Front Brake Lights Could Drastically Diminish Road Accident Rates
Technology
336
Beiträge
164
Kommentatoren
2
Aufrufe
-
I just got a Chevy Volt and when I let up off the accelerator it will start the regen and significantly decrease my speed. I assume that my brake lights are coming on because so far no one has rear-ended me or yelled at me for not having brake lights. I wish there was a good way to tell for sure though. I think it's Hyundai that does not engage the brake lights for situations like this, as I've about hit one before.
I don't think they illuminate the brake lights, hence my comment. Technology connections has talked about this, although IDK which video it was.
-
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.
This is actually insane. Their brakes must wear out so fast.
-
Couldn't we just use the point system from 5th element? The car noticed you did something illegal and dedicated from your point pool.
-
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.
-
For normal people, yes. This is to prevent accidents.
Again, if you're too stupid to make sure the multiton hunk of metal is coming to a stop by all the other obvious visual markers, including watching it's speed compared to stationary objects like signs and lamp posts, then this won't do shit. People need more aweness of their surroundings, not a bunch of lights and horns because people won't pay attention.
You enter the road when it's safe, not jump in and play frogger with lights hoping to get across.
-
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.
I have seen some cars flash their brake lights when ABS is activated, but this would be better
-
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.
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
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/424410
This is stupid
-
It is to colorblind people. You could use something else of course, just saying...
It's doesn't matter, since the absence or presence of light would still be perceived by colour blind people. It doesn't change how they would drive, as they are already driving with the knowledge of colour blindness in mind when looking at tail lights.
-
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.
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
-
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
I don't know where you are but rear fogs aren't illegal in the rain here and from experience they are nothing but helpful in heavy rain and white out snow. I am always so so sooo glad when someone in front of me is using them when it's absolutely pouring. You really have to not be paying attention not to notice that it's two lights and not three and somehow mistake them for stop lights.
In fact, Transport Canada recommends using them in fog, rain, or snow.
Use only if driving in fog, rain or snow as these lights can be confused with stop lights, distracting other drivers.
Using your vehicle lights to see and be seen
About the new vehicle lighting standard for cars in 2021 and tips on how to use your lights safely now.
Transport Canada (tc.canada.ca)
-
It's doesn't matter, since the absence or presence of light would still be perceived by colour blind people. It doesn't change how they would drive, as they are already driving with the knowledge of colour blindness in mind when looking at tail lights.
It's doesn't matter, since the absence or presence of light would still be perceived by colour blind people. It doesn't change how they would drive, as they are already driving with the knowledge of colour blindness in mind when looking at tail lights.
Tail lights being red is fine if you live with the most common forms of colorblindness which fall into what we call “red-green colorblind.” It is still a different color than headlights.
Now put those same red-green lights on the front, and we have a problem.
-
By signaling to oncoming traffic and vehicles approaching from the side, a front brake light provides an essential visual cue that a car is slowing down or preparing to stop. When the light is extinguished, it indicates that a stationary vehicle might initiate movement. According to Tomasch, this visual feedback can significantly truncate the reaction time for other road users, leading to shorter stopping distances and consequently diminishing the likelihood of accidents.
Sounds reasonable. Personally I just want front turn signals to be visible from the opposite side again.
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.
-
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 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.
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.
-
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.”
BMW has implemented this in the US market for the past 20 years or so at least. Under heavy braking, additional brake lights turn on. I believe they call that Brake Force Display. I’m sure they’re not the only manufacturer to do this, too
-
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.bestiver.se/post/424410
Not selling tanks as cars could also help. Especially with fatality rates
-
It's doesn't matter, since the absence or presence of light would still be perceived by colour blind people. It doesn't change how they would drive, as they are already driving with the knowledge of colour blindness in mind when looking at tail lights.
Tail lights being red is fine if you live with the most common forms of colorblindness which fall into what we call “red-green colorblind.” It is still a different color than headlights.
Now put those same red-green lights on the front, and we have a problem.
But why? Again, the perception would be absence or presence of light on a standardized indicator.
FYI signal lights are much more strictly regulated in Europe, such as position, colour, shape and strength.
This study is from Austria.
-
It's doesn't matter, since the absence or presence of light would still be perceived by colour blind people. It doesn't change how they would drive, as they are already driving with the knowledge of colour blindness in mind when looking at tail lights.
Tail lights being red is fine if you live with the most common forms of colorblindness which fall into what we call “red-green colorblind.” It is still a different color than headlights.
Now put those same red-green lights on the front, and we have a problem.
They could use traffic light green. There's not any problems identifying those even in places with the lights mounted horizontally. There's enough difference in saturation you can tell the difference even with colorblindness.
-
Here's an idea. How about we zap the drivers after they make a turn if they didn't use a turn signal beforehand?
Cars with lane-keep assist with vibrate the steering wheel and beep at you. It's at least something but I think most people turn it off if it gets annoying
