There has been controversy in Australia recently regarding the rear vision when reversing 4 wheel drives. Here is a link to a report on some research done on this:
tinyurl.com/a44t9
I doubt if UK cars are much better in this regard. I remember hiring a Focus several years ago and finding reversing very difficult. I believe that there is a push on in the US to get reversing cameras fitted to SUVs. Something needs to be done.
|
|
What is with people who can?t reverse without hi-tech assistance? You?re right about one thing. Something needs to be done. It?s called practice.
|
What is with people who can?t reverse without hi-tech assistance? You?re right about one thing. Something needs to be done. It?s called practice.
>>
Well said man. Do HGV drivers have reversing aids? I think not. They are that good ebcause they have practiced. Too many people driving too many cars that they shouldn't.
-----
Im not plain stupid, just a special kind of stoopid.
|
|
|
|
|
You look behind you when you reverse? I just go back until I bounce off the car behind me.... :P
|
|
|
|
I've got wonderful devices fitted to my vehicle for reversing, they're called mirrors.
|
I've got wonderful devices fitted to my vehicle for reversing, they're called mirrors.
Do they enable you to see a 3ft high child who's walked right behind the 4ft high rear of a tall vehicle?
|
Interior and door mirrors used together will show the child approaching from the side.
Lorries, vans, etc have been reversing for years, yet the press is not full of reports of injuries caused by them.
Reversing should be done the same way as any other manoeuvre, using eyes, mirrors, head movement and, most importantly, brain.
If you really connot manoevre the vehicle you have chosen to drive, then it is either the wrong vehicle for you or you shouldn't be driving at all.
|
|
|
|
Of course we should practise and take care when reversing, as the vast majority of lorry and van drivers do. Most are experienced professionals. But cars are often driven by novices - as we all were once - or by the elderly - as we all hope to be one day. It's time the stylists stopped making it more difficult than it need be.
There's another thread extolling the virtues of the Peugeot 205. If you've driven one, just think how much more likely you would be to see a child while reversing a 205 than a 206, or any Renault designed by that idiot Le Sueur or whatever his name is.
Any car with a blind spot at the C-pillar is asking for trouble.
My daughter's otherwise excellent Yaris is another poor one for rear visibility.
It's a pity that NCAP doesn't include this in its tests. Renault take so much care over other aspects of safety, and usually score 5 stars, so I can't think why they ignore this one.
|
Renault take so much care over other aspects of safety, and usually score 5 stars, so I can't think why they ignore this one.
Because there are no NCAP points for this one?
|
|
NW, you're as cynical as I am - but I bet you're right. Any extra spent, more than they have to, on safety would be money down le sueur.
|
|
|
|
I would like to echo the fact that old cars seem to be better for reversing than others:
- My '89 escort: no problem
- Mum's '92 106: no problem
- Mates new(ish) Xsara: no chance!
|
|
|
|
My take on this is that reversing vehicles (ALL vehicles, not just trucks) should have automatic right of way. Pedestrians should look out or face the consequences. Other vehicles should stop and give way to the reverser. Of course human stupidity will step in to completely horlicks things up. I once had a vehicle with a warning message when reversing ("warning-this vehicle IS reversing") as well as hazards & reversing lights, and people would STILL try to just nip around the back of me instead of waiting just a few more seconds. I suppose these are the sort of people who try to beat the barriers at level crossings.
WTM
|
My take on this is that reversing vehicles (ALL vehicles, not just trucks) should have automatic right of way. Pedestrians should look out or face the consequences.
The usual approach to these matters is that legal responsibility rests with the person creating the danger, because they have the ability to stop the danger. Inverting that principle would give drivers a licence to squash people.
Mind you, it is tempting to think if I set out to drive backwards into town, everyone else would have to get out of my way. Except that then rush-hour would see the road would be full of cars going backwards ...
|
The usual approach to these matters is that legal responsibility rests with the person creating the danger, because they have the ability to stop the danger. Inverting that principle would give drivers a licence to squash people.
