Cars in the US could soon get cameras to replace side mirrors

[Humza]

Something to look forward to: Given the widespread use of technology in cars, both behind the scenes and in touchscreen-laden modern interiors, it's only a matter of time before every interaction we have with a vehicle is processed by a computer chip. One of those includes the replacement of traditional side-view mirrors with cameras, a feature that has already made its way to Japan and Europe but is yet to appear in the US as it's currently forbidden by government regulation.

Side-view cameras like those in the Lotus Evija pictured above might be given a nod on US roads as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration along with Department of Transportation plan to test how drivers can use these cameras to replace traditional mirrors, reports Reuters.

The test would examine "driving behavior and lane change maneuver execution" in cars with camera-based systems and traditional mirrors, said the NHTSA and DOT in a notice requesting public comments on the proposal.

It further says that research participants will be members of the public who are licensed car drivers and/or truck drivers. They will drive "a test vehicle equipped with a camera-based system in place of outside rearview mirrors, an original equipment outside rearview mirror system, or a combination of both."

Driving will take place on track-based and on-road terrain with "semi-naturalistic driving" where participants would make use of conventional and camera-based visibility systems in multi-lane scenarios, while some portion of the testing will also take place at night-time or early morning, to examine performance during those conditions.

With the help of recording instruments that monitor eye glances, vehicle speed, position, steering angle and turn signal status, researchers will be able to assess participants' level of comfort and confidence in using the technology.

According to automakers, one major benefit of using cameras over conventional side-mirrors is the reduction of size that improves aerodynamics, subsequently minimizing drag, wind noise and fuel consumption. Audi and Lexus, among other manufacturers, have current models on sale (outside the US) that utilize this feature.

It can be argued that using cameras would take some getting used to as the screens on which the camera footage is streamed to, like on Audi's E-Tron shown above, are generally located lower down and lack the visual depth of a conventional mirror. Then there's the question of reliability, manufacturing costs, maintenance and repair bills associated with this technology.

The NHTSA and DOT has given the public until October 28, 2019 for its feedback on the proposal as it looks forward to 1,210 participants completing the three question sets in the activity.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/81662-cars-us-could-soon-get-cameras-replace-side.html

 

[Emexrulsier]

The thing is even when broken a mirror can still be a mirror, a broken monitor does nothing.

 

[ShagnWagn]

What's crazy? The government has given more attention to this than autonomous cars. I guess these people didn't grease the lawmaker's hands as done with autonomy. At least these camera side mirrors won't be killing people needlessly (yet to be determined as an indirect cause, versus directly caused by autonomy).

This is an example of thinking "could we" versus "should we". Probably another excuse to raise the cost/profit of vehicles, and significantly more, repair ripoff fees. Example? People don't even replace shattered side mirrors because they cost too much, or they get stolen. Do you think people are going to replace these?

What are some benefits I can think of? Less wind resistance and less chance to hit another vehicle. I'm sure we could get an extra .01 mpg... That's worth spending that extra $1500+ for a camera system...? Also, I see a benefit that you (shouldn't) need to look over your shoulder, which allows you to stay focused ahead and not lose sight of the windshield.

 

[MonsterZero]

My buddy's Honda has this, pretty cool tech, all cars should have this as a safety measure. They should also have collision prevention, lane assist, lane departure warning, HUD with speed and navigation assist, back up camera, rear collision detection, etc.

These should be mandatory features for all vehicles, not expensive options.

 

[mbk34]

I remember in the past, when your mirror got broken, it would cost about £5 to fix. Now ,with electric mirrors, it costs about £500. Now it looks like I'll be looking forward to replacing whole camera systems

I can see it making sense if the camera is mounted high up in the middle of your car with a wide angle lens. That way it wouldn't be prone to being hit by passing cars. One camera would also server both sides so it might be cheaper. It might be tough seeing vehicles that are almost alongside but then that's also true of other mirrors. If it had a short recording device then it might be useful in allocating blame in an accident. I guess it could also serve as a reversing camera.

 

[EEatGDL]

Let's not over-engineer it, keep it simple. The system of two mirrors, the smaller one for blind spot, is simple, cheap, and effective.

 

[yRaz]

I won't buy a vehicles without mirrors... First people can't drive cars without a stick, next they won't be able to drive a car without side view cameras. My buddy can't back up without his cars back up camera and I know other people who can't parallel park without that too down view assist crap. It's gonna be 2050 and I'm still gonna be driving 90s and 2000s Honda's, lol.

 

[ShagnWagn]

My buddy's Honda has this, pretty cool tech, all cars should have this as a safety measure. They should also have collision prevention, lane assist, lane departure warning, HUD with speed and navigation assist, back up camera, rear collision detection, etc.

These should be mandatory features for all vehicles, not expensive options.

