https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1013085105.htm

This article is about a wireless brake system currently in development.
Their system currently has a failure rate of 3 per trillion, per brake. So the chances of both brakes failing are quite low, almost negligible. They apparently take their cues from other situations where failure rates are critical, like chemical plants and airlines.

Bear in mind:
- no system is 100% - there is always the possibility that your brake cable might fail, so it's just a question of how close to perfect you might get.
- you already accept many risks on the bike that are more likely and probably more dangerous than this system in its current state (wild animals, crazy drivers, tire/spoke/wheel failures, etc). Obviously nobody is looking to add risks, but there is always a cost-benefit analysis)

The potential benefits, besides the lack of cables, are things like integrated anti-lock brakes and split-second braking. it's all discussed in the article.

Many people have expressed that they have no interest in electronic bike systems. That's fine, just please don't troll this discussion.
So let's have a serious discussion - what would it take for you to accept this tech on your bike?

For me, I think I'd like the system to check itself on a regular, short interval and have an LED/Beep notification if there are any connection or motor problems.

At a minimum I wouldn't want electromagnetic interference from my NiteRider cordless light (or any other gizmo) to interfere with my ability to brake like it does with my Cateye computer's ability to measure my speed.

Affordability. And a guarantee that no one can hack into it remotely.

Cojones

I believe that to pass certification with the FCC (and its counterparts in other countries), wireless devices cannot emit "harmful interference." i'm sure someone out there knows the answer better than i do.

Sounds good, but I don't think NiteRider got the memo.

I'm assuming this is battery powered. If so, I'd probably not want it because even though the failure rate of the system is minimal, what happens when the battery is going dead? Not a chance I want to take.

I'd be concerned that it'd add weight to the bike. I also do not like anti-lock brakes on anything.

Is this a disk brake only? I'd want to understand how it adapts to an out of true condition on the rotor, and more importantly how it adapts to pad wear (I'd like consistent braking "feel" throughout the life of the brake pads). I'd want a warning if my pads were at the end of their life.

I understand the reliability calculation, but it seems a more likely failure scenario is loss of power to either the transmitter or receiver. What's the fail-safe in this case?

What would it take? Money. Seriously. If they paid me to use it (my wages to be discussed), I would. Otherwise, no chance.

Or lack of sense.

Not interested. What kind of gain could this possibly lead to, other than the gain in weight from batteries and motors?

I'd have a hard time loosing the feel of the brakes in my hand. There's a lot of feedback you get through gentle modulation of the brakes which couldn't be transferred electronically.

Redundancy. Automotive ABS systems use electronics to enhance braking efectiveness, but there is still an underlying hydraulic system to fall back on in the event of electronic failure. Without that, I would have no interest in fully electronic braking.

A solution searching desperately for a problem.

wireless or cable-less?

+1 Same issue between traditional throttle cables and "Drive-by-wire" systems in newer cars.

The geek in me loves the technology (the auto-trim of Di2 is amazing to watch) but why muddy a beautiful mechanical process with circuit boards and wires. I just don't agree with all the hype and movement towards electronic shifting (and now braking) technology on bikes.

Not.
Gonna.
Happen.

(for various and obvious reasons)

This would bring entirely new ratings for cycling on TV. Imagine if the sprinters had their wireless braking hacked... they would never know when the brakes would lock-up.

It's kinda the opposite, at least from what I can read on electronic devices -- they "must accept" radiation that may cause unwanted operation. Something like that, anyway.

Great point.

Not exactly. ABS systems (and the newfangled collision-avoidance systems) add modulation pulses to the hydraulic system that's already in place, but it's not redundancy. If a brake line pops and you lose the brake fluid, you ain't got no more brakes. The good thing is that it takes more than one or two presses of the brake pedal to lose them entirely.

What are the odds of breaking a brake cable now? Pretty certain they're higher than the reliability they're claiming for this system.

Pretty certain you can design that in. You realize that a number of cars are drive by wire now, at least with regard to the throttle, and many have electrical power steering. Yet engineers have been able to retain feedback in both instances.

It's a solution to a problem that doesn't exists. Why make something so simple into something so complicated? Maybe I'm wrong or maybe I just have excellent braking skills, but there really is no need for ABS on a bicycle anymore than there is a need for rain-specific tires. In order for me to accept this technology on a bicycle of my own, I would need to see several things. Firstly, it must be as light or lighter than the current upper level offerings available today. Secondly, it must be user serviceable. Thirdly, it must be proven to be completely unaffected by EM radiation that is emitted from LED headlights and other devices. But mostly, it must be demonstrated that current bicycle braking systems are inferior in comparison.

Also, having the grips double as a brake actuator seems like a bad idea to me. Unless it's some sort of GripShift-like device, but still, not a good idea.

To answer the OP's question, it would have to be as light, or lighter than existing mechanical systems, offer an aerodynamic advantage (i.e. no cables), have at least as good modulation and stopping power, have reliability equal to current systems, and not add more than a couple hundred dollars to the bike.

Meet those conditions and I'm all over it.

When my bike's brake cable broke, it was the day before a thief stole it. It was rusted through, though, and pretty much left no doubt as to its condition.

Eh.... not really. My car's got electric assist, and its feel is okay. But that's really more dependent on steering geometry than the assist system. I could add or subtract some amount of steering feel if I could adjust caster, for example.

As for those worrying about the reliability of a wireless system, and the possibility of catrastrophic faillure, there's a pretty simple answer.

Design the sytem so that a failure results in the application of the brakes, such as the spring brake in the trailer of a tractor trailer.

If the trailer on a tractor trailer loses air pressure, due to a damaged or improperly hooked up air hose so that the trailer brakes don't operate properly, the spring brake automatically engages.

It shouldn't be much trick to design this system so any loss of signal or corrupt signal results in the brakes automatically applying. This would be an improvement over the current brake systems where loss of a cable equals no brake.