backtop

Print 66 comment(s) - last by Hieyeck.. on Nov 16 at 5:16 PM

Accident between bicyclist and driver  (Source: Barrera Law Firm)
Hybrid drivers are statistically more likely to be involved in an auto accident between bicyclists and pedestrians

A new study released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) found hybrid vehicles are more likely than regular car owners to have collisions with pedestrians and people riding bikes.

The NHTSA report was compiled about a month ago but was kept under wraps until Consumer Reports obtained a copy of the report, which can be found here (PDF).

The study compares hybrid electric vehicles (HEV) and internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles in the study, and found that the "incidence rate of pedestrian crashes in scenarios when a vehicle makes a turn was significantly higher for HEVs when compared to ICE vehicles."

Overall, 77 of 8,387 hybrid vehicles were involved in motor incidents with pedestrians -- 0.9% -- while 3,578 of 559,703 conventional vehicles -- 0.6% -- had similar incidents.  Almost 0.6% of hybrid vehicles, a total of 48, had an incident with a bicyclist, while 0.3%, roughly 1,862, of crashes were between regular gasoline vehicles and bicyclists.

Furthermore, the number of incidents between bicyclists and HEVs making a turn, traveling slowly or stopping, or entering and leaving a parking space was higher than a traditional ICE vehicle -- pedestrians and bicyclists continue to have a difficult time looking out for certain hybrids, as they are so much quieter than regular unleaded fuel vehicles.

The NHTSA study is designed to help outline future HEV crash prevention programs, specifically involving bicyclists and pedestrians, with NHTSA expected to continue collecting research.

Hybrid makers also are developing a new system that makes an audible noise so blind people, bicyclists, pedestrians, and others know a hybrid vehicle is approaching.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
How many
By gmyx on 11/12/2009 8:51:38 AM , Rating: 5
And how many were the bicyclist / pedestrians fault? While I like to walk, I see allot of bicyclist / pedestrians have an incredible disdain for their own safety / applicable laws.

Respect is a 2 way street.




RE: How many
By Amiga500 on 11/12/2009 9:13:55 AM , Rating: 1
Relative to normal (accident rates with ICE cars/trucks etc)?

Statistically speaking, all of them.

The accident rate has changed as a result of the bicyclist/pedestrian being unaware of the approaching hybrid. Hence, their fault for the accident.

That does not mean solutions to the problem are not needed.


RE: How many
By lightfoot on 11/12/2009 11:27:36 AM , Rating: 2
You've got it backwards. Just because a pedestrian or cyclist may avoid an accident if they are aware of the danger does not mean that when they are unaware of the danger that the accident is their fault. Just because a pedestrian doesn't hear you coming does not in any way give an automobile the right-of-way when they would not have already had it. Besides the independent variable in this scenario is the hybrid vehicle, something the cyclist has no control over.

The increase in accidents is 100% attributable to the drivers of the hybrid. They should know that their vehicle is different and adjust their own behavior accordingly.


RE: How many
By lyeoh on 11/12/2009 11:56:53 AM , Rating: 5
It's certainly not 100% the hybrid drivers fault.

There's nothing you can do to prevent an accident if a pedestrian doesn't look and steps out in front of you just because he didn't hear you.

If you use the horn all the time it's annoying to everyone. I'd rather the cars stay quiet, there's already too much noise in the modern world.

Maybe all pedestrians should be required to go for "pedestrian" training.

And if they still insist on committing suicide too bad.


RE: How many
By lightfoot on 11/12/2009 12:11:47 PM , Rating: 2
I would agree if and only if the study was "Deaf pedestrians are more likely to be hit by cars" or "People who don't check for traffic are more likely to be hit by cars."

The problem is that this study examined the effect of Hybrids on vehicle pedestrian collisions and found that the presence of the hybrid was what was increasing accidents. The pedestrian and cyclists do not control the presence of the hybrid vehicle, the driver does.


RE: How many
By Alexstarfire on 11/12/2009 4:13:37 PM , Rating: 4
True, but the cyclist and pedestrian should be paying attention. This isn't the situation of "the vehicle came from no where and I had no time to react." These "accidents" were VERY low speed, coming off of stop signs and out of driveways. The fact of the matter is that most people on bicycles don't know what laws/rules they are supposed to follow. This seems to highlight that fact since they are in more accidents just because they are "unaware." It is the bicyclists job, and a law in many areas, that they take steps to MAKE THEMSELVES noticeable to others around them.

