Pointless Cybertruck mirrors!

[Jhodgesatmb]

Alas, 'impractical' it's not.

Motorcycles accelerate far more quickly than other vehicles. So letting them to the front of red light queues reduces overall traffic. Are you saying you don't have red lights?

Motorcycles sideswipe collisions are far less deadly, so allowing them to share lanes in heavy traffic, again, reduces overall traffic and traffic deaths. Are you saying you don't have freeways or suburban multilane roads?

And the original reason it used to be allowed: Motorcycles were air-cooled, and sitting around in traffic is bad for them, leading to more breakdowns and, again, traffic delays.

Yeah, it's only fully legal in California. But it's not impractical anywhere. And all states allow for motorcycles to queue up more tightly than other vehicles, the standard following distance being a staggered 1 second instead of the 3 second non-staggered for full sized vehicles.

-Crissa

When I lived in LA I rode a motorcycle and lane-splitted all the time. As you say, it originated with air-cooled engines that would overheat in the LA weather pretty easily if idling. I first noticed CHP splitting lanes and asked about it at the local shop (this was in the early 80s). They told me (and I later asked a CHP giving a traffic school and he confirmed) that it wasn't legal but as long as the law was adhered to CHP wouldn't cite. As water-cooled bikes became more of a mainstream it still made sense because motorcyclists are like a magnet for bad drivers. Lane splittling levels the playing field a bit. I never rode outside of California and when I moved to the bay area I sold my bike because: (a) I was getting older and my reaction time wasn't as good, (b) the roads up here are not as dry and reliable as they are in LA (too much slipping around), and (c) frankly, the drivers in LA are much better in traffic than here. I see lane-splitting as viable anywhere but I am not convinced that it is practical for the kinds of reasons I stopped when I moved north.

Sponsored

 

[Frank Mendez]

Why wouldn't you just use a camera?

-Crissa

I find the camera on my M3 to be difficult to see the lane to which I am changing. The pic is in the lower left of my screen and is blocked by my hand or steering wheel. I am not ready to give up mirrors. The default of my looking to confirm lane is the mirror first and then the artificial display then maybe the camera.

 

[TyPope]

Yeah, they're lying about people following the rules. A comment saying they're long behind on their studies is not a comment saying they shouldn't study it!

I do not understand why they're so laggardly about this. They had approval to do the study four years ago - why only last year just open up the question about studying at all? It's ridiculous.

-Crissa

in 2009, they set up the first comment period and only a very few comments actually said something along the lines of "I believe that the NHTSA should study replacing rearview side mirrors with cameras." Most of the comments were of the "I'll volunteer to do testing" or "Cameras are good. Ditch the mirror requirement."

Unfortunately, the way the system works, the NHTSA is not allowed to just go off and study things without having a reason. So, instead of closing the request for comments and killing the study altogether, they thankfully, re-opened the comment period, carefully explained what they needed comments to say, and somehow managed to get 15 or so of us to actually say "The NHTSA should pursue a study in the viability of allowing manufacturers to replace vehicle side mirrors with a camera/monitor system that shows, at a minimum, the same rearward view available via mirrors."

They could have just killed the effort altogether but I'm glad they didn't. Further, I wish that the 1,000 or so useless comments had actually answered the question being asked rather than just being rants about their point of view on cameras.

ANYWAY, I commented appropriately during the last comment period and now we just have to, apparently, wait for WAY TO LONG for the system to move to an actual study. Back when I did, I posted here how to go in and make a good comment that will count (I read SOOOO many comments on the NHTSA site) and was hoping for a bunch of fellow enthusiasts to go and get this study done and cameras approved before my CT gets made!

 

[Crissa]

I find the camera on my M3 to be difficult to see the lane to which I am changing. The pic is in the lower left of my screen and is blocked by my hand or steering wheel. I am not ready to give up mirrors. The default of my looking to confirm lane is the mirror first and then the artificial display then maybe the camera.

Mmm. I believe you can now move where it is on the screen so that it works with your ergonomics.

That's a very good point; ergonomics varies by driver. Mirrors are up and above to avoid this problem, but they still sometimes get blocked or clipped or fogged up 'cause they're sticking out there. And the instrument panel can get obscured all the time.

Replacing the rear-view position with them might be a better solution. We'll see.

But the view out of my cameras is superior to any mirror I've had - they can see in the dark, they can have measurements on them, they don't mess with my astigmatism - so I am totally there for them to start replacing mirrors.

-Crissa

 

[Jhodgesatmb]

I find the camera on my M3 to be difficult to see the lane to which I am changing. The pic is in the lower left of my screen and is blocked by my hand or steering wheel. I am not ready to give up mirrors. The default of my looking to confirm lane is the mirror first and then the artificial display then maybe the camera.