A classic leftist - trying to force their opinion on everybody. Not to mention substantially raising vehicle prices. I turn off all that bullcrap you want. No annoying and distracting bells and buzzers, plus more crap to fail and repair. It ticks me off when people have that light in their side mirror. It makes me think they put their turn signal on and are going to ram into the side of me. Plus there being two turn lanes and buzzers going off because someone next to you is also turning the same direction. That's an epic fail. It should be a mandatory recall by all vehicle manufacturers to be removed. Don't like me wanting to force this opinion on you hmm? It's a safety concern the car warning you to a false alarm, let alone cars trying to steer themselves away into the other lane. And here people want to force these fully autonomous cars on us when they can't even figure out something this basic? LOL

 

[wiyosaya]

My buddy's Honda has this, pretty cool tech, all cars should have this as a safety measure. They should also have collision prevention, lane assist, lane departure warning, HUD with speed and navigation assist, back up camera, rear collision detection, etc.

These should be mandatory features for all vehicles, not expensive options.

A classic leftist - trying to force their opinion on everybody. Not to mention substantially raising vehicle prices. I turn off all that bullcrap you want. No annoying and distracting bells and buzzers, plus more crap to fail and repair. It ticks me off when people have that light in their side mirror. It makes me think they put their turn signal on and are going to ram into the side of me. Plus there being two turn lanes and buzzers going off because someone next to you is also turning the same direction. That's an epic fail. It should be a mandatory recall by all vehicle manufacturers to be removed. Don't like me wanting to force this opinion on you hmm? It's a safety concern the car warning you to a false alarm, let alone cars trying to steer themselves away into the other lane. And here people want to force these fully autonomous cars on us when they can't even figure out something this basic? LOL

Yep! We should stay in the dark ages because we should stay in the dark ages.

Then again, most people have no clue as to how to properly adjust side-view mirrors. Perhaps we should stay in the dark ages.

 

[wiyosaya]

My buddy's Honda has this, pretty cool tech, all cars should have this as a safety measure. They should also have collision prevention, lane assist, lane departure warning, HUD with speed and navigation assist, back up camera, rear collision detection, etc.

These should be mandatory features for all vehicles, not expensive options.

There was a similar argument for seat belts and air bags, too. Eventually, they became requirements - because they save lives.

Lee Iacocca vehemently argued against air bags as being worse than the problem, however, when they were mandated he turned the polar opposite, put them in Chrysler cars and created a marketing campaign touting air bags in Chrysler cars.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Naturally each make will have its own independent screen and cost $500. The only way I would be OK with this. Is if the tech was standardized to only a few dimensions. Bringing the price down to a reasonable value.

 

[Uncle Al]

Here's another case of trying to replace a perfectly good mechanical device with an ultra-expensive device that can easily get damaged or destroyed and cost a small fortune to replace. There is simply too much electronic "junk" on today's cars that is unneeded and wasn't even ask for. Granted, some of them make good sense like the mirror that can switch to a rear-facing camera for better visibility when you're loaded with passengers or self-dimming mirrors. I'd like to see the dealerships return to letting you order your car with as much or as LITTLE extra's as you like. Granted, it often took 3-6 months for the vehicle to arrive but you got EXACTLY what you wanted and were not oversold on a bunch of junk that serves no purpose other than to drive the price of the car up, up, up!

 

[ShagnWagn]

Yep! We should stay in the dark ages because we should stay in the dark ages.

Then again, most people have no clue as to how to properly adjust side-view mirrors. Perhaps we should stay in the dark ages.

Yeah, you're right. Why keep things simple? ;p

 

[ShagnWagn]

Here's another case of trying to replace a perfectly good mechanical device with an ultra-expensive device that can easily get damaged or destroyed and cost a small fortune to replace. There is simply too much electronic "junk" on today's cars that is unneeded and wasn't even ask for. Granted, some of them make good sense like the mirror that can switch to a rear-facing camera for better visibility when you're loaded with passengers or self-dimming mirrors. I'd like to see the dealerships return to letting you order your car with as much or as LITTLE extra's as you like. Granted, it often took 3-6 months for the vehicle to arrive but you got EXACTLY what you wanted and were not oversold on a bunch of junk that serves no purpose other than to drive the price of the car up, up, up!

I know that mazda allows you to custom-order. Chevrolet does, and also Jeep.

Although Jeep is very limited to "packages". If there is one thing you want, you have to buy a bunch of crap you don't. They lump them together to upcharge you.

Such as I was thinking of custom ordering a new mazda because they hadn't added a bunch of the bullcrap that MonsterZero wants to force on us (a well built car without all the junk). I simply wanted a moonroof with a manual transmission. It is not possible due to their "packages". So, I bought a used one. Mazda directly lost out on money from it. Most people just buy off the lot because they want instant gratification (or forced to buy immediately). Now mazda has added all the junk MonsterZero wants, so looks like I am stuck with buying old cars with low miles. Saves me a ton of money! I saved $50,000 buying a low mileage trailblazer ss rather than a new jeep srt8. Jeep also has a ton of satellite tracking crap, plus nearly all of them are blacked out which to me looks terrible. Thank you, Jeep!!

 

[yRaz]

Yep! We should stay in the dark ages because we should stay in the dark ages.

Then again, most people have no clue as to how to properly adjust side-view mirrors. Perhaps we should stay in the dark ages.