I can say that many times in parking lots that I've had quite a few people just step in front of my car because they weren't paying attention. Thankfully I pay very close attention because I know how stupid people are. Got a funny story though. This one lady was walking down the middle of the aisle in the parking lot, as do most people it seems, and didn't realize I was behind her, since my ICE was off. She started to walk backwards, presumably to turn her cart around but who knows, and she ended up hitting my car while I was just sitting there waiting for her to get out of the way. She nearly freaked out.


RE: How many
By jhb116 on 11/12/2009 8:52:09 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The pedestrian and cyclists do not control the presence of the hybrid vehicle, the driver does.

HUH?? So the answer is to outlaw hybrids? The statistics provided do not support that it the hybrids fault. There isn't enough data there. How many who were in these accidents - violated the law by J-Walking or crossing against a no-walk sign? How many were listening to their MP3 players or talking/texting on their cell phone? I don't see those statistics presented - do you?

To me this is a little like the driver that "didn't see the motorcycle". What do you expect them to say - "yeah I say the motorcycle and hit them anyhow because I'm driving a bigger vehicle." Same thing here - hybrids are quiet compared to diesels but they do make a low hum when they drive. They can be heard and seen if you use your senses. People won't admit it though, because, then they might be held liable for the accident.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who's side the law is on, in most cases your life is in your hands. Pay attention and you greatly increase your odds of survival....


RE: How many
By Lerianis on 11/16/2009 12:18:57 PM , Rating: 2
You are forgetting about the blind people, which are a legitimate concern. Really, I am one of those people who says that if you are blind, you shouldn't be out on the road walking it alone. Either having a seeing-eye dog, or simply stay home until someone can go out with you who has vision and can 'hold you by the arm'.... as my mother did while I was pretty much blind from having eye-dilating drops put in my ear by the eye doctor 5 years ago.


RE: How many
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 12:58:32 PM , Rating: 2
How is the hybrid the independent variable? Were any of those pedestrians talking on cell phones, for example? Were any hard of hearing? Were any blind? The old argument was that hybrids were just dangerous for blind pedestrians. Now it is extended to all pedestrians?

Why were so many more struck by ICE vehicles than there are even hybrids in the study sample? It looks like many times more are struck by ICE vehicles than hybrids. In fact, you could say that you are many times less likely to be struck by a hybrid given these numbers.

In any event, all vehicle drivers need to be cognisant of pedestrians and cyclists (who think they are both pedestrians and vehicles, btw, always blowing through red lights and then demanding the right of way in a cross walk) regardless of the type of vehicle you have. If you are driving an ICE, are you then excused from culpability because your engine makes noise?

I think this is going to be used for legislation to make hybrids obnoxious by reps from auto maker states.


RE: How many
By Spuke on 11/12/2009 2:54:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The increase in accidents is 100% attributable to the drivers of the hybrid.
Because it's NEVER my fault.


RE: How many
By artemicion on 11/12/2009 7:58:54 PM , Rating: 2
There's no way of knowing who is at fault based on the data given in the article. Your conclusion that it is "100% attributable to the drivers" is incorrect.

It is entirely possible that a wholly negligent pedestrian/cyclist causes an accident that would not have occurred if the car was an ICE vehicle. Example: idiot cyclist rides into an intersection when the NO WALKING or RED signal was given. Although HEV driver was not at fault, idiot cyclist has good ears and would have stopped if he had heard the car.
It is also entirely possible that a wholly negligent HEV drive causes an accident that would not have occurred if they had been driving an ICE vehicle. Experienced cyclist rides into intersection when he has right-of-way. Idiot HEV driver turns right on red and hits cyclist. If idiot driver was driving an ICE vehicle, experienced cyclist with good ears would have made appropriate evasive maneuvers to avoid crash.

In conclusion, the numbers don't say anything about who is at fault.


