 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Australian Car Forums / General Car Topics (Australian group) / July 2006Boy, 9, hit by reversing car
July 08, 2006 http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/story/0,20797,19723919-5003402,00.html A NINE-year-old boy has been flown by rescue helicopter to a Sydney hospital after being hit by a car reversing out of a driveway on the central coast. The accident happened in White Swan Avenue, Blue Haven, north of Sydney, at about 10.30am (AEST) today, an ambulance spokeswoman said. The boy was airlifted by the Westpac Life Saver Rescue Helicopter to The Children's Hospital at Westmead in a stable condition. He is suffering from head and abdominal injuries. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, this would NOT happen! My solution! http://member.newsguy.com/~mcgrice/camera-monitor.jpg Ron > If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, > this would NOT happen! Its a good idea to give people better rear visibility, but i hate to say it wont work in all instances. The camera will still require the driver to actualy look at the screen rather than just reverse straight out. >> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > driver to actualy look at the screen rather than just reverse straight > out. Yes, you are right.. >>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Yes, you are right.. It gets better. Dumb and dumber will 'rely' on a RV camera. So we get to consider whether the camera itself will have anything like full coverage of the risk area. Of course it can't and at the same time maintain any relevance to what we perceive as the real world. Ferinstance, a small person might be mobile enough to be outside the field of view of a camera when the internal screen is checked (at the same time being visible to a driver who's bonce is capable of rotation to eyeball areas near the rear of the vehicle) but be moving fast enough to get into a dire situation as the car reverses. IOW, undetectable by the camera as a risk factor. The RealDeal is building cars with good vision out of them. Not building cars with shite metal/material so the rear of them has to be three stories high for the bloody things to pass crash standards tests. Hell, we've virtually got rid of WRD cars as part of 'that' deal. Anyone else consider that as a factor in the current crop of rubbish having piss-poor rear vision? No? Roll up for your cynicism course any time soon:-)  SignatureToby. quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur >>>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>>> this would NOT happen! >>> Its a good idea to give people better rear visibility, but i >>> hate to say it wont work in all instances. The camera will still >>> require the driver to actualy look at the screen rather than >>> just reverse straight out. >> Yes, you are right.. >It gets better. >Dumb and dumber will 'rely' on a RV camera. Gadgets often make the world worse via paradox. >So we get to consider whether the camera itself will have anything >like full coverage of the risk area. Of course it can't and at the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >enough to get into a dire situation as the car reverses. >IOW, undetectable by the camera as a risk factor. >The RealDeal is building cars with good vision out of them. >Not building cars with shite metal/material so the rear of them has to [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Anyone else consider that as a factor in the current crop of rubbish >having piss-poor rear vision? You're right about the loss or rear and 3/4 rear vision... but that's been happening for well over 10 years. Reversing my 1990 Golf GTI is a real pleasure... I just twist my body to the left and turn my head to look out through the centre of the large back window and side windows. I get to see almost all the world behind the driver's seat; despite the "heavy" C-pillars. That makes it safe, quick (to keep out of the way of other road users) and accurate (when parking). Now the 2005 Golf TDI I have to reverse using mirrors because the view out the back and to the sides is so poor. The up-sweep of the waist-line means that the road immediately behind the car is invisible. The convex side mirrors don't help at all when reversing; they distort the perspective. Rear vision is at most 50% with lots of cross-checking between the 3 mirrors and turning my head side-to-side. There are cars that are worse than the 2005 Golf. Some much worse. A camera/screen is NOT going to be any better than a small mirror and a window. All that the camera/screen does is to reduce the gymnastics in the driver's seat. i.e. all the gadget does is to encourage people to become even more lazy. BTW: An 8-year-old should have enough nous NOT to be behind a reversing car. Signature/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because X against HTML mail | they threaten." / \ and postings | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD. >>>>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>>>> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Gadgets often make the world worse via paradox. <snip> > encourage people to become even more lazy. > > BTW: An 8-year-old should have enough nous NOT to be behind a > reversing car. With parenting skills being what they are these days not even the basics are being passed on. You would be surprised how many parents let their very young children "play" in the car park of our dealership in amongst what is a very dynamic area. I had to remind one lady that her child was playing under the hoist three