As a pedestrian this would be huge and make me feel so much safer.
‘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”?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Well the thing that made it blindingly obvious was that it was a 30 second video of a tall truck driving full tilt toward a low bridge, so obviously something was about to happen!
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.
Sure but the second I lose my mobility I will put a deer slug through my head.
Another kind of solution. But not needed.
So risking everyone else’s life around you is worth it?
It isn’t a negociation. If some bureaucrat ticks that box, it will just be the end.
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 don’t think I could afford to be homeless in SK.
No, being in poverty is really bad here, but I just picked SK out as a close example, old folk becoming recluses who only interact with Fox News and people serving them is pretty specific to American and/or car-centric culture. Hell even car-centric parts of america have retirement communities where they all drive scooters or golf cars.
Well in any case I’m here and not there and when that happens there won’t be money to go to some magical car free place. We have winter here and the groceries are 20 km away. There is no bus, no taxi and not even uber. Not that I would have the 60 bucks a ride would cost. Of course I would also lose my job which 60km away.
So deer slug to the brain will be the prescription.
In Finland we have this thing called “huoli-ilmoitus” Super useful when you meet elders driving 70-80km/h in 100km/h area.
I have to contend with 70-80 year olds doing 30km in an 80 while swerving across the midline because they saw a bird across the street.
Here in France they drive at 70km/h in a 90km/h road. They also drive at 70 in a 70 road. And 70 in a 50 road. And 70 in a 30 road…
Yeah, like if someone crashes their car due their own stupidity, I’m not stopping to help. Darwin Awards and all that.
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.
Wouldn’t better driving education and testing work just as well, if not better?
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.
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.
Can I have indicators that are in the same place on all cars and not buried in the headlight? That’d be cool.
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.
This might be the dumbest comment I have ever read on the Internet. That’s like 30 years of comments.
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
Yeah, no.
Those things are death traps and there’s a reason why they’re mostly prevalent in nations where people literally can’t afford anything safer.
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!
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.
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? 😀
Can we do this in the same bill as the popup spikes that take out your tires if you stop across the crosswalk? The guided RPGs replacing red light cams can wait a little longer.
Couldn’t we just use the point system from 5th element? The car noticed you did something illegal and dedicated from your point pool.
Personally I just want front turn signals to be visible from the opposite side again
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.
Isn’t that the case for pretty much everything? Newer cars alternate blinking their headlights and the signal indicator, and even cars w/ the turn signal on the side will have some light bleed through since it’s all one assembly. In the majority of cars, I can see their turn signals when they’re perpendicular to me. The larger issue is that most people in my area don’t bother to use their signals in the first place.
Yea, that’s part of why I don’t know for sure if they make cars the way the guy at the top of this thread is describing.
Same. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a car that can show me the signal on the opposite side of the car, but I have seen a lot of cars where I can see the indicator while stopped at an intersection and the car is perpendicular to me, since I have a little bit of angle to see the edge w/ the indicator.
99% of the time, it’s not an issue, and the other 1% of the time it doesn’t really matter if I can see the indicator (I.e. they’re already halfway turning, so they’re angled away from me).
Yes that’s all I want, to be able to see the indicator again. A lot of newer cars have moved them too far to the side of the vehicle.
I encounter this pretty often because a Boston area streets are terrible and the drivers are worse, so a visible indicator helps all drivers make traffic flow more smoothly.
i don’t think that was ever required in the US. it is elsewhere though.
Can’t speak to “required.” But I know it used to be done.
I’m pretty sure most cars have a turn signal near the headlights, and one on the mirror or on the side for that use case, no?
Actually I think I remember watching a technology connections video about how card in the US can use the headlights as a turn signal, or something like that. I don’t think that’s allowed in Europe or the EU or whatever.
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
Dang it, sometimes I just type stuff and dont think about what I typed (the irony of what I was writing out)
I’ve always heard it as “PICNIC”
Problem In Chair, Not In Computer
And never forget about the I-D ten T error.
ID10T for those who didn’t get it.
Layer 0 obfuscation error.
Oh, you think I need a new chair? Will the Internet come back then?
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
The thing is, you want the turn signal to turn on before the start of the turn, so other drivers, pedestrians, cyclists can react.
I cannot stand how in some vehicles if I turn on the signal to indicate I am planning to change lanes, it will beep at me that there is a car there. I’m indicating I plan on it. Not that I’m turning the wheel right this second. I know there is a car to my side, I’m going to change lanes behind it, but am indicating mostly to the car behind them.
agreed, I don’t think the blinker switch should be removed, but a late indicator is better than no indicator.
How would that work? On the highway, a slight nudge on a straight means you’ll cross a lane, meaning turn signals on.