RE: How many
By foolsgambit11 on 11/12/2009 10:15:22 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe. From the statistics given in the article, HEVs had a 0.9% chance of an encounter with a pedestrian or bicyclist, with 0.6% being bikers, and therefore 0.3% being pedestrians. ICEVs had a 0.6% chance of an encounter with bikers or pedestrians, with 0.3% being bikers, and therefore 0.3% being pedestrians as well.

Both types of vehicles were equally likely to hit pedestrians. Anecdotal evidence would suggest that hybrid vehicles are more common in "green" parts of the country - the parts of the country where bicyclists are also more common. It is possible (though I have no statistical evidence to back this up) that it is the increased bicycle traffic in areas where hybrids are common that leads to more incidents of accidents there.

Hopefully, this NHTSA study took that into account in compiling their statistics, and my point would then be negated. Anybody volunteer to read their report and its methodology? I'd like to see that the vehicles used in the study were all from the same cities/towns, and in equal proportions


RE: How many
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 12:47:08 PM , Rating: 4
Another problem is that bicyclists and pedestrians don't make any noise either. So perhaps the cyclists should have some sort of noise making device as well. Pedestrians can just carry a cardboard tube from a roll of toilet paper and yell "Toot - toot" through it.


RE: How many
By lightfoot on 11/12/2009 12:53:52 PM , Rating: 2
Pedestrians should just be forced to wear flip-flops.


RE: How many
By Omega215D on 11/12/2009 11:45:45 PM , Rating: 2
Here in NYC bicyclists (not all but MANY) ride down the opposite flow of traffic, run red lights and actually cut off drivers. Being on my motorcycle I try to see it from their perspective and treat them respectfully only to have them nearly collide with me by violating my right of way (me green light, them red).

Pedestrians here don't like to look out for traffic and many are caught up with themselves that they just waltz into the street paying more attention to their cell phone or having "i'll sue him if he hits me" mentality. This causes buses to be late by slowing down traffic and making commuting by public transit more of an inconvenience. Yet a majority of these idiots wanna be green.

Drivers aren't angels though as drivers, such as those in taxis, don't respect smaller road users like cyclists but they're not always to blame for an accident.

We have JayWalking laws for a reason. It's not because drivers have more rights but to keep everyone moving and safely.


RE: How many
By Reclaimer77 on 11/13/2009 2:59:22 AM , Rating: 2
lol at all the people coming to defend the Hybrids on this one. If the article was exactly the same, but was about SUV's, you people would all be coming down on them hardcore.


RE: How many
By Omega215D on 11/13/2009 9:50:45 AM , Rating: 2
Huh? I didn't mention anything about Hybrids (you probably meant to post under someone else) but I don't care, because I was taught to look both ways twice before crossing the street or wait a couple of seconds once the light turns red in an intersection.

Besides I can hear hybrids just fine and that's even when I'm riding my motorcycle.


RE: How many
By callmeroy on 11/13/2009 8:54:45 AM , Rating: 2
Oh boy do I like this topic...

I wish their some national ad campaigns to the effect of "When crossing the street the pedestrians and bicyclists have the right of way...but remember if you suddenly jump out in front of on-coming traffic, the vehicle will still win."

Let me set up a scene that happened to me.

10 years ago, my 2nd oldest brother, his son and myself are driving to the store in my (then) brand new Z-28. It was about 10/11 pm so it was dark. Back then my brother lived in a very crowded town of row homes with many narrow one way streets. It looked like those crowded row home "districts" in many major cities across the country.

Anyway I'm driving literally 3-4 mph because 1) there's a stop sign every 50 feet, 2) I'm being overly cautious because its night and I just got this car and I wanted to be careful with it, 3) speed limits only 5 mph anyways.

Out of no where some jackass drunk out of his mind on a 10-speed bolts out in front of my car -- i hit him doing about 2 mph, maybe 3 mph tops. His beer that he had in one hand flew to ground and his front tire was bent a bit, but he was un-injured. In his drunken state I doubt he would have felt anything anyway. He's cursing me up and down "you jack ass..don't you watch where you are driving" So I said "don't you watch what you are doing - i was barely moving with head lights on and I just left a stop sign"....his retort (mind you this is through slurred speech) "It doesn't matter, you're supposed to have control of your vehicle at all times..I can do whatever i want"...

That logic burns me up ...

