority over the safety engineers.