Doge

So think cars could have the software and detection systems upgraded to see bikes better?
Would this be voluntarily done?
https://www.roadbikerider.com/tech-g...ooks-promising

ItsJustMe

If it works, it should be cheap. It's just a 2.4 GHz corner reflector. You could make one in your garage in 10 minutes with a buck's worth of sheet metal.

Roughstuff

Do you mean it is an electronic doo-hickey that tells the car, "this is a bike! Watch out dude!" Or something like that?

Leisesturm

So do I get this right? If this takes off... am I going to be getting the equivalent of a dental x-ray everytime a CAS radar emitter passes by me? I want a lead foil shield for my you know where if that's true. Is anyone looking into what the exponential multiplication of the microwave band RF energy around the typical traffic intersection means to cyclists unshielded by automobile bodywork?? I sure hadn't thought about it till this very minute. Do we all have to wear aluminum foil coveralls and monitor how many hours of exposure we are accumulating on our commutes, like workers at Los Alamos? I am on this. I hope I don't find that some buried whitepaper has plotted the attrition curve of vehicular cyclists against the proliferation curve of radar based collision avoidance systems for driver assistance and fully autonomous vehicle platforms. They probably see that as a good thing. Grrrr.

genec

This is somewhat like sailboats using radar reflectors in their rigging to be more visible to large ships.

While it should not be mandatory to have something like a reflector or transponder, the technology might be just as handy as "blinkies" have been to cyclists seeking to grab motorists' attention.

Of course this does nothing for the those folks still driving cars only 5 years old and older... the majority of cars on the road... the average car on US roads is over 11 years old.

ItsJustMe

No, it's a reflector. Same as the reflector that's on your bike now. The red one in the back? It's made of a few hundred tiny plastic corner reflectors that reflect RF in the visible light spectrum.

This would be a hunk of sheet metal where the whole thing is 10 or so centimeters across. Larger because of the wavelength, and also made of metal because a reflector only works if it is not transparent in the wavelength you want to reflect.

I'm pretty sure that it would be extremely illegal for a device like this to attempt to actively interface with car radar systems. The FCC and the DOT would both like to have an intimate talk with you for interfering with life-critical electronic sytems. If someone attempted to come out with something that was not passive, the takedown from the feds would be fast and very hard.

Doge

I would like that. A bike specific signature. That is not what that is. But some short distance Blu-tooth / WiFi broadcast thing that says "I am a bike and if you can read this you are too close"

ItsJustMe

or anyone who spent less than $40,000 or so on their car. You know, the vast majority of cars on the road today. I have a < 1 year old car, mid range model (about $30K sticker). Even had I gone with it fully loaded, there's no obstacle avoidance. Adaptive cruise control I think, and that MIGHT apply brakes if fast approaching a slower object.

rm -rf

Microwave radar is not x-rays.

Do you hold a cell phone up to your head while talking? I'd worry about that transmitter more.

genec

Exactly... while this reflector is a good idea, it is well ahead of it's time with regard to the technology in cars today. Maybe in 10 years or so this might be a really nice thing to have.

Feldman

I would prefer to see all cars black-boxed and tracked by police.
Want your civil rights? Don't drive.

FBinNY 

The collision avoidance systems being developed are designed to see things like pedestrian and cyclists without any active measures by them. They don't use radar for non reflective targets like people, and instead rely more on video.

The issue relating to bicyclists isn't spotting them, it's properly calculating speed and direction to predict where they'll be in the next seconds, so the car can adjust to their projected track, and not be in the same place at the same time.

jefnvk

Yep, especially on the no-no to active interference part. The best thing to think of it as is a back reflector: when a signal (light) is pointed at it in the proper orientation, it reflects the signal (light) back at a much higher rate than it normally would. This makes it easier for the car to pick up and interpret as a danger.

Seattle Forrest

Don't hold your breath.

Seattle Forrest

My car uses two video cameras immediately behind the windshield.

I agree, the problem is that drivers don't expect bikes to travel at bike speeds.

ItsJustMe

There are autonomous cars using radar these days. I read of one recently that braked at an intersection, and it turned out that it had seen through a hedge and seen a cyclist behind the hedge approaching the intersection and slowed down until it was clear that the cyclist was yielding.

Doge

I guess the general question is ... what is the market for improving the recognition of cyclist (and others - just staying on cycling topic) by crash avoidance systems in cars.

rekmeyata

Hell, it would be easier just to put a chip in everyone so the police can track every single person at any given time...I suppose that sounds good to you too?

Unless we become a Martial law country the police could care less where every single car is at any given time. We ever get to that point, or putting chips in everyone, I'll leave this country.

FBinNY 

I don't think there's any need for cyclists or pedestrians need do anything except maybe try to avoid moving erratically in traffic.

The auto makers are all working hard on ever smarter crash avoidance systems. The systems don't rely on people making themselves more visible, because that dependence would create an unacceptable degree of error.

OTOH - crash avoidance isn't magic, and subject to physical & practical realities. For instance, if you step out into the street some distance ahead of a car, the system will effectively see and avoid you. OTOH of you jump out immediately in front, leaving inadequate braking or steering distance, you're SOL.

1989Pre 

Your concerns are prudent and well-founded. The exponential increase in ambient level of RF (over)exposure is something that should concern us all. A good, light, high-quality RF meter is the Cornet ED15. In just a few moments, you can tell what your exposure level is and where it is coming from. There is a plethora of adverse side-effects of over-exposure to RF; Both the neurological and endocrine systems are disrupted. Many people are being over-exposed 24/7 without even knowing it, and this translates into symptoms and conditions (diseases) that are difficult (for doctors) to 1.) diagnose or 2.) determine the cause of. Apparently, with the imminent advent of 5G (fifth generation) cell technology, this situation is only going to get worse. Heavy duty foil works very good in stopping RF.., and Ultima Foil is even better. Insanity.

Viich

Lol. Love it. Actually, a big part of 5G is lower power. The big gains look to be Tx/Rx frequency reuse, ad-hoc relay, and smaller cells at lower power (still more frequency reuse). Just look at battery life - the amount of energy radiated by the analog cell system was hugely more than anything since.

1989Pre 

Well.., like I said: The meter doesn't lie.

genec

Move to the country...

Chris0516

I will stick with my extremely bright, USB-Rechargeable lights. They are so bright that drivers have to shade their eyes.

howsteepisit

Why in the world you use a light to diminish the vision of a driver, especially while they are approaching you? Is an a$$hat stunt. and then you wonder why drivers treat you poorly.