Naturally technically he was right...drivers are responsible for the control of their vehicles at all times...I just had the attitude of pedestrians/bicyclists of 'Well I don't need to be responsible at all...I can just jump out in the middle of a car and the law will come down on the driver regardless of how cautious an alert they were being'....


Let me get this straight...
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 8:16:25 AM , Rating: 2
77 + 48 = 125 hybrid incidents versus

3578 + 1862 = 5440 ICE vehicle incidents works out to a significantly higher accident rate among hybrids.

Sounds like someone is lining up some legislative action and needs some statistics to back them up.




RE: Let me get this straight...
By mdogs444 on 11/12/2009 8:22:51 AM , Rating: 5
That's how legislation works. They don't work in real world numbers or scenarios, they rather work in "spin" numbers to further their agenda.


RE: Let me get this straight...
By bhieb on 11/12/2009 9:47:10 AM , Rating: 3
So true afterall 75.4893727% of all statistics are made up on the spot.


By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 12:49:59 PM , Rating: 2
That must be true because the number is so precise. See, I knew it.


RE: Let me get this straight...
By The0ne on 11/12/2009 9:54:19 AM , Rating: 1
They use "Fox"-thematics.


RE: Let me get this straight...
By mdogs444 on 11/12/2009 10:22:27 AM , Rating: 1
I'm pretty sure FOX didnt come up with the fanatasy "jobs saved or created" equation.

A raise equals a saved job. A part time 10 hour per week position equal 3 created jobs. Hiring and letting go of the same worker 3 times for contract work equals 3 saved jobs.


RE: Let me get this straight...
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 12:49:12 PM , Rating: 2
Eager to stick up for Fox, are you? Smells like someone has embraced a conclusion.


RE: Let me get this straight...
By Spuke on 11/12/2009 2:56:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Eager to stick up for Fox, are you? Smells like someone has embraced a conclusion.
Eager to bag on Fox, are you? Smells like someone has embraced a conclusion.


RE: Let me get this straight...
By callmeroy on 11/13/2009 9:00:17 AM , Rating: 2
You'll never win on a DT thread that mentions Fox and then you make even a slight hint of defense on Fox's behalf.

There's certain themes DT readers heavily favor in cult like union....being anti-fox is one of them.


By 91TTZ on 11/12/2009 9:23:34 AM , Rating: 2
While it may be true that hybrids are involved in more pedestrian accidents than conventional cars, we don't know if the driver or the car is responsible for that higher incidence.

If we were to compare the accident rate of Honda Civics to Lincoln Towncars, you'd probably find that Civics are in more accidents. It's not that the car somehow is more likely to crash, it's the fact that Civic drivers are on average much younger and less experienced than Towncar drivers.

I don't know the demographic of hybrid drivers so I don't know if hybrid drivers are any more likely to hit pedestrians than that same crowd of drivers in conventional cars.




By rikulus on 11/12/2009 9:55:32 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed, there are a LOT of variables that could explain the difference, rather than just the sound of the car. Maybe people that buy hybrids are on average less attentive drivers - little jab there. Really though, how many hours of driving in the hybrid vs ICE. Are more of the hybrids doing city driving compared to ICE (both increases the number of cyclists & jay walkers, and the type of driving where a hybrid vehicle makes some sense.)

If you really want to see if the noise is to blame, it seems to me there is a pretty clear way to do so. Didn't NYC mandate taxis change to hybrid vehicles? How has the accident rate for NYC cabs changed since they changed vehicles?


By lightfoot on 11/12/2009 12:25:39 PM , Rating: 2
It could also be other variables that are unique to hybrids. Things like how the breaks respond due to a regenerative breaking system vs. a traditional friction break. I'm not necessarily blaming the engineering of the vehicle, but having driven a 1st-generation Prius I can definitely say that the breaks are at best a little funky.


By Alexstarfire on 11/12/2009 4:19:35 PM , Rating: 2
Unless you drove one of the Prius's in Japan I doubt you drove a 1st-gen Prius. You most likely drove a 2nd-gen Prius which is when they first came out in the US. Having owned one, until it got totaled, I don't understand this "funky" braking that you are talking about. Also, you don't seem to understand that the Prius has traditional friction brakes just like every other car on the round.


