Laser Headlights Promise More Intense, Controllable Beams

cartechboy writes "Soon, your new car's headlights will be powered by lasers. The 2015 BMW i8 is entering production, and it's the first vehicle to offer laser headlights. These new beams offer a handful of advantages over LED lighting, including greater lighting intensity and extending the beams' reach as far as 600 meters down the road (nearly double the range of LEDs). The beam pattern also can be controlled very precisely. Plus, laser lights consumer about 30 percent less energy than the already-efficient LED lights. Audi is among the short list of other auto manufacturers to promise laser lights in the near future. But the coolest part of all this? When you turn on a set of these new headlights, you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

Comments

..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Anonymous Coward]

*slow sarcastic clapping* bravo, sir/madam. bravo.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[davester666]

just remember to turn them off before cresting a hill, because otherwise you will be fined and/or imprisoned for firing lasers into the sky in an effort to down aircraft.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[MobSwatter]

This would indicate the FBI is still interested in law enforcement, which is incorrect. You see after nurturing organized crime for the purpose of job security along with an undocumented bonus program (because there's money in the mob) to be an out of control institution they ran off to play spy and changed their drama theme to be national security. So what makes you think they'd give a rats ass out of lasers and aircraft? Me thinks they'd be more interested if there were sharks with laser beams and aircraft.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[MobSwatter]

FaceBook? Wasn't that a C.I.A./D.A.R.P.A. thing?

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[MobSwatter]

*slow sarcastic clapping* bravo, sir/madam. bravo.

No, definitely a full blown golf clap...

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Barny]

Except the headlight beams are not actually lasers.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[stiggle]

If you're screaming "Fire the lasers" then you're an idiotic BMW driver. Those clueless morons who have no idea as to the rules of the road, good manners, or the English language. It is "Shoot the lasers". You can only 'fire' a firearm - as it is the method of introducing fire to the propellant to launch the projectile.

Although saying that - burning down their superbright blinding headlights would be a bonus for other road users, so perhaps "firing the lasers" would be beneficial, along with firing the rest of the BMW including the driver :-)

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[MobSwatter]

Ah, it's all about Florida strippers!

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[gbjbaanb]

I should think "Release the photons" would be more sensible, and shooting implies some active approach to attack something, which as everyone knows, BMW drivers use the bulk of the BMW for (at least I think its that, some people day they're just rubbish at driving properly)

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[mcvos]

I should think "Release the photons" would be more sensible

But you can already release photons with regular non-laser headlights. Nothing new about that.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Noxal]

I cry with joy every time I see a BMW's turn signals actually being used. I softly tell myself "Yes! Somebody that ACTUALLY DESERVES such a fine car!"

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[ZahrGnosis]

Or you can just turn in all Audi drivers for the new $10,000 reward!

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[amalcolm]

Release the coherent photons?

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[GarethIwanFairclough]

Or you can just turn in all Audi drivers for the new $10,000 reward!

You'll have to beat Jeremy Clarkson to that, he thinks all Audi drivers/owners are cocks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[MightyYar]

Yes, but there is something different about them. The guy driving in the 15 year old Maxima is driving in a more "got nuthin' to lose" style... using the shoulder as an extra lane, that sort of thing. Reckless and stupid. The BMW driver is more of a "get off my road!" kind of driver. More tailgating and anger than sheer recklessness.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Stele]

I find Lexus drivers to be more annoying than BMW drivers, at least around here. I've always wanted to ask one if they had to pay extra for their "Asshole Card" or if they get it free with the car.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[satch89450]

just remember to turn them off before cresting a hill, because otherwise you will be fined and/or imprisoned for firing lasers into the sky in an effort to down aircraft.

You need to look up how laser-pumped headlights work. The light isn't coherent outside of the bulb assembly. The laser fires into a phosper, which then generates the wide-spectrum illumination. So the FBI wouldn't be interested, although I would watch using high-beams on a hill.