If someone is reversing, they have a lot more limited visibility than a pedestrian. And anyway, why shoudnt it be the pedestrian who ducks behind a reversing vehicle who is the one creating the hazard?
WTM
|
And anyway, why shoudnt it be the pedestrian who ducks behind a reversing vehicle who is the one creating the hazard?
When did you last hear of a truck being squashed by a pedestrian?
I should have written "hazard to others".
The clown who leaps behind the truck is endangering her/his own life ... but the driver who reverses without confirming that all is clear is creating a danger to others.
|
|
|
|
My take on this is that reversing vehicles (ALL vehicles, not just trucks) should have automatic right of way. Pedestrians should look out or face the consequences.
Well I was walking through a busy car park the other day when I walked past a car just as it was starting to reverse. It stopped before it hit me. This car was a Focus, meaning it had one reversing light only, very low down, on the opposite side of the car to where I could see it. Now unless I carefully peer into every car to look for a driver and listen for an engine note (not easy in a busy car park), I don't see how I can take responsibility in a situation like that.
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
worse than that. the reversing light might not work at all.
so. what are you going to do? wander happily along, blissful in the knowledge that although you may be painfully injured, maimed for life or even killed, by golly you are in the right, and if anyone dares to try reversing into me, well I (or my surviving family) will jolly well sue the doorknobs off them! Or will you accept that you can be more aware of whats happening -or might happen-than some pedestrians seem to think.
NoWheels-I'm afraid its just not possible to get out of my cab, walk 50ft to the rear, check its clear, walk 50ft back and climb in then reverse assuming its still clear.
WTM
|
NoWheels-I'm afraid its just not possible to get out of my cab, walk 50ft to the rear, check its clear, walk 50ft back and climb in then reverse assuming its still clear.
So either fit a camera at the back, or get someone else to stand behind and check. That's what I have always done when the vehicle has a huge blindspot.
|
|
|
so. what are you going to do? wander happily along, blissful in the knowledge that although you may be painfully injured, maimed for life or even killed, by golly you are in the right, and if anyone dares to try reversing into me, well I (or my surviving family) will jolly well sue the doorknobs off them! Or will you accept that you can be more aware of whats happening -or might happen-than some pedestrians seem to think.
When walking through a car park, keeping as close to the parked cars as possible to avoid those in the road, I can't keep 100% observant of every eventuality, so if someone decides to release their handbrake and start reversing just as I'm walking past them, then there is nothing I can do about that.
--------------
Mike Farrow
|
When walking through a car park, keeping as close to the parked cars as possible to avoid those in the road, I can't keep 100% observant of every eventuality, so if someone decides to release their handbrake and start reversing just as I'm walking past them, then there is nothing I can do about that.
By walking as close as you can to parked cars you are giving the driver of a stationary car trying to reverse maximum opportunity to hit you! At normal walking pace you would traverse his/her field of view of the mirrors in less that 1/4 second to be in an impact area.
NoWheels-very few fleets have cameras fitted. I dont own the vehicle I drive, so I cant modify it. sometimes it can be a struggle to remind them to keep it legal.
WTM
|
By walking as close as you can to parked cars you are giving the driver of a stationary car trying to reverse maximum opportunity to hit you! At normal walking pace you would traverse his/her field of view of the mirrors in less that 1/4 second to be in an impact area.
Which is why drivers should watch out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see the problem myself, It is not the design of the cars/vehicles it is the standard of the driver. If you use the side mirrors, as you do in a truck, then you cant see what is directly behind you anyhow, you therefore have to look before you start your reverse. All it is down to is lack of proper observation. It would not matter if you fitted reversing cameras as their field of view is very narrow compared to that of the human eye, also the black and white versions give very little depth of view making it alot more difficult. I have used a number of systems and none of them are foolproof, including using a banksman. The only ones that "help" are the type that tell you when you are getting close to an object (some make a sound others use lights), but these are sold as reversing "AIDS", as the name suggest they only aid the reverse, at the end of the day people have to take responsibility for their own actions.
|
|
|
