Using Brain Waves Can Shorten Braking Distance

cheros writes "A BBC article reports on work at the Berlin Institute of technology where brainwaves are used to trigger brakes. Apparently this cuts braking distance by more than 3m (10ft), but I have reservations about skull electrodes in any circumstances. I'll stick with radar, thanks."

Comments

Too much potential for false alarm

[hawguy]

Seems like way too much potential for false alarm - what happens when I'm driving along and thinking "Crap, I forgot to STOP for milk" or I see someone across the street about to get hit by a car and I think "That car's going to hit him, he better STOP! And my mind goes through the thought process of applying the brakes even though I don't do so"

I bet they can get nearly the same result by using motion sensors to detect the motion of the driver's foot off the gas pedal and over to the brakes - as soon as it sees the driver let up on the gas, it can prime the brakes and get ready for a panic stop based on the driver's next move - maybe instead of saving 12 feet of stopping distance they can only save 6 feet, but in a panic stop from 65mph, 6 feet (or even 12 feet) is rarely the different between a safe stop and an injury collision.

But an unexpected panic stop at 65mph with a 40 ton 18 wheeler right behind you could be fatal - even if he has this magic thought-control system, the laws of physics guarantee that your small car will stop faster than his heavy truck.

Re:Too much potential for false alarm

[yodleboy]

Yeah, the sensor solution works pretty well. I had a Mercedes Benz a few years ago that was able to detect a 'panic stop' situation and would apply the brakes much harder and faster than normally. I tried a lot of times to fool it, but the only times it fired were real panic stops. The difference in stopping time/distance was pretty startling. Once at around 50 mph there was an accident ahead of me and i slammed on the brakes. I stopped so abruptly, it felt like the back of the car was going to come off the ground and keep on going. that would have been funny, a 4 wheel luxury endo. personally, i'd like thought controlled wipers/lights/signals/radio. Hell maybe even shifting. That would be cool.

Cheaper and safer alternative

[Carewolf]

Keep a distance between cars of at least 2 seconds. Who cares about reducing optimal human reaction-time. You might reduce the best-case reaction time from 300ms to 200ms, but you still have 0.5-1s of decision making before reaction-time kicks in, and then another 1-2s while the car breaks.
Saving 100ms in leg movement doesn't seem very important, when the real risk is how long it takes for the brain to raise the alarm and decide on the correct action, and then the actual breaking which still takes a long time.

Re:Cheaper and safer alternative

[Skidborg]

The distance between cars may not matter if the problem is something else entirely suddenly dashing into the street. Wildlife is a real issue in some parts of the world.

Re:Cheaper and safer alternative

[mjwx]

Keep a distance between cars of at least 2 seconds.

2 seconds is the absolute bare minimum distance you need to maintain. 3 seconds is recommended here in Oz because so many factors affect stopping distance. Your reaction time is going to be between 1.5 and 3 seconds alone depending on fatigue and alertness. Very few drivers will be capable of fully applying the brakes in under 1.5 seconds whilst a distracted driver will rarely be able to react in under 3 seconds.

Saving 100ms in leg movement doesn't seem very important, when the real risk is how long it takes for the brain to raise the alarm and decide on the correct action, and then the actual breaking which still takes a long time.

True,

Stopping distance is reaction distance + braking distance. Reaction distance is always at full speed (say 60 KM/h) whilst braking distance is how long it takes your car to stop.

Reaction distance at 50 KM/h is 20.8 metres, at 60 KM/h is 25 metres and at 70 KM/h it's 29.1 meters. this is the distance travelled before even engaging the brakes.

To increase road safety, you want to drive slower and have more room with the vehicle in front of you. Unfortunately if you leave a wide enough a gap between you and the vehicle in front of you in too many cities some moron will try to take up that space cutting a 4 or 5 second gap down to a 1 second gap.

Re:Cheaper and safer alternative

[makubesu]

Because the faster I drive, the sooner I get home, and the less time I spend drunk on the road. Come on man, use your reason!

Re:Just what we need a high tech system that can f

[Cryacin]

I need a neuroport like I need a hole in my head!

umm....
It IS a hole in your head.

One flaw:

[jd2112]

It's derived from experimental Soviet era jet fighter technology, so you have to think 'Stop' in Russian. But I hear Clint Eastwood is getting one installed in his car.

(If you don't get it search for 'Firefox' on imdb.com)