Oh, wait, this is slashdot. Where facts get in the way of a good joke...

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[afxgrin]

Gas dynamic lasers actually do involve 'firing' the laser. I know this is not the case with the BMW however you can still fire some lasers.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Anonymous Coward]

But the photons are no longer coherent after the phosphor to make them white.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[cusco]

As someone who walks our dogs at night, we will be hating these lights the evening they hit the street. The intense blue and purple ones are already annoying enough, and the idiots who think that turning on their high beams any time that there isn't an oncoming car is a good idea should be taken out and flogged. These are going to be absolutely blinding.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[maz2331]

Hey, I drive a 328i, and always use my signals and follow the rules of the road. Some of us buy the car for its quality and tech, not to be pretentious douchebags.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Gr8Apes]

Of course, they could always turn their headlights "off" and then run you over while you're walking your black dog because they didn't see you in your black jeans and brown leather jacket. There's a reason drivers hit the high beams when there's no oncoming traffic, it's so they can see those types of people on unlit or poorly lit residential streets. I'll also note that there's no reason for the dog walker to stare into the headlights. Looking to the side should be easy, given the extra light.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Immerman]

Right, talk about a bad headline. Laser-excited phosphors are a completely different thing than lasers, and that's a really good thing. It's not even a good idea to shine a laser pointer directly into your eyes for any length of time, can you imagine driving past a line of oncoming cars with laser headlights? Your vision would be lucky to survive the week. Not to mention the horrible, horrible dazzle of laser light.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[noh8rz10]

can anybody give one paragraph on how these things actually work? tfs has abdicated.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Immerman]

Car powers lasers. Lasers shine on phosphors. Phosphors emit wide-spectrum normal light at high efficiency.

Not sure how they get the increase in range, unless they're just a lot brighter (ugh, like existing high-intensity headlights aren't bad enough for everybody else's visibility.)

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[noh8rz10]

How are these better than HID or LED? Are they more directional? Why would they be brighter?

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[ColdWetDog]

They're new, more expensive and associated with sharks.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[ColdWetDog]

But the photons are no longer coherent after the phosphor to make them white.

OK, OK, "release the formerly coherent photons".

Now are you happy?

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[cellocgw]

Sharks with laserbeams on a plane?

Sharks driving BMWs with Lasers

Umm, no, BMWs are driven by porcupines. (yes, I know that's not how the joke goes)

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[operagost]

Lasers? They won't even penetrate the navigational deflectors on my Galaxy-class.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[operagost]

the idiots who think that turning on their high beams any time that there isn't an oncoming car is a good idea

So when is a good time? I use a flagger who walks in front of my car. If he doesn't see anyone walking his dog, he gives me the signal to turn on the brights.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[operagost]

This kind of shit is why I started saying, "Make it so."

- Jean-Luc Picard

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[cusco]

On an open highway where there are no street lights is the only time that I can imagine high beam lights being appropriate. There is absolutely no reason to use them in the city, except to piss people off.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[davester666]

actually, the FBI just started a "get $10000 for turning in your friend" campaign for people pointing laser pointers at aircraft.

your tax dollars at work!

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[JimSadler]

So why are we not seeing diffused laser light bulbs for lighting homes? If they are 30% more efficient than LED light bulbs why is there any hesitation in deploying them?

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[MightyYar]

Quite the opposite - I was saying that they drive differently.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[suutar]

according to the summary, they are both more directional and more efficient.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Larryish]

"Who let the photons out?"

"PEW, PEW, PEW, PEW"

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[semi-extrinsic]

There is no way these could be "better" than existing solutions, at least not for high beams. There are stringent restrictions on how much light you are allowed to emit in which directions, and if you've bought some $400 Hella Rallye Compact's you're touching that limit no matter how bad your stock headlights are. The only usefulness here is that BMW will perhaps be able to make more exotic looking headlights.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[noh8rz10]

maybe they are more energy efficient than other options, reducing accessory loads. every little bit counts now that cars have cut out a lot of the low hanging fruit like idling!

