Title is pretty much it, new-ish car has a blind spot monitoring system. Got told by a friend that his wife got booked by the police for $400 for not turning her head over the shoulder when changing lanes, she had relied on her cars blind spot monitoring sensor.
I’ve done some googling, but I can’t seem to find anything I can rely on.
What are the laws that surround this and can you get fined for using your cars blindspot monitoring system instead of turning your head over the shoulder?
Make the effort to turn your head or hand in the licence.
It's an assist feature not a replacement for your eyes.
The answer is pretty simple, if you drive fast enough, you never need to do head checks
byeeeeee
my dad installed a blind spot fisheye mirror, do i actually still need do a head check? my fisheye mirror covers the entire blindspot
Please turn your head!
There are times where I see the other car has their mirror blind sight on but sometimes I am faster and they turn on their blinker straighta way and merge and im like….. bruh, you should have seen me in the mirror!!
People stop relying on the light!!!
All techs and gadgets in modern cars are to assist driver. They are not there to replace rules.
Same applies on reversing camera and sensors, speed alerts, etc.
Please follow rules and drive safely.
It’s only used as a backup in case you miss seeing someone in your BLIND SPOT, not so you don’t have to check what’s beside you with a shoulder check. Secondly, what happens if it becomes faulty and doesn’t register a car beside you?? Wouldn’t you look like a goose side-swiping someone that you should have known was there? It reminds me of the woman who set cruise control on her motor home at 100kph and then went to make a cup of tea.She crashed and claimed against the manufacturer for unclear instructions. Idiots are out there.
I agree that checking over the shoulder is still necessary, even with technology adding an extra level of safety.
That said: getting a fine for not doing it appears to be over the top. How do they even prove it? They'd literally need to be sitting in your blind spot to be able to have it on camera…
Why don't they fine people who don't correctly indicate at roundabouts? Easy to prove with just a dash-cam, just as dangerous, and a lot more common.
Adding to that: there are situations where checking over your shoulder immediately before changing lanes is actually counter-productive.
Take a situation where you need to change lanes in dense traffic, with most people not keeping a safe distance, finding a safe gap to change into can take a while. During that time the mirrors are constantly monitored, meaning no one can get into the blind spot undetected.
Checking over your shoulder takes your eyes off the mirrors, the car behind you can change lanes and get into exactly the spot where you'll hit them once you're moving over after checking the blind spot.
ah this reminds me of the once-upon-a-time i had a courtesy car from the service place, when reversing cameras were new.
I was so keen on experiencing the tech that I scraped someone's car while reversing. camera view wasn't wide enough.
Lesson learned the expensive way, for me - driver aids are aids and nothing else. They must only be used as a second layer, in addition to your normal driving practices as if you're in a car without said aids.
Exactly right. A few years agon I rented a car in the UK, it was a manual Corsa, no cameras, no sensors, no navigation, zero driving aids. It's amazing when you recalibrate and realise how dumbed down we've become with all the cushy modern features. A few hours in though and I felt I was a much more alert driver as a result!
No she doesn't need to turn her head. Her car should also have airbags, so tell her she doesn't need to stop at the next intersection either
So many comments, wonder how many ppl actually own cars w a blind spot camera (and not just a detector/ light). I've been driving one for 3 years now, and after doing some extensive trial and experiment it is actually v clear that you will not miss anything unless the camera is blocked by water/ dirt. So blind spot camera, good; non-camera, bad.
Actually they use radar behind the rear lights. Anyhow Tesla's have multiple cameras and radar and still crash into stationary objects in the road
Just refer to your drivers handbook for the answer.
If there is no section about blind spot monitoring systems, then it’s not part of any legal framework.
You have no chance of arguing this one mentioning the words ‘blind spot monitor’ in the eyes of the law…. They don’t exist.
This will get downvoted but if you adjust your mirrors correctly you won't have a blindspot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkQX2gkwJoE.
The down-voters should watch the video instead of just mindlessly clicking on the -
Is it just me or is it terrifying to others that someone who drives a car is asking this question?
Judging by the way people drive is would seem like a normal question unfortunately
As someone who writes code for living & has dabbled in device manufacturing (and seen a crapload of weird failure modes) - I wouldn't trust any electronic system to be 100% reliable.
I'm flattered you all have to much faith in us tho :P.
It's an aid to hopefully back you up when you make a mistake (i.e. forget to turn your head, misinterpret what you see after turning your head, etc…). It's like a parent sitting in the passenger seat double checking things for you. A cop will certainly pull you over if you don't turn your head (even though your passenger does check for you).
Also - typical problems apply: What if the sensor fails? Is it camera or wave based technology (different limitations)? etc….
The age-old question: "If you boarded a plane and realised you and/or your colleagues wrote the software for it, would you get off immediately?"
I am a bit confused. Doesn't everyone just have the sixth sense for proximity of surrounding vehicles and objects?
Jokes aside, the question for me always is, what is the point of having the features, when you can't trust it fully? With BSMS we have to check if there is a vehicle or not anyway, then what is it actually assisting?
One commercial reason I can think of is that we are just real life testers for early stages of the technology to go into self-driving cars.
Because the feature is an aid, its not designed to be trusted fully.
The point is… profits… more features makes more profits for the car maker.
More than half the features on a car is not needed to pass rego.
DisabledUser276832
Confirmed sh*tpost
My dive computer manual starts with the following paragraphs:
This computer has bugs. Although we haven't found them all yet, they are there. It is
certain that there are things that this computer does that either we didn't think about,
or planned for it to do something different. Never risk your life on only one source of
information. Use a second computer or tables. If you choose to make riskier dives,
obtain the proper training and work up to them slowly to gain experienceThis computer will fail. It is not whether it will fail but when it will fail. Do not depend on
it. Always have a plan on how to handle failures. Automatic systems are no substitute
for knowledge and training.No technology will keep you alive. Knowledge, skill, and practiced procedures are your
best defense (Except for not doing the dive, of course).
I believe it applies to every other computer/electronic aid that helps us stay out of harm.
that's a refreshingly candid disclaimer, in simple English, from a business
i put my car on 'r' to turn on the rear camera to see clearly if i can change lanes..then quickly change to 'd'
I don't know if you're talking about the camera systems that show a live video screen of the side of the video, displayed through a small screen inside the car, But common sense tells you that if the screen isn't constantly on, you will need to indicate first before it activates, and thus you could be creating more issues with people than you think. By looking over your shoulder first, you get a feel for upcoming traffic, and whether it is appropriate to even be putting your indicators on at that moment in the first place.