Me too, though they now give the option to move that camera view to other places on the monitor that aren't blocked. I haven't gotten that update yet since FSD Beta is behind.

 

[Deleted member 5322]

1. A camera costs about $50. The head display varies.
2. So... don't leave it there?
3. So... use a different display configuration?
4. Why is a tiny camera harder to screw onto a truck or trailer than a mirror?

Honestly, it seems like you have preconceptions and you're unwilling to go past them.

-Crissa

Have you ever towe anything longer than 15 ft? Have you ever tried back up 30-35ft trailer?
Cameras are awesome as an adds, not as a main source

 

[Crissa]

Have you ever towe anything longer than 15 ft? Have you ever tried back up 30-35ft trailer?
Cameras are awesome as an adds, not as a main source

What does that have to do with cameras, tho?

Have you used cameras designed in the last half a decade? They're honestly amazing.

-Crissa

 

[Deleted member 5322]

What does that have to do with cameras, tho?

Have you used cameras designed in the last half a decade? They're honestly amazing.

-Crissa

They are! But not as the main source! Would like to see a man towing using 5th wheel mirrorless. Don't think anyone would give up mirrors and just use cameras....

 

[Crissa]

They are! But not as the main source! Would like to see a man towing using 5th wheel mirrorless. Don't think anyone would give up mirrors and just use cameras....

But again, that doesn't have anything to do with cameras. They can give more steady, brighter, clearer, and angles you cannot get from mirrors,

Cameras are straight up superior.

-Crissa

 

[Deleted member 5322]

Crissa, looks like you’ve never towed any real things, therefore, keep arguing. I am gonna kill this debate.

 

[HaulingAss]

Could you do the same with cameras and a screen? Of course. But unless that is a fairly large screen on your door that can show two different views, it won't nearly as quick or have as much detail as looking in the glass. I'd rather not have to switch between wide and normal views on a screen if I want to verify that everything is hunky-dory behind my cab.

I'm not following your stated reasoning here. The amount of detail shown by a digital mirror can match a glass mirror of the same size by having adequate resolution.

The problem Audi had with their digital side-view mirrors was that they were not bright enough for bright conditions. Maybe the resolution suffered as well, I don't know, but that was not a complaint I saw voiced, it was the brightness. I think they just cheaped out on the type of LCD screen they used.

It's certainly possible to have virtual mirrors that are superior in most ways to a decent optical mirror, but you have to spend the money and get the right cameras and displays (and mount them in the proper spots).

 

[HaulingAss]

Crissa, looks like you’ve never towed any real things, therefore, keep arguing. I am gonna kill this debate.

I've towed a wide variety of stuff, all with optical mirrors. I've never seen a virtual mirror that was as good but that is not because the technology is not ready, it's because nobody bothered to make a really good one (or I've never seen one that does exist). An optical mirror will have a lower upfront cost, but a virtual mirror could easily pay for itself with less drag.

 

[HaulingAss]

Okay.......

Lemme make it a little more concise then:

1. Extra cost of adding equivalent cameras/screens compared to cost of towing mirrors
2. 95% of the time a large screen isn't needed in the door for those hauling on an irregular basis
3. You can quickly glance at the mirrors, vs. likely having to switch between standard and wide-angles on a camera/screen system
4. Adding/removing towing mirrors would likely be easier than adding/removing a wide-arm camera(s)

A virtual mirror can be set up with whatever configuration of wide/normal views you want displayed with the wide view placed anywhere in the view. There is no need to flip back and forth between the wide/normal views if the wide view is inset into the normal view. The resolution of the "display" can be whatever you want to pay for.

 

[HaulingAss]

mirrors are the law... until they aren't.

Elon has said more than once that the current state of Federal law in the US requires them to deliver the car with side view mirrors but that same law does not require that the purchaser doesn't immediately remove them. It's perfgectly legal, in some states, to drive without sideview mirrors. And the side repeater cameras make that a viable option.

 

[firsttruck]

They are! But not as the main source! Would like to see a man towing using 5th wheel mirrorless. Don't think anyone would give up mirrors and just use cameras....

There are already commercial semi trucks tractors (class 8) and full length 5th wheel trailers that have cameras and are without side mirrors being operated on U.S. roads. Some fleets have been using digital camera systems instead of mirrors for several years. Also large city and school buses are getting these digital camera systems to replace mirrors.

Some FreightLiner (DaimlerChrysler AG) semi truck tractors models can be purchased factory pre-wired for a mirror-less system. The trucks are still shipped with mirrors but the truck owner or truck service organization can remove the mirrors and install the external cameras, the in cabin A-pillar LCD viewing panels, and control system.