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[silverhalide]

The problem is that turn signals are a premium option on BMWs, it's not your average beemer driver's fault they can't afford them.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Zxern]

Cost.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[faffod]

Considering this is for the i8 they got rid of the idle and the vroom-vroom. It's an electric car, so anything to save battery consumption is a good thing (tm)

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[faffod]

And of course, once they see the pedestrians they can turn their high beams down. You know, not turn off the headlights. Not drive with just their parking lights, simply dim the high beams. It's all perfectly safe. It is how the car was designed to be operated. And as a bonus it is courteous to your neighbors. I recommend trying it some day.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[faffod]

Rural roads are an other good place to use them. When you approach a turn, dim them and you will be able to tell if a car is coming in the opposite direction (you'll see their lights) and you can take the turn knowing that you won't blind them.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Gr8Apes]

Amazing! I wouldn't have known what I do was the courteous thing to do without your obviously superior wisdom. I didn't think it needed to be said, you have shown me the error of my ways. I bow down to your magnificence, may your light always shine so brightly, and I'll be sure to pound the pedantic statements into the ground in the future!

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[cusco]

Rural road = open highway

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[faffod]

Ah. Did not know that. thank you.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Duggeek]

Car powers lasers. Lasers shine on phosphors. Phosphors emit wide-spectrum normal light at high efficiency.

Quite true! The current convention of excited-gas luminescence (High Intensity Discharge, or HID) is very bright indeed. Sports venues are looking into feasibility of replacing stadium and indoor-arena lighting with HID or something similar for the sheer savings in energy consumption.

Headlight glare from HID is only dulled for oncoming traffic by shaping the beam. The technology for laser-bombarded phosphors will probably have the same optical harnessing as HID. (most likely due to cost-efficiency by automakers so they don't have to fully replace their precision manufacturing) As for the 'annoyance' factor, there will continue to be hill-crest and sharp-rise blindness from oncoming traffic until such a time as when all cars are equipped with a solenoid-controlled lens assembly tied to a comprehensive pitch-sensing array. It's also clear that, unlike LED light sources where luminescence is hard-wired in the manufacturing, laser-excited phosphors can be precisely controlled through the phosphor material and packaged optics. As this report shows, the exact nature of the phosphor-impregnated material affects the color and amplitude of the light emitted.

Are they potentially brighter? Quite possibly. Would manufacturers be able to easily mitigate that effect as they roll-out production? Absolutely.

In the meantime, I doubt I am the only one that's concerned with the term, "laser headlights". The emitted light is not actually laser light, it's the broad-spectrum light (as correctly stated by PP) emitted by energized phosphors. The laser only energizes luminescence, the phosphor is what actually emits the light. But it's the "laser headlights" term that implies that the beams are made-up of laser light. Sure, it's a finer point, but I think it stands for comprehensive accuracy. This tech should be known as "laser-powered headlights" or even "Laser Energized Phosphor Emission | LEPE headlights".In fact, I sense a good marketing angle in the latter, at the very least for laser-energized-phosphor emission manufacturers.

The way it's written in those articles is, plainly put, misleading to just about everyone on that point.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[metaforest]

Nah. They bought an 'Asshole Card' and the car is a bonus accessory.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[AK Marc]

Next, you'll tell me a CRT isn't a particle beam cannon. "stream of electrons excite the phosphors." The real reason LCD TVs took off is that people didn't have to stare into the barrel of a particle beam canon to watch TV.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[Immerman]

Yeah, but popular science fiction has been all downhill since then. Coincidence?