f.cking times before she did anything about it, and then she lost the little bugger and came into the workshop ranting and raving that she couldn't find her son. Stupid c.nt of a woman doesn't deserve kids. > Anyone else consider that as a factor in the current crop of rubbish > having piss-poor rear vision? Absolutely. It's being getting worse with every ugly new model. -- Regards, Noddy. >>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Yes, you are right.. How about decent reverse sensors that are audible from inside and out? >"Ron" <X101@newsguy.com> wrote in message >>> Ron wrote: >>>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>>> this would NOT happen! >>> Its a good idea to give people better rear visibility, but i hate to >>> say it wont work in all instances. The camera will still require the >>> driver to actualy look at the screen rather than just reverse straight >>> out. >> Yes, you are right.. >How about decent reverse sensors that are audible from inside and out? They're called "eyes" and "ears". Signature/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because X against HTML mail | they threaten." / \ and postings | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD. >> How about decent reverse sensors that are audible from inside and >> out? > > They're called "eyes" and "ears". EXACTLY! Jeezus. Be aware of what's around, if you can't see, don't move until you can. Signatureant > EXACTLY! Jeezus. Be aware of what's around, if you can't see, don't move > until you can. This applies to all vehicles *except* large 4wd's, where it then automatically becomes the fault of the vehicle for being too high and having poor reward visibility :) -- Regards, Noddy. > This applies to all vehicles *except* large 4wd's, where it then > automatically becomes the fault of the vehicle for being too high and having > poor reward visibility :) Yerrrs... I've noticed that is being very carefully avoided in this thread ;-) >>"Ron" <X101@newsguy.com> wrote in message >>>> Ron wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > They're called "eyes" and "ears". Both parties are usually armed with them but that doesn't mean they use them. > >>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, > >>> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > How about decent reverse sensors that are audible from inside and out? You'd think the stink from the cat converters would chase kids away, maybe need something a bit stronger like rotting roo spray. Al SignatureI don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone. http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html >>>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>>> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > How about decent reverse sensors that are audible from inside and out? Have thos as well :-) This is the "Wifes" car... >>>>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>>>> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Have thos as well :-) > This is the "Wifes" car... oic lol, enough said :-) >>>>>> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >>>>>> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > oic lol, enough said :-) She is so short 5,' that she uses the reverse camera all the time. If she looks out the rear vision mirror, all she can see is the rear spoiler. The reversing sensors make up for the "unsure" distance as seen behind, in the camera. I use the other camera to back up and hook up the caravan :-) Ron > July 08, 2006 > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, > this would NOT happen! Wouldn't make any difference if the driver was in a rage, not paying attention, pissed, off his head on meth or other substances. These thing are not associated with being careful, Checking in mirrors or looking at a monitor. > My solution! > http://member.newsguy.com/~mcgrice/camera-monitor.jpg > > Ron >July 08, 2006 >http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/story/0,20797,19723919-5003402,00.html >A NINE-year-old boy has been flown by rescue helicopter to a Sydney >hospital after being hit by a car reversing out of a driveway on >the central coast. >The accident happened in White Swan Avenue, Blue Haven, north of >Sydney, at about 10.30am (AEST) today, an ambulance spokeswoman >said. >The boy was airlifted by the Westpac Life Saver Rescue Helicopter >to The Children's Hospital at Westmead in a stable condition. >He is suffering from head and abdominal injuries. >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >this would NOT happen! Rubbish. The cameras have a narrow angle view. A driver needs to cover an angle of almost 270 degrees when reversing; especially across footpaths. If a single camera provided such a view on a single screen, it would be so distorted as to be useless for positioning the vehicle. What was the boy doing *behind* the reversing vehicle? Just because they're injured, doesn't put them beyond blame. Road safety only works when all road users participate. Signature/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because X against HTML mail | they threaten." / \ and postings | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD. > July 08, 2006 > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > My solution! > http://member.newsguy.com/~mcgrice/camera-monitor.jpg My mate who lives near you put one on his Cruiser, he told me it only cost him about $150.00, if I could get one for that price I buy it but any of the ones I've looked at are closer to double that. How much did yours cost? Daryl D Walford <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in