Make Reversing Cameras Compulsory on all new vehicles. - Page 2

kaniSS · 29-09-2011, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by new2ford

That's exactly the way I reverse and I haven't caused an accident in 40 years. If you turn and look back you don't have your eyes on the mirrors which is the most important thing. And as the last two posters said, you can only use the mirrors in a truck, bus or loaded ute or wagon.

In the Territory you don't gain anything by looking back because it's too high to see anything. I've just upgraded to one with a camera and it's a useful adjunct to the mirrors, that's all. I can imagine some stupid people relying only on the camera but it doesn't show you everything. The best advantage of a camera is that it stops people turning around and looking over their shoulder, allowing them to concentrate on the mirrors!

Then there's the people who reverse while looking forward (not even at the mirrors) - I've seen a couple of those dillbrains reverse into cars behind!

My mates wife does this, she never looks back. You should see the back bumper of his G6ET....

She only uses the mirrors. He will have to replace the bumper soon lol....

Thank god my Mrs listens to me and turns her body around while reversing. 10 years of driving, after I taught her this method and she hasn't hit a thing while reversing.

Magna · 29-09-2011, 10:02 AM

in the days before cameras tradies with vans had a mirror attached to an arm over the back tailgate that did the same thing at much less cost. i think some were even factory fitted.

Brazen · 29-09-2011, 10:02 AM

sad that people want airbags, abs and stability control to protect themselves yet bash the idea of reverse cameras which could prevent the death of a little tacker.

sarrge2001 · 29-09-2011, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pottery beige

or a little short *** like me that would need to sit on six phone books to see over the parcel shelf....

i see plenty more out of my mirrors.. straight down the sides.. i thought people that used your method were people that didnt know how to use mirrors....

No, we can do it because we aren't a stunt double for one of the seven dwarfs

**Silver Ghia** · 29-09-2011, 10:25 AM

Never reversed a car that has a camera myself, but I can see a big danger with drivers who have their vision affixed to the camera screen in front of them rather than whats coming up behind the car from the side.

Drivers need to look each side as well as whats behind.

But observing adults in shopping centre carparks, they dont set very good examples to their children by walking behind reversing cars themselves.

pottery beige · 29-09-2011, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaniSS

My mates wife does this, she never looks back. You should see the back bumper of his G6ET....

She only uses the mirrors. He will have to replace the bumper soon lol....

Thank god my Mrs listens to me and turns her body around while reversing. 10 years of driving, after I taught her this method and she hasn't hit a thing while reversing.

how do you go with gutter rashing rims..???... just take a good over the shoulder guess.. ey.........

eaglem · 29-09-2011, 11:24 AM

As I'm not putting a Towbar on the new car I've decided to have a reversing camera installed as there are always objects that are low enough to sit below the line of vision behind your car, eg, idiots that park and leave their shopping trolleys behind your car at shopping centres. It may save the paint work a bit as well as being a safety factor.

new2ford · 29-09-2011, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaniSS

Thank god my Mrs listens to me and turns her body around while reversing. 10 years of driving, after I taught her this method and she hasn't hit a thing while reversing.

I've never hit a thing while reverse parking - using the mirrors. Once you know your vehicle you can judge the space. I can get it down to centimetres. The sonar on my Territory is more conservative than me, it goes into continuous beep when I still have plenty to go on my own instincts.

It helped that I grew up in the inner city so got used to really tight spaces. I will be interested to try this new technology that reverse parks the car for you - sounds spooky! I wonder if the sonar on that really replaces the need for the camera in terms of objects behind?

**Polyal** · 29-09-2011, 11:32 AM

As a father it makes my gut turn when I hear of these stories, it doesnt get much worse to do it yourelf..I dont know how I would cope so perhaps taking the mickey with the topic isnt a great idea.

I do however disagree with making cameras some how standard. Yet again its another excuse for the public to not watch the road and there surroundings.

Things like this will always happen, and its is VERY difficult to protect your kids 100%

But there is a clear education problem here, both for the driver and the children.

Its like the lady that hit the accelerator the other day and killed the child and seriously hurt the Granddad..terrible, but things happen. Although I must admit I cant fathom how that happens, surely once you started to go forward you would slam the brakes on....

RIP.

kaniSS · 29-09-2011, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pottery beige

how do you go with gutter rashing rims..???... just take a good over the shoulder guess.. ey.........

On occasions while I am turned around I will glance back at the passenger mirror to see how close I am to the gutter. This is the only mirror I will occasionally use.

I just don't feel in control when I don't look back. I physically can not do it without turning back.

Streets · 29-09-2011, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

Although I must admit I cant fathom how that happens, surely once you started to go forward you would slam the brakes on....

The thing is, you think you ARE slamming the brakes on, because your proprioception is momentarily confused. You think you're hitting the brake, but the car goes forward, so you hit the brake harder, and the car goes forward faster.

new2ford · 29-09-2011, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaniSS

I just don't feel in control when I don't look back. I physically can not do it without turning back.