By Alexstarfire on 11/12/2009 4:20:50 PM , Rating: 2
Can't believe I said round, I meant road.


By JediJeb on 11/12/2009 2:24:25 PM , Rating: 2
True, it is entirely possible the person driving the hybrid is the biggest variable, or not. Can go either way, but if you think about it, a good majority of those driving a hybrid are probably not the people who enjoy spending a lot of time just driving for pleasure. Those who drive because they like it usually put more time into learning their cars, learning to drive in many types of weather and traffic conditions, and are more attentive to their surroundings, especially if they like to travel above the speedlimit. The person how hates driving, and only sees it as a means of getting to and from work or other places is more likely to be thinking of other things while driving. Yet this crowd is probably more likely to buy the hybrid because it is more practical than fun.


By Hieyeck on 11/16/2009 5:16:16 PM , Rating: 2
The demographic is obvious: Hippies. They're the only one's crazy enough to buy a hybrid and they're still too stoned to drive straight.

OK, I'm actually semi-serious about this.


Envy?
By SublimeSimplicity on 11/12/2009 9:40:31 AM , Rating: 5
It's quite obvious that hybrid drivers are out to eliminate anyone greener than them. If word gets out that you can be green by NOT driving a car, they'll be forced to do physical activity.

They're willing to pay a premium for an underpowered car, not take showers, and watch "An Inconvenient Truth" once a month to save the planet, but physical activity? That goes too far.




RE: Envy?
By Rob94hawk on 11/12/2009 11:46:37 AM , Rating: 3
ROFL!

Do hybrid drivers keep score? 50 for pedestrian, 100 for cyclist, 200 for baby stroller, etc?

On a serious note, people that get hit on a bicycle are usually the idiots riding across the street, not walking the bike across like you are supposed to.


RE: Envy?
By Alexstarfire on 11/12/2009 4:26:51 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, that's not even true. Bicyclists are supposed to follow the rules of the road (in many states anyway) just like cars, with some minor variations. That includes no riding on sidewalks.


Pedestrians & bicyclists
By bildan on 11/12/2009 9:36:36 AM , Rating: 2
I don't expect my cat to have the sense not to run in front of cars but I expect pedestrians to look where they're going.

I'm utterly amazed at people who will walk into traffic without looking either way betting their life some drooling idiot will stop a 300HP SUV headed right at them. I know pedestrians have the right of way but that sometimes means DEAD right.

As for a noisemaker, I vote for a 120db sound of screeching brakes when you hit the horn.




RE: Pedestrians & bicyclists
By Norseman4 on 11/12/2009 9:46:49 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I vote for a 120db sound of screeching brakes when you hit the horn.

As a motorcyclist, that thought brings chills. It would be amazingly effective though.

(That's the worst sound to hear behind you in traffic)


By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 1:13:28 PM , Rating: 2
No, this is aimed at hybrids making a noise all the time when they are in electric only mode. I vote for this noise: "whaaaaaa-nee-neee-brip-brap-whaaaaa-rrr-rrr-boodey -bahdey" etc done in a cartoon voice. At 120 dB, of course.


RE: Pedestrians & bicyclists
By Camikazi on 11/12/2009 1:16:05 PM , Rating: 2
You know I bet less cats get hit by cars then people :P They might run out in front of traffic but they are fast enough to get out of the way, people tend to be like Deer in the headlights.


Sample Size
By lukasbradley on 11/12/2009 8:25:54 AM , Rating: 2
My immediate reaction was those sample numbers look too small.

From the report:

"The small sample size used in this study remains as a limitation towards conducting further analysis. Incidence rates provided in this report should
be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size. Future analysis using larger sample size would provide better estimate of the problem size."




RE: Sample Size
By lightfoot on 11/12/2009 12:47:56 PM , Rating: 2
With a larger sample size you can also control for variables such as driver age, experience, income level, and time of day. You might even be able to compare various hybrid models to each other to determine if some models are more dangerous than others.


Reading the Study
By GeorgeH on 11/12/2009 2:39:23 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
A new study released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) found hybrid vehicles are more likely than regular car owners to have collisions with pedestrians and people riding bikes.

Actually that's not at all what the study found. What it found was that a given hybrid vehicle accident was more likely to be a pedestrian/bike accident. That's a small but very important distinction.