news:44af7d40$0$497$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks. com.au: >> July 08, 2006 >> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > any of the ones I've looked at are closer to double that. > How much did yours cost? $300 with all three camera's. Each camera was $50. All from E-bay, Hong Kong Ron > D Walford <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in > news:44af7d40$0$497$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > Each camera was $50. > All from E-bay, Hong Kong Thanks. Daryl >> D Walford <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in >> news:44af7d40$0$497$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks. [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Daryl Depending on required resolution locaaly bought cameras can be very affordable as well , let me know if you are looking.. >>> D Walford <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in >>> news:44af7d40$0$497$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks. [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > Depending on required resolution locaaly bought cameras can be very > affordable as well , let me know if you are looking.. Reverse camera setup for the Hilux. Daryl >>> D Walford <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in >>> news:44af7d40$0$497$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks. [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > Depending on required resolution locaaly bought cameras can be very > affordable as well , let me know if you are looking.. Know of a good source for infrared cameras with around 20m range for less then what DSE sell them for in Brisbane? > Know of a good source for infrared cameras with around 20m range for less > then what DSE sell them for in Brisbane? Ebay. I bought a couple early last year from Hong Kong, and they're excellent cameras. Around half the price of the cheapest I could buy locally, and they were delivered in 4 days. -- Regards, Noddy. >> Know of a good source for infrared cameras with around 20m range for >> less then what DSE sell them for in Brisbane? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Regards, > Noddy. Got them on your Jeep? Ron > Got them on your Jeep? No, got them on my house. My jeep has rear view mirrors :) -- Regards, Noddy. "Noddy" <dg4163@dodo.com.au> wrote in news:44b1bdf0$1 @news.comindico.com.au: >> Got them on your Jeep? > > No, got them on my house. My jeep has rear view mirrors :) And the house hasn't :-) > If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, > this would NOT happen! Yes it would Ron. It doesn't matter how many idiot proof devices you put on your average vehicle, some idiots will still manage to f.ck up and cause problems. I think such devices are an excellent idea, but there'd still be some who are too f.cked to take advantage of them. -- Regards, Noddy. > July 08, 2006 > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > hospital after being hit by a car reversing out of a driveway on the > central coast. Are you sure they weren't just using the child as a wheel chock? Al SignatureI don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone. http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html > July 08, 2006 > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Ron Wonder why it wasn't splashed across the news networks Oh wait, you said car didn't you? no 4WDs involved Kev >> July 08, 2006 >> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > Oh wait, you said car didn't you? > no 4WDs involved :-) > If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, > this would NOT happen! Bullshit! If parents stopped driving their kids walkable distance to school and taught them how to look after themselves on the road and walk to school instead, THEN this would never happen. 40kph school zones, traffic control devices, reversing cameras, yadda yadda, all useless if you breed dumb kids. We are trying to protect the kids too much that they don't know how to protect themselves anymore.Solve the REAL problem! >> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > We are trying to protect the kids too much that they don't know how to > protect themselves anymore.Solve the REAL problem! School? 10.30am??? Speaking of dumb ...... > July 08, 2006 > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Ron Which is why I reverse INTO my driveway. I can pull up next the driveway and see there are no peds around then safely reverse in. Driving out the next day is of course a piece of cake. Reversing out is much less safe, plus I'd have to wait for a bigger gap in the traffic if I reversed out. Ben > If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, > this would NOT happen! > > My solution! > http://member.newsguy.com/~mcgrice/camera-monitor.jpg Yeah! Then we should install forward view cameras to stop accidents all together! "Stan Marsh" <neddo69 AT hotmail DOT com> wrote in news:44b0f609$0$17548 $61c65585@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au: >> If ALL vehicles were fitted with reversing camera's, >> this would NOT happen! [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Yeah! Then we should install forward view cameras to stop accidents all > together! what a stupid comment.......... > > Yeah! Then we should install forward view cameras to stop accidents all > > together! > > what a stupid comment.......... That was my point Ron. As long as there are cars, there will be accidents. Sure, reverse cameras will help - but it won't stop ALL accidents |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.