But a mirror provides literally the same functionality but much simpler and cheaper. Why does absorbing photons, converting them into a video file and streaming it to a screen where your eye then absorbs the photons work better than simply reflecting the photons directly into your eye? And what about at night? Ask anyone doing photography why having an optical view finder on a DSLR is better than a mirrorless camera for night photography.

It's not about being in the dark ages, it's just stupid and unnecessary while adding extra cost. It's also something that NOBODY ASKED FOR.

 

[Evernessince]

My buddy's Honda has this, pretty cool tech, all cars should have this as a safety measure. They should also have collision prevention, lane assist, lane departure warning, HUD with speed and navigation assist, back up camera, rear collision detection, etc.

These should be mandatory features for all vehicles, not expensive options.

A classic leftist - trying to force their opinion on everybody. Not to mention substantially raising vehicle prices. I turn off all that bullcrap you want. No annoying and distracting bells and buzzers, plus more crap to fail and repair. It ticks me off when people have that light in their side mirror. It makes me think they put their turn signal on and are going to ram into the side of me. Plus there being two turn lanes and buzzers going off because someone next to you is also turning the same direction. That's an epic fail. It should be a mandatory recall by all vehicle manufacturers to be removed. Don't like me wanting to force this opinion on you hmm? It's a safety concern the car warning you to a false alarm, let alone cars trying to steer themselves away into the other lane. And here people want to force these fully autonomous cars on us when they can't even figure out something this basic? LOL

I didn't realize wanting cars being safer was "leftist". Then again I'm sure the same kind of arguments were posed against drinking and driving laws when they were first introduced. Personal "freedom" vs the safety of everyone. Many of the features he listed aren't even an infringement of personal freedom. No idea how collision detection could be considered bad by anyone. It saves lives.

 

[Danny101]

No thank you. I'll keep the mirrors. It's just makes care more expensive to purchase and repair. Just because you can doesn't mean should.

 

[Danny101]

YRaz - Ask anyone doing photography why having an optical view finder on a DSLR is better than a mirrorless camera for night photography.

You're right. A camera at night, at this point, is never as good as eye-definition reflectivity.

 

[VitalyT]

I do not like this. The position seems awkward, you will keep looking just above the passengers knees all the time, which will make the passenger feel uncomfortable. And it is placed where ordinarily a speaker would be.

The two mirrors should be inside the dashboard, I think, on both side of the main panel. Then the driver won't need to turn his head all the time.

 

[matrix86]

My buddy's Honda has this, pretty cool tech, all cars should have this as a safety measure. They should also have collision prevention, lane assist, lane departure warning, HUD with speed and navigation assist, back up camera, rear collision detection, etc.

These should be mandatory features for all vehicles, not expensive options.

Side cameras should NOT be mandatory. If a camera fails or is somehow damaged, it is hundreds of dollars to fix, and leaves you without a side view. With a traditional side mirror, a broken mirror still works, and is very cheap to fix. Having side mirrors also means relying on an screen. If the screen fails, you're SOL until you have a few hundred bucks to fix it.

 

[matrix86]

There was a similar argument for seat belts and air bags, too. Eventually, they became requirements - because they save lives.

Lee Iacocca vehemently argued against air bags as being worse than the problem, however, when they were mandated he turned the polar opposite, put them in Chrysler cars and created a marketing campaign touting air bags in Chrysler cars.

Yeah, there's a bit of a difference between seatbelts/airbags and mirrors. In one case, you are adding safety features. In the other, you are simply replacing a safety feature with another feature that is both more expensive and more prone to failure. The "more prone to failure" part should be what worries you. Electronics are not perfect. They fail. And when they do, they're typically expensive to fix. Last time I checked, nobody reported not being to see their side mirror because the software crashed.

 

[Catweazle]

This is one of the reasons I hate modern cars. They really don't need to be stuffed full of expensive computer crap and touch screens that quickly become obsolete. I want real mirrors on my car and real knobs on my radio and climate controls.

 

[p51d007]

Oh goodie! Something else for the criminals to rip off of autos (that is if the American manufacturers will even make any!) All this "convenience" crap just drives the price up.
Give me a clutch, shifter, mirrors and a good reliable engine...I've been driving a clutch transmission for well over 30 years. Hey, if you want an automatic, that's your choice, but I prefer a clutch.
All these gizmos are just inflating the price and making DRIVERS more distracted, like they need any help with that!

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

Are backup cameras currently being stolen? Or broken? I haven’t heard of this happening. With a large enough screen they’re way better than a rearview mirror. Of course neither of those can be replaced by looking for perpendicular traffic, but the same idea applies here.

I’m highly in favor of requiring a blinker press to enable a side view camera; it would actually force people to use their blinkers finally. That’s the only real reason I see backlash for this.

 

[cliffordcooley]

I’m highly in favor of requiring a blinker press to enable a side view camera; it would actually force people to use their blinkers finally.

There are more reasons to use a side view camera than turning. Requiring a turn signal to use the side view would be a handicap.