One obvious reason that it's an important distinction is that the study does not take into account the geographical distribution of hybrid vehicles. If a hybrid is more likely to be driven in an urban environment and pedestrian/bike accidents are more likely in an urban environment, then a greater percentage of hybrid accidents being pedestrian/bike accidents is neither terribly interesting nor significant.

A second reason that it's an important distinction was already raised in another comment. Because the study did not consider absolute accident rates (ie how likely a hybrid accident is in the first place) it's impossible to conclude anything about an uncrashed hybrid, only a crashed one. It could therefore be the case that a hybrid driver is much less likely to collide with a pedestrian/bike.

I could go on, but hopefully the point is made.




By NaughtyMonkey on 11/12/2009 2:35:58 PM , Rating: 2
"Looking at moving violations, Quality Planning found that Toyota Prius drivers get 0.38 violations per 100,000 miles driven, compared to an average of 0.23."
http://blogs.thecarconnection.com/marty-blog/10222...

To blame it on quiet hybrids is a bit troublesome. Most modern gasoline cars are extremely quiet at these low speeds.

Prius at idle 39.2 DB (engine off)
Civic Hybrid at idle 44.2 DB

http://www.insideline.com/honda/insight/2010/compa...

For comparison, at idle a Lexus IS250 is 41 DB.

http://www.insideline.com/lexus/is-250/2007/follow...

So to blame the accidents purely on the noise emitted by the car seems mistaken. I suspect that further research will find a demographic tendency. One thing I have noticed is that the driving dynamics for hybrids are much less pleasing to people who care about those things. It may just turn out that hybrid drivers tend to not be "car people" and are less focused on the actual act of driving. I wonder if there is any way to correlate driving a hybrid with cell-phone usage.




Oh well...
By croc on 11/12/2009 4:06:36 PM , Rating: 2
there goes my plan for a new Rolls, maybe I'll go for the new Porsche. My insurance company says I NEED a noisy car to protect the possums.




By bwilson4web on 11/12/2009 11:50:01 PM , Rating: 2
It is poor practice to claim a vehicle risk if the registered vehicles are not counted. Sad to say, the report, DOT HS 811 204 (downloadable from the NHTSA,) failed to count the hybrid and ICE vehicles in the study population.

What gave me a clue was table 6a (pp. 13) when this remarkable math showed up:

'Making a turn, 19 incidents, 1.8% incident rate'
'Backing, 7 incidents, 5.3% incident rate'

Notice the incident counts are not proportional to the incident rates. This is because they are not using vehicle counts in the report but doing ratios of accidents types. This is not a risk per vehicle or vehicle mile.

The report has merit for looking at accident profiles but to call it definitive about a real risk or hazard by type of vehicle violates even the NHTSA standard. Every year the NHTSA reports the USA fatality rate as deaths per 100 million miles (see DOT HS 811 207.) Yet here is a report that failed to count the vehicles being studied, much less the miles traveled during the study interval.

It is a shame to see a fact based agency release this misleading, paper.

Bob Wilson




By rika13 on 11/13/2009 9:10:40 AM , Rating: 1
it may not be JUST the silent killer hybrid (however, the deadly silence was well known at the Pikes Peak hill climb, they have had audible warnings for the electric cars for years)

1. the Prius is the new Hummer (from "look at how much gas I can waste" to "look how I save the earth"), same yuppie asshole driving it while texting/talking on cell phone and cares nothing about the unwashed masses outside his personal "zone of New Age serenity"

2. The Prius (THE hybrid) is the worst designed piece of shit I have ever seen. The gauges are in the center of the dash (so you don't just look down, its down and right, which means more time staring at your speedometer and less at the road) and rear visibility is horribad.




What the?
By mdogs444 on 11/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: What the?
By mdogs444 on 11/12/2009 8:24:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
We do need some annoying whistling

Meant to say "We do NOT need some annoying whistling...."