Quite honestly, each to their own. If this is your most comfortable reversing technique then that's fine. But it shouldn't be implied that people reversing using only their mirrors are somehow doing it unsafely.

geckoGT · 29-09-2011, 11:48 AM

Those that think looking back over the parcel shelf is the best, try this. Get a broom stick and someone to hold it up 3 m from the rear bumper, then get that person to mark the lowest point on the stick that you can see from the drivers seat. You will find in the average sedan such as falcon that it is higher than the height of the average toddler.

I use reverse cameras every day in the ambulance and I think it is a great idea. I think you will find that in competition between manufacturers for new tech and appealing to the buyers. As has happened with other expensive tech such as ABS, this will eventually be standard equipment.

**Polyal** · 29-09-2011, 11:48 AM

Also if people just use the camera then that does not solve the issue of a kids running behind the car...the dont run directly from the rear.....

Camera's are crap. Full stop. If you need them to park then I would suggest that sensors are good enough, they come in handy if you have a funny shape boot etc.

EDIT: for the above, Vans and trucks etc are different. But for SUV, sedans...come on.

XESP351 · 29-09-2011, 11:57 AM

Most of the instances I know of (and I know of a few, mate's brother ran over and killed my mate's kid years ago, that's just one example), the kid is actually playing UNDER the car. No camera can detect that. There is NO substitute for supervising the kids, I know it can be hard when you have more than one and things are hectic but the price to pay is very high.

dimka100 · 29-09-2011, 12:01 PM

Reverse cameras would require for reasonable size colour screens to be installed in the vehicle in order for the camera to be operational, this would drive the cost of the basic models up fairly significantly especially on cheap cars that have no fancy screen or any such features, would the consumers be happy to pay extra?

Also reverse cameras use wide lenses which make judgment of the distance to objects almost impossible by just looking at the screen, essentially you would need to integrate reverse sensors as well to make the camera useful (which is how its currently done on all vehicles) again adding to the cost of base models that do not have such sensors installed.

Lastly on big 4WDs a single reverse camera mounted in the centre or the rear bumper is not sufficient to properly cover the rear of the vehicle, hence why most proper (say land/range rover) 4WD will have multiple cameras installed at the corners to provide for better coverage

Whitey-AMG · 29-09-2011, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

Also if people just use the camera then that does not solve the issue of a kids running behind the car...the dont run directly from the rear.....

Camera's are crap. Full stop. If you need them to park then I would suggest that sensors are good enough, they come in handy if you have a funny shape boot etc.

EDIT: for the above, Vans and trucks etc are different. But for SUV, sedans...come on.

I think cameras and sensors should be a MUST on all these softroaders / 4WD that have "less" rear visibility than most sedans. Proximity sensors are great and have saved the rear bar on my GT many times when parking.

The loss of these kids is a real tragedy and hits home about our adopted thinking that we all have a "right" to drive cars. It is a privilege and should be treated as such.......as with most privileges - we tend to forget and become absent minded about them......human nature.

At the end of the day - you can have all the fandangled devices that current technology can provide - but if you don't have your wits about you......there will be tragedies. I feel sorry for these families.

75van · 29-09-2011, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

But observing adults in shopping centre carparks, they dont set very good examples to their children by walking behind reversing cars themselves.

I think that is probably the most valid point - the number of times I've had to stop reversing out of a carpark spot because some idiot adult walks past the back of my car would run into the hundreds. Education of the dangers of all vehicles is the key. I've taught my 3yo (and will teach my 9mth old when she can walk) that they should try to stay where the driver can see them, be well clear of any car that is moving, and if they can't they need to be with an adult.

RedHotGT · 29-09-2011, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JC

It's not about cameras - it's about stupid parents not knowing where their kids are. Why would you reverse when there's a 2 year old or 3 year old around the car - they should be in the car, or in the house. We have 2 x 8 year olds and 1 x 6 year old, and they really have little sense around the car, so when we are moving it, they are either in it, or well clear of it where we can see them.

JC - I'm amazed that is your opinion on this discussion given that you are a parent. of multiple young kids... Despite how well you try to teach kids, as you would well know - they are blissfully unaware of how dangerous some simple situations can be.

I have 4 kids under 7, and can think of a number of situations where this could happen... For instance, times where I am in the car alone or with 1-2 of my kids, and the others are still inside the house (with my wife).... Then without me knowing as I concentrate on reversing, my 2 1/2 year old (who is very resourceful) has managed to open the front door, and run beside the car (which I wouldn't see anyway with a camera) and then behind it...

These accidents (which are accidents) most likely happen when the driver is unaware that the kids are right next to - or behind the vehicle. It's almost always an SUV or 4x4 - not a sedan - that is involved with these accidents. Obviously it is the higher driving position/reduced visibility that causes the accident to occur.

