Drivers Tend To Kill Pedestrians At Night. Thermal Imaging May Help.::Pedestrian automatic emergency braking (AEB), which may become mandatory on U.S. cars in the future, tends to not perform well in the dark.

  • Kissaki@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    In IIHS’ latest tests of car headlight systems, fewer than half (43%) earned a good rating. […] “Vehicles that earn a good rating for visibility in our tests have 23% fewer nighttime pedestrian crashes than those that rate poor.”

    That’s a lot of room for improvement without new technology.

  • TurboHarbinger@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    Drivers Tend To Kill Pedestrians At Night. Thermal Imaging May Help.

    Yes, I need more incentives to kill pedestrians.

  • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    hmm thermal imaging in cars… or just more public transit and street lighting… give me the expensive capitalist hellcreating thing

    • Flyingostrich@endlesstalk.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      That only works in more urban areas.

      Its impossible to covered every road in lights and it can get very dark when you are far away from a city. Same with public transit. I am all for it, but it’s only reasonable in more densely populated areas. There just won’t be enough people using it in th middle of nowhere to just something like that much less staff it.

      Meanwhile helping cars see people even in those less common and more difficult situations is a good thing. Why would you NOT want your car to be safer for others around you?

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    This has been a thing for decades now at least in Mercedes (S & E) and BMW (5+).

    And it’s not just the camera alone, car headlights have a special projector that selectively illuminates pedestrians (or just does a double flash at them). Works as intended, but few people opt for it … and gov are still not mandating it (like automatic breaking).

    • HeneryHawk@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      My parents gotba relatively new Merc and I’d to turn that auto braking off. Its far too sensitive and nearly had me rear ended driving around a bend. My guess is its picking up the retroreflective spots on the markings as there usually isn’t a car on that bend but the Merc is beeping at me like I’m about to be in a collision

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Something must be wrong then.

        Or its just a (now) standard emergency braking feature (not meant as a substitute, but to lessen crash outcomes), not radar cruise control. If it is tho, look in the settings, maybe you can adjust something there. But radar breaking on all new-ish cars is smooth. But it does tend to sightly mimic the driving (accelerating and braking) style of the car in front, especially in cities as it tries to be polite & not make others impatient.

        Also afaik radar braking/cruise control is something to turn on, can’t be on by default.

        • HeneryHawk@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          They didn’t get the car brand new but it wasn’t very old. Perhaps the previous owner turned on the setting

          I have been in the settings and adjusted it but in the end it was just easier to turn the function off

          Its probably awesome on the Autobahns but its a danger on windytight roads that I drive on. Probably 3 or 4 times it braked on me when there was no reason to do so. There’s one bit near my approaching a roundabout and it beeps like hell at me to slow down at least 50% of the time. Fortunately I’m back in my own car now as I don’t need the automatic (I injured my left leg)

          • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Oh, I don’t have a comparative experience at all. But also once you touch the brakes all cruise control should turn off anyway so I’m not sure if we are talking about the same thing.

            • HeneryHawk@thelemmy.club
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              No, I’m not talking about having cruise control on in any of my comments. Just driving with the pedals myself

        • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          They are a great example of how far away we are from automation in many spaces.

          The auto-cruise control barely works right for me, the lane assist complains constantly because I don’t hang on the steering wheel like an ape as most people do. And don’t get me started about the auto-brake system that tries to stop when the lane next to me slows down, on an interstate.

  • paultimate14@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    ITT: “What was the victim wearing at the time? Was the car acting in self-defense? Do cars have qualified immunity? Did the pedestrian pose a threat or instigate the car? Were they wearing their officially state-sanctioned Pedestrian uniform and helmet? Did the pedestrian have any pre-existing conditions?”

  • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I know I am part of the problem, but the number of people walking around in dark colors and dark jackets at night baffles me. Bonus points if they are jaywalking because they have the right of way.

    Combine that with spending any time after sunset either partially blind from super bright LEDs or fully blind from high beams and yeah. Constantly having to drive defensively and try to spot potential hazards a mile ahead in the brief window of just being partially blinded.

    So I am all for some thermals I can glance at

    My genuine favorite is a motorcyclist who lives out near my ex. Lights off more often than not and he has jet black leathers and helmet and bike

    • tiramichu@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      A pedantic point from me here, but it’s not ‘jaywalking’ if you have the right of way. It’s only jaywalking if it’s against regulations.

      Still endangering yourself to trust drivers to stop at night I agree, right of way or not.

    • Pxtl@lemmy.ca
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      If you cannot drive safely around pedestrians in normal street clothes, you should not be driving. You are the one bringing a lethal machine into the equation, they’re just out living.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Then please enlighten me as to how you manipulate the laws of physics to increase the reflectivity of clothing while your night vision is impaired by all the headlights at face level angles too far to the left?

