HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
This concept has been around for a while now but, as far as I know, Samsung is the first company to actually move forward with the idea. Thanks to cageymaru for the heads up.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Samsung Safety Truck Has Four HD Screens
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
Having driven on a few two lane roads overseas I would be a big fan of this ... although I see the usage in the USA to be limited as most of our roads where this would be useful don't see much truck traffic ... I would love to see a camera with a stilt or something that was mounted on a car and looked past cars in front of you (like a periscope) ... that would be handy on a few USA two lane highways 
...and maybe people should stop drunk driving, and people should stop overdosing, and people should eat healthy.
should.
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
Even if you are a couple of car lengths back you still have to swerve into potentially oncoming traffic to look ... if you were so far back to see the entire road you might not have enough speed to pass them before something out of your field of view hits you
Ashbringer
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2010
- Messages
- 5,522
What a Grinch.
What a Grinch.
Yes, I'm a grinch because I considered something involving the rest of the trucks on the road that won't have these cameras and monitors attached
True, would be only for an owner / operator, or a company that has tight controls on it fleet of trailers, and mainly does Live Loads / Unloads.
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
Luckily Samsung is a global multinational and could sell this to any number of countries ... perhaps highly regulated countries like those in EU could find a use for this
Zepher
[H]ipster Replacement
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2001
- Messages
- 20,937
It has a wireless camera in the front, someone is going to hack it so they they can watch a movie on the back of the truck.
Was going to post something like that with. With everything getting hacked now, I can see somebody doing some type fo loop frame or freeze frame soo it would look like no car coming....
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
I can see a hacker watching a movie but disguising the road so you could kill people in a car accident ... I didn't think most hackers were quite that psychotic
Would like to see this "Required" in the US, especially for Double and Triple Semi Rigs.
They couldn't get Sued, if mandated by Federal, and/or State Regulations.
Having driven on a few two lane roads overseas I would be a big fan of this ... although I see the usage in the USA to be limited as most of our roads where this would be useful don't see much truck traffic ... I would love to see a camera with a stilt or something that was mounted on a car and looked past cars in front of you (like a periscope) ... that would be handy on a few USA two lane highways
Speaking personally, there are long stretches of I-23 that are two lanes in Michigan. Well two lanes divided. If you meant just two lanes one each directions, truckers can be but are less common then.
Of course in Michigan most truckers use the 3 second rule. Turn on the signal, count to 3 and change lanes. IE get the fuck out of their way.
rudy
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2004
- Messages
- 8,704
Argentina is known for their shitty drivers though, they have absolutely no concept of what a lane is. Anywhere a car fits they try to stick it, what a surprise people die all the time trying to do stuff that is ridiculously too close. Lets see if this actually helps them or makes it worse as they get more daring with their passes more often now that they can see more.
Most likely CA would be the first. They require a lot of modifications to trailers if they wish to pass into or through their state.
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1707758471){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,862
I wish these were legally mandated on SUV's, or at the very least ban tinted windows so I can see in one side and out the other.
It's a major nuisance in traffic, and outright dangerous, especially when you can't see oncoming traffic because some retard with a huge SUV parked right at the edge of the intersection.
Some common sense laws to me:
- Vehicle max weight for non-commercial plates (lets say 3,500lb)
- Ban on all window tint under 60%
- center of gravity on non-commercial vehicles must be equal to or lower than a uni-bodied crossover, like an Audi All Road wagon or Volvo Cross Country.
Lots of lives would be saved.
It's a major nuisance in traffic, and outright dangerous, especially when you can't see oncoming traffic because some retard with a huge SUV parked right at the edge of the intersection.
Some common sense laws to me:
- Vehicle max weight for non-commercial plates (lets say 3,500lb)
- Ban on all window tint under 60%
- center of gravity on non-commercial vehicles must be equal to or lower than a uni-bodied crossover, like an Audi All Road wagon or Volvo Cross Country.
Lots of lives would be saved.
TheMadHatterXxX
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2004
- Messages
- 3,022
Next problem: Retards watching screens who forget to hit the brakes plow straight into the back of the trucks when they slow down.
Zarathustra[H];1041684995 said:
...or, keep demanding higher MPG.. since, you know, physics.
I mean you do all those 'regulations' a head will explode at Fox News hehe.
The HD screen are a nice idea... but also I agree with the sentiment, everybody is in a rush to get nowhere.. the only place we are going is the grave.. why the constant rush, jeez.
Hey, and is an important point, the truck can become 'invisible' in your mind if you don't pay attention.
But, then again it might be a rare instance.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,862
Their heads explode all the time anyway.
I mean, they go all Godwin's law faster than an internet forum, and that is really telling
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,862
True, but I think we are only a hop skip and a jump away from auto-breaking systems becoming mandatory, just like stability and traction control systems did.
From what I understand it's already under consideration, and will likely be mandatory on the road before these screen trucks deploy en masse
D
Deleted member 83233
Guest
Am I the only one that thinks this would be extremely distracting for drivers behind the truck? People already have trouble watching what they're doing. Not to mention the mismatch in actual distances to what's on the screen. Hmmm...
Zarathustra[H];1041684995 said:
3500lb weight limit on non-commercial vehicles... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
This would rule out pretty much everything but smaller cars. What do you do if you are traveling and have more than 4 people?
And what are they going to do? Ban older non-commercial vehicles over 3500lb? That would never fly unless you want the government to be using your tax dollars to pay for brand new cars for everybody.
The bigger vehicle pretty much always wins in a crash.
Lower the weight limit and all you are doing is raising risk of death and serious injury in crashes.
Oh, government.. please save me from myself. I do not know how to live and need you to tell me what to do in every area of my life /rant.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 38,862
This would rule out pretty much everything but smaller cars. What do you do if you are traveling and have more than 4 people?[/url]
Well, 3,500 was a guesstimate I made up on the spot, but the entire "normal, mid to full size car" is in that approximate range. Saab 9-5, Volvo S80, BMW 5 series, Audi A6, Ford Taurus (before it got bloated) etc. etc. These cars seat 5
No, that's not how bans work. They are phased in by model year. Older cars are never forcibly taken off the road. They just stop the production of new ones.
Wrong again. Weight DOES have an impact (no pun intended) in vehicle to vehicle collisions, but less so than well designed unibody vehicles with good crumple zones. You are going to be safer in a mid size (again class I mentioned above, not what rental car companies call mid size, which is in the small car territory) than you are in any big ass SUV or truck due in part to the roll over risk of those taller vehicles, and the fact that they have rigid truck frames, which translates more of the impact shock to the occupants, making them less safe.
In most cases weight helps up to a certain level (again, approximate mid size class above) where the vehicle alternatives start to get taller, and have rigid truck frames, at which point occupants become LESS safe.
I'm not suggesting government save anyone from themselves. As far as I am concerned, if you want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet please feel free (and please fill out your organ donor card before you do)
I'm talking about where the actions of some, put OTHER PEOPLE in harms way, and that is never acceptable.
Your rights only go as far as to where they conflict with the rights of another person, and quite frankly, my right to live outranks your right to drive the vehicle of your choice by several orders of magnitude.