I think suggesting reverse cameras to be compulsory is a knee-jerk reaction.... but it does have some merit... Though in some cases, I'm sure that even a reverse camera may not have avoided the accident anyway. As I pointed out, my 2 1/2 year old would not be seen out of the windows of my Territory if he was standing beside, infront, or behind it... If he was to run beside the car, and then behind it - reverse camera or not, I probably still wouldn't have seen him until it was too late.

I think you can NEVER be too careful with kids... and teaching them strict rules inside and outside a car is very important... And I would hate to be in the same situation as some of these families who have lost their young child...

But just remember - Accidents do happen...

kaniSS · 29-09-2011, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by new2ford

Quite honestly, each to their own. If this is your most comfortable reversing technique then that's fine. But it shouldn't be implied that people reversing using only their mirrors are somehow doing it unsafely.

I never said that.
Everyone has their techniques I agree. You may reverse safely without looking back but the people I have come across can not.

mrbaxr6t · 29-09-2011, 12:40 PM

once some time ago my wife parallel parked to drop off the kids @ school in a silver EF sedan, she had to go into the school to pickup some uniforms for them and she returns to the car with a land rover on the bonnet that had reversed on top of it, the driver of said vehicle claimed they couldn't see the car behind them when they reversed, now if people cannot see a car parked behind them in their toorak tractors what hope have they of seeing a primary school aged child.

In my opinion better education of kids and drivers (as per usual) is needed I have taught my two not to walk directly behind or in front of cars, and if you see reverse lights on a car move beside it at a distance, cars seldom move sideways.

mik · 29-09-2011, 12:58 PM

maybe a better feature to go for would be the object avoidance /emergency braking thing ?

Olbucko · 29-09-2011, 01:18 PM

Obviously a reverse camera will not save a child in every situation but they could reduce child deaths by 70-80%, a big step forward.

**Polyal** · 29-09-2011, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPI

Obviously a reverse camera will not save a child in every situation but they could reduce child deaths by 70-80%, a big step forward.

I cant see the logic in it?

By the time you actually see the kid its typically too late..by the time your reaction kicks in. There are many examples but generally I would have thought kids come from your peripheral vision, no camera will pick that up.

To put that cost, standard, on all cars wont happen, it will double the price of a Cherry to start.

flappist · 29-09-2011, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPI

Obviously a reverse camera will not save a child in every situation but they could reduce child deaths by 70-80%, a big step forward.

But then if it increases accidents due to idiots only using the camera screen and not looking at the other 270 degrees, e.g. backing out in front of a truck you are back where you started.

Unfortunately this could go down the "speed kills" path where many think it is more important to be watching the speedo than the road ahead......

**Polyal** · 29-09-2011, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

Unfortunately this could go down the "speed kills" path where many think it is more important to be watching the speedo than the road ahead......

Exactly, just another reason for society to blame something else....

pottery beige · 29-09-2011, 01:31 PM

situational awareness... stupid people lack it....

jozza76 · 29-09-2011, 01:36 PM

Living in a relatively built up estate where there are a lot of kids around (including my own), I usually reverse at a snail's pace and with my window down, so that I can use an additional sensor (my hearing).

Unfortunately not everyone takes the same precautions, so education from an early age for your kids is essential. More awareness from the public is also required but like with anything there is always an element of society that will drink drive, or speed etc. regardless of how many times they hear the message. Not reversing related, but it makes me sick the number of times I see a 3 or 4 year old riding a scooter on the footpath beside a busy road with mum or dad in tow about 50 metres behind without a care in the world. All it takes is for a car to come out of driveway...

dimka100 · 29-09-2011, 02:04 PM

We all know that adding reverse sensors, decent colour screens, and rear cameras on all cars is going to make them more expensive, so having that in mind here is the question:

Person A has kids and they want safety for their kids.

Person B does NOT have kids, they DON’T want to pay for features they have no use for, frankly Person B thinks that Person A must to take care of their kids and there are Persons A issue.

Why does person B need to pay for child safety features when they don’t have kids? If Person A is serious about their child’s safety then they will buy a car with the appropriate safety features they require! Getting others to pay for it too is wrong …

XESP351 · 29-09-2011, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jozza76

Not reversing related, but it makes me sick the number of times I see a 3 or 4 year old riding a scooter on the footpath beside a busy road with mum or dad in tow about 50 metres behind without a care in the world. All it takes is for a car to come out of driveway...

I tell my son who rides his bike when we go for walks to only stay on the footpath and never go on the road, and tell him to always look out for cars coming out of driveways. But tell me what else can I do, the only thing left is to ban him from riding his bike all together (which would devastate him) because people simply can't look before reversing out of their driveways or or reversing at stupid speeds.

Surely there is a point where it's not the fault of kids and their parents and the person coming out of the driveway without looking can get locked up for being stupidly negligent. Sadly won't turn back time or bring a kid back though.

Anyway back on topic. Sorry.