RE: What the?
By nugundam93 on 11/12/09, Rating: -1
RE: What the?
By fezzik1620 on 11/12/2009 11:21:05 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
The whistles go whooooo!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nnzw_i4YmKk

quote:
Tha's only in tha monin'. Ya 'posed to be up cookin' bre'fest o' sumpin' by then. So, 'as like a' alarm clock: Whoo whoo!
-Bubb Rubb


RE: What the?
By Zehar on 11/12/2009 11:44:53 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe they could mandate that all hybrid vehicles come equipped with 13" Dayton Gold Spoke Wheels with recycled poker cards installed on each wheel instead.


RE: What the?
By frobizzle on 11/12/2009 8:41:31 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Hybrid makers also are developing a new system that makes an audible noise so blind people, bicyclists, pedestrians, and others know a hybrid vehicle is approaching.

It will be a pre-recorded voice yelling, "Get your sorry @ss out of my way before I ram you!"


RE: What the?
By ncheese on 11/12/2009 8:42:32 AM , Rating: 5
The problem isn't people need to honk the horn. If the driver SAW the pedestrian/bicyclist, he could probably AVOID the accident (it states in article the majority of accidents are low speed).

A very common example I see often with any vehicle are right turns. The vehicle driver is looking LEFT, since that's where the incoming cars are. The pedestrian is also looking left, but at the incoming cars as well and NOT back left (the car turning right). Both the car and pedestrian see no incoming car, so they proceed. The car creeps forward to turn right, the pedestrian steps right in front of car as it almost competes turn. I've seen way to many close calls here.

This may be worse when the car has green, meaning pedestrial (if there's a pedestrian sign) is probably also green. The assumption is all traffic goes forward at once. If the car taking a right turn isn't looking right immediately (and I've seen people turn there head right to look right AFTER committing to turning), and the pedestrian seeing the green assumes it safe to go forward, it could be messy.

The assumption of the lack of noise is even if the pedestrian doesn't see the car (at least is somewhat paying attention but is not looking in the exact right spot), they would at least hear a car coming. Just a split second of attention may be enought to avert (or reduce the odds) an accident. The noise won't stop accidents, but it may prevent just a small amount more than without noise.

Same is true when backing up. There's plenty of blind spots for a car, and many times, the car backing up is worried about car traffic, so they're looking right/left for cars and maybe only directly backwards in rearview. Pedestrians to the back-right back-left, not in rearview but when driver is looking for incomming car, doesn't see them, the noise of cars may at least help the pedestrian move out of way. Granted, I do NOT want those annoying "beeps" you see on industrial vehicles and golf carts, but again, some bean counter probably shown at one time it does slightly but measurable reduce accidents since at least it warns the pedestrian.


RE: What the?
By Spivonious on 11/12/2009 9:32:58 AM , Rating: 2
You make some valid points, but the responsibility still lies with the driver. I always make sure no one is crossing the street when I turn right. Even if there's no crosswalk, someone could still be crossing, or a bicycle could be riding on the wrong side of the road coming towards me.

Defensive driving is the only way to avoid these kinds of accidents, not causing the vehicle to make some extra noise.


RE: What the?
By Ranari on 11/12/2009 10:49:20 AM , Rating: 3
I agree. The responsibility is with the driver, though that doesn't mean that the cyclist doesn't have the responsibility of looking after him/herself either. But the point is, the car is the weapon, not the cyclist. If the cyclist goes slamming into a car at full speed, it's not going to hurt the person inside the car. If the car goes slamming into a cyclist at full speed, then we have a different story.

You guys get the point.

As an avid runner, however, honking the horn is NOT the solution. It's my responsibility to look where I'm going. However, driving right up to a person on a bike and honking the horn is a very good way to cause an accident without even touching somebody. You guys ever been jogging or biking and had someone honk at you? Ya, it startles the crap out of you, doesn't it? At least when I'm jogging, I'm on my two feet, but a sudden jerk of the wheel on a bike is a good way to go crashing into the pavement at 15-20mph, causing a lot of pain.

We need a two pronged approach. Make the hybrid vehicles a little louder, and more importantly, we need to start educating our cyclist to watch out for hybrids.

It's everyone's responsibility.


RE: What the?
By JediJeb on 11/12/2009 12:26:02 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, but around here I have seen cyclist who think they are imune to traffic laws. Most just blast through intersections wheither the light is red or green and expect oncoming cars to stop for them. That and riding against the traffic are both bad. Here bicycles are to adhere to the exact same traffic rules as automobiles, but seems the cyclist never read the rules.

