backtop


Print 66 comment(s) - last by InCarExperts.. on Dec 12 at 9:37 AM


  (Source: dieselpowermag.com)
NHTSA pushes for the mandate to save lives while opponents such as the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers reminds it of costs associated with implementing the rule

New regulations that require automakers to improve rear visibility in all new models by 2014 were proposed in December 2010, and now, the backup camera rule is part of the national debate about safety, federal regulations, and jobs.

The backup camera rule would require the installation of backup cameras in all new vehicles by 2014. It was proposed by President Barack Obama, and is a response to the Cameron Gulbransen Kids Transportation Act, which is a 2008 law named after a young boy who was accidentally ran over by his father's car.

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), about 292 people die from back-over accidents per year. By implementing the backup camera rule, half of those lives would be saved annually.

While the backup cameras could clearly be beneficial, the topic is up for debate because opponents say the requirement would be too costly and would result in job losses.

According to an August 30 letter the president sent to House Republican leaders, the backup camera mandate is in the top five list of the five most costly rules under consideration at this time.

The backup camera rule could cost as much as $2.7 billion, and would equate to about $18.5 million per life saved. Adding the cameras to vehicles would tack on an extra $58 to $203 per vehicle.

"Congress built flexibility into this law to balance safety and cost, and unfortunately NHTSA has ignored Congress by mandating an expensive, one-size-fits-all solution for rearview cameras," said Gloria Bergquist, spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

So far, individual automakers have not said anything negative about the rule despite these costs. In fact, Ford plans to have backup cameras in all Ford and Lincoln models by the end of this year.

The backup camera plan calls for 10 percent of the United States' new fleet to meet standards by 2012, 40 percent to meet the standards by 2013, and all new vehicles to comply by 2014.

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Personal Responsibility
By TSS on 11/25/2011 5:17:25 PM , Rating: 1
or, yknow, you could check the camera first, THEN check your mirrors, then turn your head completly around to visually back up.

Why is it assumed the person stares at the camera when backing up?

Let's ask the question nobody wants to ask then: How many of those deaths is because of stupid people not paying attention, and how many are "legitimate" deaths by smart, attentive people where a child was caught in a blind spot and was run over. Since nobody cares because "it was the drivers fault" if it was the driver not paying attention, lets ask that question and on the basis of that, make the decision to have to not have these cameras.

Why? Because they're a tool. To the smart, attentive people, it'll be an extra help and safety measure, added to the regular routine but not used exlusively (as in look at the camera, then look around to back up). To the stupid people not paying attention it won't help at all. And audio beep won't help either. An airhorn wouldn't even help because that would probably startle them and cause them to floor the gas. Aside from mounting a robot hand into the steering wheel that will bitchslap the driver when their not paying attention, nothing you do will help these drivers pay attention.

Oh and yes some people will start using these camera's blindly and not checking mirrors anymore. lazy falls under stupid when your operating a large movable object. My bet would be those people would stop checking the mirrors when they feel there's no need to with or without backup camera.


"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki