UK rejects noisemakers

My English to American interpretation may be wrong, but did the article say that the blind/visually impaired had the most difficulty hearing electric/hybrid cars when they were driving away from them? I fail to see this as a concern.

How often have you been run down from behind by a blind person?

 

You have to give the UK points for testing the theory and trying determine the scope of the problem before passing a law requiring noisemakers. Would that the US could have been so reasonable. Sigh.

 

The noise is only active at low speeds, right? So regardless of whether this passes or not, in various countries, it will have no effect on wildlife versus roadkill. Is that correct?

 

let's hope the idiots in washington don't legislate the hell out of this either.

 

You have more chance of being hit by a mobility scooter which sneaks upto you on the pavement/sidewalk than you would by an electric car which spends its time on the ROAD.

 

UK!...UK!...UK!

Which, if read wrong becomes:


Which ironically is oddly reminiscent of congress...

 

does someone have to die before they get a clue?

 

It's a false friend.

To "pull away" just means to start moving. What that means is that the blind persons had more difficulty telling when an electric car was starting to move.

Incidentally, the quoted part of the headline 'pose no danger' misrepresents the quoted stats from the report which says that they pose slightly more danger.

Note that the minister specifically said that they need to make sure that EVs "do not pose any additional threat".

The key points to me are that:
- From 12mph there's no significant difference
- The risk is low and the difference in risk is low
- ICEVs are getting quieter.

I'm sure they'll do a further study to find the right volume level and whether this really will be a long-term problem. I just hope that if they do introduce noisemakers they'll be applied to all cars.

 

maybe we should just give the blind an underground world of their own where there are no vehicles

 

I'll be a little harsh, but that's the point. I think it's worthwhile to (a) determine if this really is a problem and if so (b) figure out if this is the best solution to it.

We could be solving a non-existent problem. The idea that EV's are quiet raises fear of an accident happening. There are old threads posted by Bob Wilson who did a lot of searching of databases to see if he could find any incidents of this happening. There wasn't much to find. Interestingly, a PC member BlindGuy, who really is blind, didn't support requiring noisemakers either.

Let's say you find 10 accidents. Out of how many EV vehicles? And over how much time? It would be a miniscule percentage of the total pedestrian accidents. More people who have all their senses (but maybe not much common sense as demonstrated by those who text while walking) have been hit crossing the street by a car. I'd put the resources available to improve safety where they can have the biggest impact. If quiet EV's are a risk, a different solution to the problem might benefit all parties. I think we need more information before mandating something like this. If it's costly and doesn't solve the problem, it's a big waste.

 

i'll agree that research is necessary, i have no idea how much has been done however. is this just pac money buying votes? that would be wrong but not uncommon. certainly, if it is a problem, all cars should be subject to the law based on their noise levels.

 

Just strap a Canadian Goose to the hood. Two problems solved at once.

 

They require noise on trains...we had a situation here where a guy walked into a Metrorail train, and they gave them more noise.

And by into, I don't mean inside or in front of. He stepped off (which he shouldn't have done, anyway, as it was not a legal crossing) and into it, glancing off the side. Then the ambulance got hit by an suv when taking him to the hospital, so noise doesn't always prevent accidents, either.

 

This may work for a pedestrian warning. It's suttle, but effective.

 

And some places forbid that noise in urban areas.

I seem to recall Spokane having such a prohibition, which became an issue in an ugly tragedy when a loaded fuel truck stopped on the tracks.

 

Well according to Gov't data there are 40% more hearing impaired Americans than vision impaired. And that doesn't include the voluntarily hearing impaired (i.e. those that wear headphones attached to MP3 players). How exactly are they addressing that problem?

 

Flashing lights on the roof of the vehicle. Obviously they can't look like one of the emergency services so the lights need to be a distinctive colour - and I'll leave the choice of colour upto the forum!

But what of the pedestrians who still don't see and/or hear you coming? I suggest a maximum top speed of 5 mph and cotton wool to be wrapped over all protruding edges and corners.

Sorted, job done.

 

In the past couple years, school buses have started sporting small white flashers on their roofs. Same tech as the hidden lights on unmarked police cars, so it is noticable.

For now on, all new cars will have these flashers, be only available in dirty yellow, and have a noise maker reproducing the sounds of an aging diesel and squeaky brakes.

 

Sounds like an old taxi I once drove - and pedestrians still walked out in front of it!