3 ms·

I'm happy to see that the article (briefly) mentions the current regulations requiring side mirrors instead of side cameras. Side mirrors are the bane of aesthe

by dbloom 13y ago

I'm happy to see that the article (briefly) mentions the current regulations requiring side mirrors instead of side cameras. Side mirrors are the bane of aesthetic and aerodynamic design. They even cause excess cabin noise, especially in electric cars. But current NHSTA regulations require side mirrors, and don't accept side cameras as a substitute. For example, the Nissan Leaf (like many other cars) has funny-shaped headlights to prevent excess cabin noise and drag from the side mirrors: http://www.nissanusa.com/buildyournissan/vehicle-images/2013/LEF/XGC30NIC161C0/a30ad739fefc5519680bfee9fd1e8323/LEAF/SL/Aerodynamic-LED-headlights/Exterior http://www.nissanusa.com/buildyournissan/vehicle-images/2013... Tesla's early promotional materials for the Model X show side cameras instead of mirrors (http://www.teslamotors.com/modelx http://www.teslamotors.com/modelx ). But apparently they have given up on the regulations changing, because their newer design prototypes have side mirrors (http://green.autoblog.com/2013/01/14/tesla-model-x-makes-auto-show-debut-in-detroit/ http://green.autoblog.com/2013/01/14/tesla-model-x-makes-aut... )

sschueller 13y ago
Side mirrors are required and will be required for a long time because when side cameras fails its all or nothing. A physical mirror can be partially damaged and still be used. Almost every car I have owned some electrical device was broken or failed. The time to get it fixed and the cost usually meant I didn't bother. Same would happen with the side cameras and many people would just live without it even though it may be illegal. A physically broken mirror can be seen and the Police can write you a safety violation so you have to get it fixed. I don't think mirros are such a bane on aerodynamics, even F1 cars still use fairly large mirrors. http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72607000/jpg/_72607984_mclaren2_getty.jpg http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72607000/jpg/_72607984...
Crito 13y ago
Side cameras are massively inferior to side mirrors. Side cameras give you no parallax or 3d, and don't let you adjust where you are looking by adjusting your head position. Turn on the front-facing camera on your smartphone and place it face up on your desk. Note that no matter where you move your head, you always see the same patch of ceiling (or your face, if you are over it). Mirrors don't work that way. Aesthetics, aerodynamics, and cabin noise are poor reasons to do away with mirrors.

by dbloom 13y ago

sschueller 13y ago

Side mirrors are required and will be required for a long time because when side cameras fails its all or nothing. A physical mirror can be partially damaged and still be used. Almost every car I have owned some electrical device was broken or failed. The time to get it fixed and the cost usually meant I didn't bother. Same would happen with the side cameras and many people would just live without it even though it may be illegal. A physically broken mirror can be seen and the Police can write you a safety violation so you have to get it fixed. I don't think mirros are such a bane on aerodynamics, even F1 cars still use fairly large mirrors. http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72607000/jpg/_72607984_mclaren2_getty.jpg http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/72607000/jpg/_72607984...

Crito 13y ago

Side cameras are massively inferior to side mirrors. Side cameras give you no parallax or 3d, and don't let you adjust where you are looking by adjusting your head position. Turn on the front-facing camera on your smartphone and place it face up on your desk. Note that no matter where you move your head, you always see the same patch of ceiling (or your face, if you are over it). Mirrors don't work that way. Aesthetics, aerodynamics, and cabin noise are poor reasons to do away with mirrors.