I don't mind at all those who actually follow the rules though, and I even slow down for them and wait for a good time to make a proper low speed pass if they are ahead of me instead of just zooming past them. But the other crazies just make a bad name for those that know what they are doing.


RE: What the?
By lyeoh on 11/12/2009 11:45:17 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, the responsibility may lie with the driver.

But in practice the pedestrians and cyclists better be more alert, since any mistake (doesn't matter who made it) is more likely to brutally hurt them more.

If you're a pedestrian or a cyclist it's better to assume that there are crap drivers out there, because there are certainly VERY MANY CRAP DRIVERS out there who are just one mistake from killing or maiming you.

If you don't believe me, look outside a window of a building and watch car drivers at a busy junction for a while. See how many are really paying attention, how many are competent and know what they are doing.

How many drivers would be distracted from driving if a front passenger just dropped something on the floor?

Just because the "Walk" light is green, doesn't mean you shouldn't look out for vehicles (cars, bikes, cyclists). LOOK FIRST. Heck, in my country you have to look both ways when crossing a one-way street.

Lots of people are STUPID and cross the road just because other people cross. I've seen some people cross the road _quickly_ and make it somewhat safely, and then a few stupid sheeple try to follow without looking at all! They're busy talking or dreaming.

I once saw a girl step on the road without looking and almost got hit, but her guy friend grabbed her and pulled her back. If she wasn't pulled back, I doubt the vehicles could have stopped in time.


RE: What the?
By glsunder on 11/12/2009 12:17:26 PM , Rating: 4
The accident rate is higher in urban areas and so is the hybrid ownership rate. I have to wonder if that doesn't skew the statistics a bit.

I don't think density is the only reason. When I moved to the Bay Area from the midwest, I was surprised at the actions of many pedestrians and (especially) bicyclists. What would be illegal elsewhere is normal here. I wouldn't be surprised if pedestrian and biker accidents are more common here because some people think most of the safety responsibility is up to the motorists, not them.


RE: What the?
By Mint on 11/12/2009 12:40:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A very common example I see often with any vehicle are right turns. The vehicle driver is looking LEFT, since that's where the incoming cars are.


That's exactly how I broke my leg. The light just turned green for me, and the driver was turning right on a red trying to beat the oncoming traffic to her left. Unfortunately I just entered the intersection when she hit the gas. Yeah, she was nice and apologetic, but that injury f***ed up the last free summer of my childhood. I used to wonder why some jurisdictions had no right turns on reds anywhere, but then it made sense.

msdogs44, you seem to think that the pedestrians and bicyclists are seen by the drivers. The fact is that drivers don't look out for them as well as they should because they're more concerned about saving their own ass from other cars. Even if we have right of way, we have to watch out for other cars, and sometimes our ears catch something that our eyes miss.


RE: What the?
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 1:01:03 PM , Rating: 2
The first example usually happens in the city here because the driver is making a right turn on red (legal) and the pedestrian is trying to cross against the no walking sign (illegal) at the same time.


RE: What the?
By mmcdonalataocdotgov on 11/12/2009 1:04:44 PM , Rating: 2
On that score, the law in this city is that pedestrians have the right of way in a cross walk.

That means, a marked and unregulated cross walk, or when crossing with the light in a marked cross walk, not just any old where in the street. I see many pedestrians who jay walk and cross against the light and make loud remarks at you cause they think they have the right of way. Pinheads.


RE: What the?
By Omega215D on 11/12/2009 11:48:50 PM , Rating: 2
In NJ and less populated parts of NY have those cones out in the middle of the road near a pedestrian crosswalk stating drivers must stop for pedestrians. It works and people in those areas rarely jay walk. In a large city like NYC it won't work as well.


RE: What the?
By Amiga500 on 11/12/2009 9:11:48 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why is everyone so hell bent on reinventing the wheel? Use the damn horn.


You assume the driver sees the danger and reacts in time.


RE: What the?
By LRonaldHubbs on 11/12/2009 11:47:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
...but we can't make our crossing lights have an audible beep to them so the blind can hear when its time to walk?

They do that extensively in cities. And from what I've noticed, when older lights break around here, they replace them with beeping ones.


"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings









botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki