You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don't think the side cameras would be mandated, just that they would be allowed instead of mirrors. I believe that's what Tesla is trying to do.
I don't think the side cameras would be mandated, just that they would be allowed instead of mirrors. I believe that's what Tesla is trying to do.
The feds should not just allow but mandate these on all new cars!
I see. I agree with you. Mandating the cameras wouldn't make sense that this point but allowing them instead of mirrors might be nice.Agreed, my post was in response to this:
... I use them to look backwards in peoples mirrors to determine how well they are paying attention. ...
...
It's a huge change just to save a few miles in range.
Problematically, regulators don't have any "$ versus life" benchmark to work to. Suppose Tesla could demonstrate that this camera option, if adopted on 5% of all production vehicles, would save $XX per year and reduce various pollutants by Q%, R%, and S%, but an opposing expert introduces evidence that there would be an expected increase of Y highway deaths annually. How should the regulator weigh these numbers?Math disagrees.
Problematically, regulators don't have any "$ versus life" benchmark to work to. Suppose Tesla could demonstrate that this camera option, if adopted on 5% of all production vehicles, would save $XX per year and reduce various pollutants by Q%, R%, and S%, but an opposing expert introduces evidence that there would be an expected increase of Y highway deaths annually. How should the regulator weigh these numbers?
I think we all could agree that if X=$1 and Y=100 lives, we should reject the change. Most people would agree that if X=$1 billion and Y=1 life, we should accept the change. But what about intermediate values? And how should Q, R, and S figure in?
The world of regulatory economics is not cut-and-dried.
For a car the is "close to production" these are a big move. Apparently Tesla is going to lobby to have these legal. Not even pairing with any other makers.
3 to 5% aero gain is a lot. WHile we have seen it on other design studies, they are a better solution than those headlights on the Leaf.
The opposing expert would be an idiot. But you could placate those idiots with the physical mirror that deploys if the camera fails.
People merge all the time without signaling or using their mirrors although that's not something they could argue of course. I think multiple cameras covering especially what would normally be the blind spot would be great. Hopefully the Tesla lobbyist has some luck.