Advocacy & Safety - Transponders for bike safety?

Interesting idea, though short sighted in my opinion. http://www.roadsharealert.com

Wonderful idea, but it should be compatible with existing GPS and OnStar tm systems.

I think this is the way technology is heading, with motorists and cyclists able to share a railroad like system of "Centralized Traffic Control" (CTC), that has been used on the RR's for a hundred years (at least in the Northeast).

I hope there is way of overcoming the compatibility problem.

We had a similar thread on one of my email lists. Despite all of the modern technology on today's military and commercial aircraft, the pilot is still ultimately responsible for the plane. I just hope John Q. Public does not start to rely on advanced electronics as an excuse to be even less attentive, responsible, and cautious.

There is so much we could do but don't.
Dead people are better than using technology.

Wonderful idea, but it should be compatible with existing GPS and OnStar tm systems.I agree.



I think this is the way technology is heading, with motorists and cyclists able to share a railroad like system of "Centralized Traffic Control" (CTC), that has been used on the RR's for a hundred years (at least in the Northeast).

I hope there is way of overcoming the compatibility problem.Shouldn't be too much of an issue I would think.

We had a similar thread on one of my email lists. Despite all of the modern technology on today's military and commercial aircraft, the pilot is still ultimately responsible for the plane.This is just as true for bicyclist and motorist as it is for the pilot. One point I will bring up since you mentioned aircraft is the fact that their transponders display what they are (commercial, "Friend or Foe") I would assert that a similar identification could be integrated into the transponder for cyclists. One thing I would want though would be a smaller size, not that the solar power part isn't great, it's just that the thing is just awkward looking.

I just hope John Q. Public does not start to rely on advanced electronics as an excuse to be even less attentive, responsible, and cautious.
While I agree with the sentiment, the fact of the matter is that cyclists in a world of cell phones, text messaging, etc need every alert they can get.

No, this is dumb.

It's only for drivers who buy the car module, who would probably be the drivers who are already concerned about bikers and would be watching for them. And, at worst, it's a false sense of security.

Instead, put that money into a light set, or reflective tape, or a yellow jacket, or bike safety PSAs.

No, this is dumb.

It's only for drivers who buy the car module, who would probably be the drivers who are already concerned about bikers and would be watching for them. And, at worst, it's a false sense of security.

Instead, put that money into a light set, or reflective tape, or a yellow jacket, or bike safety PSAs.


Because of GM's commitment to continuous safety — offering protection before, during, and after collisions — OnStar will be standard in the full range of GM retail cars, trucks, and SUVs in the United States and Canada by 2007. The first year of OnStar service is included with your purchase of a new GM OnStar-equipped vehicle.

Adding this in can't hurt.

Sure it can hurt. It will provide another 'reason' cyclists and drivers don't have to pay attention.

Some cyclist gets creamed and the driver says 'well they didn't show up on my alert' or the cyclist stopped paying attention because he has the alert on his bike.

Too often people rely exclusively on their safety gear and forget how to be safe.

Ken

Sure it can hurt. It will provide another 'reason' cyclists and drivers don't have to pay attention.

Some cyclist gets creamed and the driver says 'well they didn't show up on my alert' or the cyclist stopped paying attention because he has the alert on his bike.

Too often people rely exclusively on their safety gear and forget how to be safe.

Ken:rolleyes:
Good grief, re read post #5. Also you need to actually visit the page the bike has a transmitter not a receiver.

Many states now have radar transponders at work sites. Some areas have transponders on emergency vehicles, and there are a host of other radar transponders out there for various safety related warnings. They activate radar detectors in cars. If it works on this principle I would say why not ? Any advance warning of any kind is better than none. Would I buy one....I'm not sure if I need one. Is the idea a good one....I think so.

:rolleyes:
Good grief, re read post #5. Also you need to actually visit the page the bike has a transmitter not a receiver.

You should reread my post

the gist of it for those who need an explanation is that this system, as happens with many who mount a blinky or wear bright clothing, will promote the feeling in the CYCLIST that he can easily be seen/noticed/detected and therefore can relaxe vigilance, and won't -NEED- to be as alert.

It will do the same in the driver who has the RECIEVER in their car, (IE: the alert didn't beep so it should should be clear)

Ken.

radar transponders They activate radar detectors in cars.

Now THAT is an excellent idea. Is there any bike-portable device that could be used to set off radar detectors? That's an approach targeted at alerting the drivers most likely to be aggressive (i.e., the ones who are already demonstrating behaviors aimed at evading police). It also would activate a device that already has market penetration and is not proprietary.

Hmm.

the gist of it for those who need an explanation is that this system, as happens with many who mount a blinky or wear bright clothing, will promote the feeling in the CYCLIST that he can easily be seen/noticed/detected and therefore can relaxe vigilance, and won't -NEED- to be as alert.
A comment of a similar vein was made above. In post #5


We had a similar thread on one of my email lists. Despite all of the modern technology on today's military and commercial aircraft, the pilot is still ultimately responsible for the plane.This is just as true for bicyclist and motorist as it is for the pilot. One point I will bring up since you mentioned aircraft is the fact that their transponders display what they are (commercial, "Friend or Foe") I would assert that a similar identification could be integrated into the transponder for cyclists.


It will do the same in the driver who has the RECIEVER in their car, (IE: the alert didn't beep so it should should be clear)

Ken.Right, just like the early warning system built into Volvo's CAUSES crashes. :rolleyes:

I think a cell phone jammer would be more effective.

I think a cell phone jammer would be more effective.

I disagree, at that point the driver will be more distracted in the "What the flying ********************* happened to my phone!?" sense and will automatically look at the phone display instead of the road.

Damn...I have been thinking of a similar concept for my thesis...back to the drawing board I suppose. This is fundamentally a good idea I feel, there are no pro-active safety solutions available to cyclists, only active and passive (lights, reflective gear, helmets). A more pro-active approach is necessary, because clearly it is not evident enough to drivers that there are cyclists out there.

I have grave doubts about using technology to solve behavioural problems. It may work well enough, but when that technology invariably fails...

Wonderful idea, but it should be compatible with existing GPS and OnStar tm systems.

I think this is the way technology is heading, with motorists and cyclists able to share a railroad like system of "Centralized Traffic Control" (CTC), that has been used on the RR's for a hundred years (at least in the Northeast).

I hope there is way of overcoming the compatibility problem.

CTC is a tradename for a brand of Traffic Control System (TCS). TCS relies on exclusive block allocation, which is completely unworkable for highway use, because trains are not permitted even to enter a block where another train is present. Positive Train Control, computer based train control, may offer the possibilty of flexible blocks, which would not allow a train to get close enough to a preceding train that an immediate service application of the brakes would result in the following train passing the preceding train's current position, even if the preceding train is moving in the same direction. This is quite different from what highway users do in current operation, where the following vehicle only needs to be able to stop behind where the preceding vehicle will stop, given the current speed. This results in much closer following distances on highways, relative to braking capability, than on railroads. At present, PTC systems, using very conservative braking algorithms, actually reduce system capability because the PTC systems do not allow as close follwing as TCS, or other fixed block systems. As far as I know, no PTC system will offer position information to a central office often enough to be useful were the system to be ported to highway use. Maybe some system contemplated under the Intelligent Transportation Systems program would offer a more practical solution. http://www.its.dot.gov/index.htm