        Defensive driving is acknowledging problems and trying to mitigate them. Stupidity is pretending there isn’t one

        • justJanne@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          The law says, regardless of the speed limit, you need to be driving slow enough to react to someone suddenly stepping on the road. If you can’t do that while driving at the speed limit, you’ll just have to drive slower.

              • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                I guess people angrily speeding past and honking means they would hit the ninjas, so… kudos.

                Unless they just get angry and blast high beams into my rear mirrors even more.

                Don’t disrupt the flow of traffic

                • justJanne@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  The speed limit isn’t a suggested speed, it’s an absolute maximum (excluding motorways with a minimum of 60km/h). If the road is frozen over you can’t drive the speed limit either, the same applies when it’s slippery due to rain or leaves or when the lights are off.

                  You always need to be able to react to sudden movement, no matter if it’s a pedestrian crossing the street, a motorist leaving their own driveway or even a trash can rolling into the road. It should be in your own best interest to avoid accidents.

                  The entitled attitude you ascribe to the overtaking drivers but also display yourself is just going to cause problems for everyone. Trying to shave a few seconds off of your commute by speeding in dark areas isn’t going to get you home any faster, all you’re doing is increasing your own stress level and risking someone’s life.

                  A little bit of respect on the road would go a long way to improve everyone’s experience on the road.

      • BearOfaTime@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        You clearly have never driven at night.

        Edit: Also, the idiot wearing dark clothes walking into a road at night will still be just as dead whether the driver is considered culpable or not.

        As a motorcyclist of 30+ years, this is a rule you either learn early or pay the price.

      • Bruno Finger@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Sure but people can be a little more sensible to think not to dress as a fucking ninja at night and expect to be seen?

    • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      Bonus points if they are jaywalking because they have the right of way.

      I don’t know where you live, but over my way that is a dangerous, and factually wrong, assumption.

      Anyone reading that, make absolutely sure it applies in your area; it doesn’t everywhere.

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        I understand I tend to forget people have different life experiences.

        The legality doesn’t matter in the slightest. The cash settlement for suing the driver who paralyzed you isn’t really that large.

        Look both ways for fuck’s sake

        • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Legality is exactly what applies when you sue. For example, in California, USA, the law is written pedestrians do not have right of way in your scenario. No, it does not mean drivers can mow them down, but pedestrians assume the risk of their actions.

          I’ve had a lot of puahback talking about this with local people in my city who have a “pedestrians are always right” mentality, and I understand the desire to wish that’s true, but it just isn’t the case. There are very clear places right of way is, and is not, protecting pedestrians.

    • Case@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I nearly killed a group of people one night.

      Full on slamming of brakes and trying to not have another sort of accident.

      Roughly 3am, a major major highway, and a group of people decides to dash across.

      Dark clothing. Crossed between where any lights were.

      Everyone involved was very lucky in that moment.

  • notepass@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    As much as I like the anti-car think, this really shouldn’t be blamed completely on cars. Especially in the US, pedestrian infrastructure in general is lacking. This includes thinks like sidewalks, but also proper lighting at places where people could be (See the sample image of a petrol station in the article, why are there no lights there?).

    Additionaly, a lot of people dress dark with no reflection surfaces whatsoever (And some ciclelysts are insane enough to go without light at night). Try wearing stuff with some build-in reflectors at night. It does not need to be an ugly big yellow patch for that. I own a backpack with nicely worked in reflectory surfaces which makes me highly visible at night.

    Ofc there is also a component to the Cars and drivers here, but if thermal cameras are the first solution someone can come up with, maybe the start needs to be somewhere else.

    Overall: If I can see someone jaywalking on the autobahn about 800m in front of me while going 180kph and can react to that, the cities and villages in the US should probably have something similar in lighting and overall road elsetup.

  • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I know I am part of the problem, but the number of people walking around in dark colors and dark jackets at night baffles me. Bonus points if they are jaywalking because they have the right of way.

    Combine that with spending any time after sunset either partially blind from super bright LEDs or fully blind from high beams and yeah. Constantly having to drive defensively and try to spot potential hazards a mile ahead in the brief window of just being partially blinded.

    So I am all for some thermals I can glance at

    • Capricorn_Geriatric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Bonus points if they are jaywalking because they have the right of way.

      What does this even mean?

      • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        It means someone isn’t using a crosswalk but still has the right of way by virtue of being a pedestrian.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yeah. Maybe it is different where others live but it is incredibly common for people to just say “fuck it” because they know others will stop or swerve. Happens in cars and on foot