I was driving our 2003 Prius on base the other day and an approaching car in the far lane of a divided, four-lane, had 'disappeared' when I looked that way to clear traffic. I didn't pull out because I thought there should be a car . . . and seconds later . . . there was. But later I realized I had missed this obvious flaw in the NHTSA 'studies' claiming the Prius is a hazard to pedestrians and the blind. There are two visual effects in the Prius that would lead a driver less able to see a pedestrian: "A" pillar, the windshield support frame - the width and closeness to the driver means a significant area would be obscured. If turning left at the right radius, it would continue to block the view of a pedestrian even in a crosswalk. Central instrument panel - causes a glance right beyond the base of the steering column. Not a problem with a right turn, a left turn, the glance is the 'wrong way' to spot a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Sad to say, I didn't realize the visual effects of the Prius cockpit were NOT included in the NHTSA statistical analysis of pedestrian accidents. Given the asymmetrical and Prius unique configurations involved, I just didn't think of it at the time. . . . DARN! These flawed, NHTSA studies claimed it was 'the lack of noise' that led to a slightly higher rate of pedestrian-Prius, injury accidents (not fatalities!) But no one thought to analyze the driver visual fields. Bob Wilson
My Prius is a MkII (2008). And in Australia we drive on the left, so my car is RHD. Between home and my younger daughter's kindergarten, there's a road that goes down a steep hill and turns 120 degrees to the right along a distance of about 50 metres. And the road is not quite two car-widths wide if there are cars parked on both sides. Because of the right A-pillar, it is absolutely impossible to see cars on my right coming the other way unless I lean out of the driver's window: the pillar is in exactly the wrong place, and it is very thick. But if I do that, I can't see the skinny, black-clad iPod-listening joggers running out from the park on the left-hand side of the road. I have to be extremely careful there.
I doubt it. A-pillars have got much thicker over the past 10-15 years. It's apparently much better for meeting requirements for passenger-cell protection. And now more and more cars need enough room in there for an airbag too. But it does restrict visibility. I saw an early-90s five-door Rav4 (is it called a Rav4 in America?) the other day, and I actually noticed how skinny the A-pillar was. This suggests two things to me: - Visibility was much better in the olden days because pillars were narrower. - I really, really need to be less of a complete dork.
I can't even count the number of times I almost didn't see pedestrians just to the left and front of me in my GenIII. The "A" pillar design is terrible. Maybe we need to bell the pedestrians too.
I have dashcams mounted in both cars on the passenger side, head rest. Short of Google glasses, this is about as close to the driver's eye view available. I'll go back and see if I can find that incident and/or see how easily it can be documented. Bob Wilson
I almost hit someone early on owning this little car... the A-pillar was the reason... I modified my driving behavior to include moving my head to the side... I have not hit anyone... My two accidents in this little car are both someone hitting me from behind... not my fault... and not the fault of the A-pillar
It's appallingly difficult to see out of my G3 given how much glass it has. The pillars haven't bothered me (yet) because I always drive with my head on a swivel. One of my offices is in front of a large daycare, squashing somebody's crumb-snatcher would probably cause me problems with my employer. One of the problems with crashworthiness and fuel efficiency requirements is that cars get to be shaped like a doorstop with very little ground clearances, large overhangs and meaty pillars. Toyota didn't help things with the %$#@%#!! bifurcated rear glass, but Kermit always told me that it's not easy being green. My beloved government is requiring rear cameras soon for all passenger cars. Soon, this will be coupled with an active (and effective) collision avoidance system. Until then....I just do what we Luddites have done for >100 years. Hang up and drive the bloody car!
I actually park far from the entrances of big box retailers --- just so that I don't have to drive the Prius in an area where there are a lot of pedestrians. Two close calls was all it took.
Now I'm pissed: http://www.nhtsa.gov/images/5stars/nhtsa-5stars-rfc-notice.pdf The majority of fatal pedestrian crashes involve light vehicles.210 About one-third of pedestrians who are injured are struck by an SUV or pickup truck (see Appendix VII, Table VII1), which corresponds closely to the make-up of SUVs and pickups in the U.S. vehicle fleet. However, SUVs and pickups account for closer to 40 percent of pedestrian fatalities, which suggests that injuries may be more severe when sustained in collisions with these vehicles. Results from a meta-analysis of 12 independent injury data studies showed that pedestrians are 23 times more likely to suffer a fatality when struck by an SUV or pickup truck than when struck by a passenger car.211 Laboratory tests reflect this real-world data observation.212 213 214 The higher risk of fatality associated with being struck by an SUV or pickup also applies to a vulnerable population – children. In a study conducted by Columbia University, school-age children (5 to 19 years old) struck by light trucks were found to be twice as likely to die as those struck by passenger cars.215 The risk was even greater for the younger set (ages 5-9); their fatality risk is four times greater from SUVs and pickup trucks than from passenger cars. pp. 90 The whole justification for putting noise makers on our cars it because in 2009, they were 'too quiet'. But analysis had already shown the SUVs and pickup trucks were actually killing and injuring many more than our Prius ever did. Still, I will be submitting a comment. I will point out the left and right turn bias of Prius-pedestrian, injury accidents corresponds to the geometry of human eyes and the "A" pillar. I will suggest that 'Blind Spot Detection' needs to cover the areas that obscure a pedestrian in a cross-walk during a turn. Then I'll cite the left-turn, right-turn of their own 'Quiet Car' studies to show the correlation. My suggestion will be this pedestrian blind-spot should also be addressed and not just 'looking forward.' I will also suggest comparison of the effectiveness of 'sound generators' and 'pedestrian blind spot detection' by citing that the wrong diagnosis leads to cures that are both ineffective and costly. Bob Wilson
wasn't the whole thing started by the association of the blind? probably just good intentions but misguided. and our pols are too politically correct to correct them.
From looking at some of the early videos and photos of the Gen IV, the A pillar area looks to be redesigned for better visibility. Can anyone who has sat in a Gen IV confirm this?
"Blind pedestrians" are far more alert to traffic than the sighted IDIOTS that walk around poking glass all day in the same traffic situations.