A kilometer later, the exact same slight nudge could mean it’s just a light turn in the road, meaning signals off.
Now you could mandate cameras in all vehicles, which analyze your driving and turn on the turn signals when it thinks you’re making a turn. Now who’s responsible in a false positive if someone else dodges you and crashes because you suddenly turned on the signals without turning? Except it wasn’t you, but your car. Oh and also you made entry level cars 10k more expensive, making them way more inaccessible if you aren’t rich.
it wouldn’t indicate for slight turns only standard turns. Normal turns on the road may engage it but It’s meant as a “hey this person is actively turning” or as a “this cars wheel is turned that way” so you know the direction it will go if it started moving
but honestly even if it did, it isn’t hard to see “oh that car is on a curve obviously it’s not turning”
How would you do that so it isn’t ugly as hell and isn’t prone to misunderstanding?
< and > for turns. X for brakes.
Honestly, we should focus on functionality rather than aesthetic.
That doesn’t answer the question. The question is how you would design it so you can look at the left side of a car, know that it’s turning right and isn’t prone to misunderstandings.
Up and down arrows? Up is away from you and down is towards you.
How would you do that so it isn’t ugly as hell
same way we do with lights now, design them attractively. It is not always successful and that’s on the manufacturers.
and isn’t prone to misunderstanding?
what about it is confusing? green = not coming at you so it’s okay to turn left (or whatever).
sliding light or arrows
How would that work? If you look from the side you suddenly don’t see anything again, or an arrow point forwards or backwards?
If you look from the front, current turn signals work for that already.
sliding lights: it depends on the bulb but i imagine it would easy to see move
arrows: i dont know why you think they would point fowards or backwards they would just towards the side youre on or not
If you’re looking at the side of the car, you don’t see them the same way as from the front. Which this whole discussion is about.
If you can see both turn signals from your point of view, current design works well enough.
i found a video to help you picture it better (https://youtube.com/shorts/ZD_34DxW_uI)
it really isnt that difficult
I know how flow lights work. But they still don’t help you see better that a car is turning away from you, which is what this discussion is about.
Imagine a crossroad where a car is coming from your right side. You have no way of knowing whether they turn right or go straight, regardless of the way the lights work, because you won’t see them.
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.
Absolutely, but that doesn’t solve the problem that’s talked about here (seeing the turn signal from the other side of the vehicle). It might be clearer what the turn signal is, but if you look at the right side of a vehicle, you won’t be able to see the left headlight, even when it’s massive.
When am I ever looking at the side and needing to see the other side’s turn signal? The best I can think of is (using right side driving) a car turning right into my lane of travel as I’m going straight, but I’ll be a bit offset to the left and should be able to see the right headlight. If I can’t, that means the car is angled to the right, making it obvious that they’re turning.
Because this is what the discussion is about?
Personally I just want front turn signals to be visible from the opposite side again.
And I’m saying I can see them most of the time, and when I can’t, I don’t need to because their intention is obvious.
I’ve seen newer cars turn the headlight off while the turn indicator is on, so you get a sort of double-blink effect
Those are typically DRLs. Chrysler did this for a while in the 2000s-2010s (maybe still, idk), where the high beam - in DRL mode - turns off while the turn signal is doing it’s thing. Other manufacturers do this with dedicated DRLs, sometimes integrating the DRLs and turn signals into one multicolored unit (Kia Telluride, for example).
No manufacturer shuts off a headlight for a turn signal when the headlights are intentionally turned on (whether by light sensors at night, or by the driver).
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.
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.
Counterpoint: the dumb people could have them as well.
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
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
In some places in the world you can give it a shot and see, but we don’t have rear fog lights in the US. I’ve never seen one on any car designed for this market, and my Crosstrek just to name an example has a conspicuous filler panel over the hole where the rear fog light goes on the same model sold in other markets.
As to why, I have no idea. But we also mandate that front fog lights can’t be configured so they can be activated without the main headlights on at the same time, which kind of defeats the purpose if you ask me. So maybe asking DOT regulations to make sense is a tall order.
Like… a horn?
No. I want to make my voice loud enough for me to stop at a red light and ask the guy behind me if there is a proctology emergency or if they could stop riding my ass, and savor their expression as it dawns on them what is happening.
You are looking for war
Road rage 5000 initiate
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.
Yes, and an oil slick button that drops some oil on the road for the hard of hearing tail rider.
These exist. I used to deliver pizza and one of my coworkers installed one of these on their car.
Liknks or didn’t happen
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.
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.”
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
BMW should focus on making the turn signals work first.
