New Sat Nav for drivers - good idea of not

[hoopdriver]

Wonder if we might have a similar system for warning cyclists of "lorry hotspots" at some point?!?!

You know, I wondered the same thing...

 

[Archie_tect]

Wonder if we could commission research into a battery powered transmitter, built into a light, that sent out a signal which interfered with wi-fi SatNavs so that they emit a warning sound when you get within, say, 100 feet [sorry 30m] of a cyclist.

... bit like those hand held speed camera detectors. Would have the same effect by slowing drivers down and making them more alert, if only until they'd spotted the hazard, ie us.

 

[ColinJ]

I think somebody needs to invent garments which can be worn by cyclists and pedestrians to make them look like cyclists and pedestrians. That would enable drivers looking in their direction to identify them as such and take suitable evasive action!

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

How about one that announces ''Put that phone down or the engine will be disabled until the police arrive?''

 

[Archie_tect]

Drivers have the benefit of a big sheets of clear stuff to look out of as they're driving along... and eyes to see -so they should be able to spot hazards up ahead all on their own.

 

[vernon]

What about public service broadcasts targeting cyclists warning them of the perils of cycling up the LHS of the motorised behemoths? I only went up the inside of a left turning articulated lorry once and learned from my close escape that such a manoeuvre was most unwise and should never be attempted in the future.

It all to easy to lay all or most of the blame on the wagon drivers in left hook accidents but removing the cyclist/pedestrian/motorcyclist from the left hook zone would contribute more to the reduction of injuries and fatalities.

 

[Archie_tect]

That relies on the common sense of the cyclist Vern... sadly some, like some drivers, haven't got any.

 

[hoopdriver]

Drivers have the benefit of a big sheets of clear stuff to look out of as they're driving along... and eyes to see -so they should be able to spot hazards up ahead all on their own.

Then why do we have cautionary road signs? Do we get rid of them too as unnecessary? And barriers for railway crossings? Surely they can see a train.

 

[Archie_tect]

Then why do we have cautionary road signs? Do we get rid of them too as unnecessary? And barriers for railway crossings? Surely they can see a train.

I'll assume you're serious. Some hazards are not immediately visible... eg trains, so barriers are necessary. Most cautionary signs are unnecessary and are only there to permit drivers to drive faster than the situation would otherwise allow... to give them sufficient time to slow down. Sadly though cyclists are the approximate size of cautionary signs, they are still not seen by some drivers...

 

[screenman]

One that may make drivers more aware of how they drive and observe is the forward facing camera now being fitted to some vehicles. The driver then knows if they cock up there is evidence for all to see, may just may make them think harder about the way they drive.