U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ( FMCSA ) determined that Stoneridge's Mirror-less MirrorEye Camera Monitor System for Semi Truck tractors & Trailer, when used instead of mirrors, the cameras would likely “achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety provided by the regulation.”

U.S. FMCSA, FreightLiner, Tyson Foods, American Trucking Associations (ATA), Truckload Carriers Association (TCA), Trucking Alliance, Maverick Transportation, J.B. Hunt, think camera systems tec hnology is better than mirrors.

--------------------------------------


Robert Bosch and Mekra Lang North America Digital mirror systems gets U.S. FMCSA exemption
By Today's Trucking September 17, 2020
https://www.trucknews.com/transportation/digital-mirror-gets-fmcsa-exemption/1003144639/

MEKRA Lang North America (MLNA), an independent company of the MEKRA Group, is the leading manufacturer of rear view vision systems for commercial vehicles.

--------------------------------------

Camera monitoring systems gain fleet favor as adoption grows
By Alan Adler
May 27, 2021
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/camera-monitoring-systems-gain-fleet-favor-as-adoption-grows

.....
Stoneridge was the first of three companies to receive a five-year waiver from the U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to retrofit existing trucks and remove the side mirrors in December 2018. Since then, MEKRA Lang North America and Vision Systems North America have received similar FMCSA exemptions. MEKRA Lang is based in Germany. Vision Systems is headquartered in France.

The MEKRA Lang system is standard on the Mercedes-Benz Actros heavy-duty truck in Europe, where CMS rules are less restrictive.

German supplier Robert Bosch partnered with MEKRA Lang to install its system on the Nikola Tre battery-electric truck expected to go into production in the fourth quarter.

Vision Systems has about 50 buses equipped for tests with two bus and coach operators in North America, spokeswoman Alexandra Martin-Devaud said. Vision Systems expects to expand into new truck installations and retrofits in Europe next year with a new production facility capable of 100,000 CMS units a year by the end of 2022.

“The switch from mechanical mirrors to our electronic mirrors seems easy as it takes a couple of hours for bus drivers to get used to and become convinced by our camera monitoring system,” Martin-Devaud told FreightWaves.

“The truck market seems to be in favor of using these solutions as they come along with the need for advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) in general.”


--------------------------------------

2018 Dec 26
Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application for an Exemption from Stoneridge, Inc.; Notice of final disposition.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION [4910-EX-P]
U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration [Docket No. FMCSA-2018-0141]
Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Application for an Exemption from Stoneridge, Inc.
AGENCY: U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of final disposition.
https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulatio...peration-application-exemption-stoneridge-inc

.....
FMCSA Decision
The FMCSA has evaluated the Stoneridge exemption application, and the comments received. For the reasons discussed below, FMCSA believes that granting the exemption to allow motor carriers to operate CMVs with the Stoneridge MirrorEye™ CMS installed as an alternative to the two rear-vision mirrors required by the FMCSRs is likely to achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater than the level of safety provided by the regulation.

Use of the MirrorEye™ CMS provides CMV drivers with an enhanced field of view when compared to the required rear-vision mirrors because

(1) it eliminates the blind spots on both sides of the vehicle created by the required rear-vision mirrors,

(2) the multi-camera system expands the field of view compared to the required rear-vision mirrors by an estimated 25 percent, and

(3) the trailer panning feature automatically tracks the end of the trailer to keep it in view in forward motion.

Additionally, the MirrorEye™ CMS uses high definition cameras and monitors that include features such as color night vision, low light sensitivity, and light and glare reduction that together help provide drivers with improved vision in the field of view when compared to traditional rear-vision mirrors. The MirrorEye™ CMS includes features such as self-cleaning lenses/cameras to eliminate problems with rain and dirt, a feature that is not required for traditional rear-vision mirrors, and an advanced defrosting system for winter driving.
In response to commenters’ concerns about the possibility of electronic malfunctions that may compromise operation of the system, Stoneridge notes in its application: The MirrorEye™ CMS is a fail-safe operating system by design due to its independent video processing of multiple camera images. In the unlikely event of an individual camera failure, the other camera images continue to be displayed. Proprietary software ensures that real-time images are continuously displayed without interruption. In addition to the MirrorEye™ CMS multi-camera redundant design, mounting the camera housing high on the vehicle and providing both a power-fold and breakaway feature further reduces the potential damage that is possible in normal operating environments. Importantly, neither of the motor carriers that provided comments and that are currently using the MirrorEye™ CMS cited any concerns or problems with system functionality.