BMWs need a speeding indication more than a braking one /s
Haha, funny enough, some BMWs have a feature where the speedometer reads 5 MPH higher than actual vehicle speed. Probably to try cutting down on speeding
Plenty of cars flash their brake lights when ABS(/ESP?) engages, which is reasonable and should be a legal requirement IMO.
There’s lots of room to give additional info in between that and “brake light is on because the driver doesn’t understand that they can do mild adjustments by letting off the gas / stupid bitch-ass VW PHEV computer thinks using cruise control downhill with electric regen requires the motherfucking brake lights”. It’s like no-one realizes or cares that brake lights lose all purpose if they’re on when the car isn’t meaningfully decelerating. ARGH.
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 you want that, just light up the first and last LED always.
That’s a good point, although flashing does help to grab attention, but it can also be annoying when the person is driving with their foot on the brake pedal.
If Japan introduced that they never caught on, unless it’s specific to an area or model of car.
90% of the things that Japan introduced according to comment sections on the internet never happened (or never made it past the prototype stage) and the rest was actually introduced in Korea, not in Japan.
The Japanophilia is strong with a lot of people on the internet.
Yeah I mean I’ve been commuting 2 hrs a day in Japan for almost 10 years now-- you’d think I would’ve seen these brake lights by now
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 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
That could probably be implemented in most existing vehicles, and at least it would provide more information.
I think some cars also turn on the hazards automatically if you really hammer the breaks.
That would serve the same purpose without and extra light, I think they’re into something
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.
I think only brake lights are required I’ve never seen turn signals on them. I suspect the ones I’ve seen with those aftermarket ones drive those trailers on other states with more strict requirements
Wow that’s got to be almost worthless. As you say, it just takes some idiot with a load obscuring the vehicle lights and suddenly nobody behind them knows what’s going on. What’s next, are we going to make tail lights optional?
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
Turn signals can be either red or amber in the US.
yeah, but they shouldn’t be allowed to be red to begin with.
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.
The hazards also override your turn signals so I now have no idea when you are going to attempt lane change.
The hazards are to indicate you are stopped and now a hazard.
Only when you are stopped and now a hazard. Your car becomes a blinking light. We have road rules for blinking lights, so it SHOULD be saying one specific thing.
Thank you for coming to this road safety talk.
They also indicate slow moving road hazards like a semi carrying an oversized load
and honestly i have the same problem with that intended use. it often looks like a stopped car is attempting to turn out into traffic. IMO emergency lights should have a faster blink pattern or something to differentiate from turn signals.
Faster blink is already used to indicate that one of the lights is burned out. It’s a consequence of the mechanical part that operates (used to operate) the blinking; less resistance caused by a burned out light means it blinks faster
There’s a programmable flasher relay that does exactly this. It’s specific to certain Toyota/Lexus and Subarus from the 2000s to mid-2010s, but it’s something. I have one in my 2008 Sienna - the “emergency flasher” part is programmed to strobe, kinda like a tow truck. I like it.
Thats more an issue of using the same lamp for rear lights and turn signal
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
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.
II. - Le ou les feux arrière de brouillard ne peuvent être utilisés qu’en cas de brouillard ou de chute de neige. ☞ https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006842263
Feux de brouillard arrière : ils sont indiqués uniquement en cas de brouillard ou de chute de neige (mais jamais sous la pluie en raison de leur trop grande intensité) ☞ https://public.codesrousseau.fr/conseils-pratiques/909-feux-de-brouillard-avant-et-arriere-quand-les-utiliser.html
Ça c’est de l’osti de merde comme on dit ici.
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.
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
I’m kind of surprised he made absolutely no mention of manual gearbox vehicles. Some of the problems he’s describing predate EVs and adaptive cruise. I have a manual car and motorcycle. I pretty regularly apply just enough to the brakes to turn the light on without engaging them during engine braking. Engine braking depending on gear choice can be pretty strong. Likely not as aggressive as a regenerative braking system but more than enough to cause issues. I’m certain I’d have been rear ended if I didn’t make the lights turn on while just slowing down, not coming to a full stop.
I feel like if your car is doing anything to actively slow itself down (as in apart from just cruising) it should turn the brake lights on.
Yeah, just have an accelerometer that triggers them
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”.
One pedal driving just sounds like motion sickness city.
Nah not at all tbh, you can get very smooth deceleration with it and it doesn’t feel floaty or whatever, it does take a tiny adjustment to how you drive, you don’t coast anymore but rather you can finely control your deceleration by how much you lift the accelerator, it’s quite nice to be honest I always drive it in that mode (even if it’s not real one pedal).
I’ll be the judge of that once I’m a passenger in such a scenario.
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.
They tested using a green light for the front brake light, not a red one
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.
Flashing blue would be neat.
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.