In response to concerns about the possibility of increased driver distraction, FMCSA notes that the monitors will be located over the A-pillars to maintain the same approximate direction of glance as conventional mirrors, minimizing any possible concerns about increased distraction. And, as Stoneridge notes in its application, the monitor’s mounting location “requires less lateral head movement resulting in an ergonomic benefit and less driver fatigue.”

--------------------------------------

2019 Jan02
FMCSA (U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) Approves Exemption for Stoneridge's Mirror-less MirrorEye Camera Monitor System for Semi Truck & Trailer
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...irroreye-camera-monitor-system-300771668.html

.....
Fleet and driver feedback built into MirrorEye CMS technology
Leading fleets, including Maverick Transportation, J.B. Hunt and Schneider National, have provided vehicles, test drivers and invaluable feedback during a significant fleet evaluation period in order to ensure the MirrorEye CMS product meets driver and fleet requirements. Fleets have driven more than two million miles with the MirrorEye system, and it has received outstanding reviews from professional truck drivers.

"Thank you to the leaders in the trucking industry who have tested, provided input, and helped validate the effectiveness and reliability of this safety technology," said DeGaynor. "Stoneridge would like to especially acknowledge the American Trucking Associations (ATA), Truckload Carriers Association (TCA), Trucking Alliance, Spangenberg Partners and numerous individuals of the trucking community who have supported our mission of improved safety."

Fleet trial participants noted that they would feel unsafe returning to conventional mirrors after using the MirrorEye system.

.....
MirrorEye CMS delivers improved driver vision and blind spot elimination Stoneridge's MirrorEye CMS has been proven to meet or exceed the visibility requirements of conventional mirrors by providing the following enhanced vision benefits:

* Greater field of view and elimination of common blind spots — Three views, including wide angle, narrow angle and passenger-side "look-down" cameras, greatly expand the driver's field of view and eliminate blind spots

* Fail-safe design — Independent video processing of multiple camera images ensures that in the unlikely event of an individual camera failure, the other camera images continue to be displayed. Real-time images are continuously displayed without interruption.

* Augmented and enhanced vision quality — High-definition digital cameras provide color night vision, low light sensitivity, glare reduction and trailer panning capabilities.

* Trailer panning tracks the end of the trailer — The CMS automatically tracks the end of the trailer to keep it in view while the vehicle is moving forward. This feature could eliminate right-hand turn collisions with motorists and pedestrians.

.....
Exemption Details The five-year FMCSA exemption allows MirrorEye-equipped trucks to operate with an integrated system of cameras and digital displays as an alternative to conventional rear-vision mirrors.


--------------------------------------

Tyson Foods reflects on the benefits of using cameras instead of mirrors
The company expanded its pilot to 55 trucks after promising results and positive driver feedback. The next step is realizing a return on investment.
Published Dec. 10, 2020
By Amanda Loudin
https://www.transportdive.com/news/...eridge-mirroreye-camera-mirror-safety/591930/

.....
Tyson chose the MirrorEye Camera Monitor System, developed by automotive electronics maker Stoneridge. The system stands as the first of its kind to receive a five-year FMCSA exemption, which allowed trucks equipped with the technology to operate with integrated cameras and displays in lieu of the required two rear-facing mirrors.

The FMCSA determined, when used instead of mirrors, the cameras would likely “achieve a level of safety equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety provided by the regulation.”


--------------------------------------


Drivers beginning to embrace benefits of going mirrorless
By Tom Quimby, CCJ senior editor
Mar 29, 2021
https://www.ccjdigital.com/technolo...irroreye-proving-to-be-phenomenal-driver-tool

For Maverick Transportation (CCJ Top 250, No. 79), swapping out truck mirrors for the camera-based MirrorEye System from Stoneridge was largely based on providing a better experience behind the wheel for their drivers.

Three years into using the high-definition, multi-camera system, Dean Newell, vice-president of safety and driver training at Maverick in Little Rock, Arkansas, said they’re glad they made that choice. The roughly 1,600-truck fleet that handles flatbed, specialized and heavy haul loads recently announced that all of their new trucks will be spec'd with MirrorEye

“The feedback that we’ve gotten from the drivers is absolutely phenomenal,” Newell said

--------------------------------------

Stoneridge MirrorEye® Camera Monitor System: Better Safety Through Better Vision The Stoneridge MirrorEye Camera Monitor System replaces a commercial truck’s mirrors with integrated external digital cameras and digital monitors inside the cab of the truck. MirrorEye CMS eliminates driver blind spots, provides a greater field of view and improves safety for everyone on the road – day and night.
https://www.stoneridge.com/mirroreye/

--------------------------------------

Sponsored