And no, it's not a particle beam cannon. It's a combination particle beam cannon and a target range, with thousands of phosphorescent targets that glow when you shoot them! You can tell the difference by fact that the people standing in front of your cannon just get a stupid faraway look on their face while being lightly bathed in X-rays, rather than having their flesh slowly seared away in an appropriately theatrical manner.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[AK Marc]

There have been a number of studies that indicated that streetlights harm pedestrian safety. The lights don't have universal coverage, and a pedestrian between lights is hit by people like you who assume everyone is lit by a light. Oh, and streetlights increase crime, as they give more shadows from which the nefarious operate.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[AK Marc]

Don't take him seriously. "open highway" means interstate/motorway. He's just adjusting the definition to match his opinion.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[AK Marc]

Wait, but I've heard it called "firing" a bow and arrow, and they weren't flaming arrows. Canons were "fired" and carbines weren't (even flint-locks weren't "fired" they were struck). "Fire" means to initiate the release, even if it was initially derived from applying fire to fuses.

It's *your* English skills that are lacking.

Re:..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'"

[AK Marc]

No, it's the Volvo drivers. "I bought this car because it's the best in a crash, and I want to try it out on someone, you interested?" is about how they drive. You don't need signals if you are secretly hoping someone hits you so you can see how safe you are.

Side benefit

[SuperKendall]

I'm down for laser headlights if I can program in the exact speed the cops with laser speed detectors get to see.

Re:Side benefit

[rvw]

Aim them at a plane :)

Better make sure your annoying neighbour does it. Then alert the FBI. Profit!

Re:Side benefit

[www.sorehands.com]

Hack the lights, fry the next guy who cuts me off or goes to slow.

Driving in Boston is a contact sport.

Re:Side benefit

[DoofusOfDeath]

I'm pretty sure it's stuck at 186,000 miles/second.

brighter?

[lecoupdejarnac]

I can't be the only one who thinks that the headlights on certain luxury cars are already annoyingly bright to other drivers. Now we get to be blinded by lasers, great...

Oh and beta sucks.

Re:brighter?

[Anonymous Coward]

New car headlights are horribly bright, hurt my eyes, and the LED taillights are almost as bad.

Re:brighter?

[Fusselwurm]

My take on it as well.

There is a lights arms race on the streets. I wonder if we already passed the point of "more is safer".

Re:brighter?

[misosoup7]

So they decided that it was dangerous and made it illegal to point lasers at air planes yet they think it's some how safe to point it at cars? Seems like someone forgot to sanity check their idea.

Re:brighter?

[Redmancometh]

Yeah this was definitely my first thought. I'm in a short car..if an suv has bright lights...bad experience.

Re:brighter?

[jklovanc]

Laser pointers are quite different than laser headlights.The key is divergence. A laser pointer is tuned to spread out as little as possible with distance and can therefore be quite powerful at long distances. A headlight, through the use of dispersing phosphors and or lenses is designed to spread out and cover much more area. Illuminating a 1/2 inch circle 600 yards down the road is not much use.The key is that laser light is more controllable. Perhaps directing more light lower down along the road. Laser headlight will use a laser initiator but when the beam comes out of the headlight it will be far from cohesive.

Re:brighter?

[mjwx]

I can't be the only one who thinks that the headlights on certain luxury cars are already annoyingly bright to other drivers. Now we get to be blinded by lasers, great...

Oh and beta sucks.

This, aren't headlights bright enough, what they need to do is to illuminate more of the road and surrounds (as in the side of the road where people jump out in front of cars from).

Instead now I'm going to have a BMW prick playing with his lasers as he pootles down the highway either doing 20 more or 20 less than the traffic.

Re:brighter?

[rosshalz]

I doubt if any OEM is planning on using lasers directly to illuminate the road. I remember Audi introduced a concept at CES 2014 with laser headlights and a similar debate had ensued then. I work for an auto-OEM and I can tell you that all cars are aimed to avoid the beam going UP i.e into other driver's eyes (unless he's in a go-kart or something.. Ariel atom maybe???). There's not much that can be done when someone gets the headlight reaimed higher which is never recommended by the OEMs

This article http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/advanced-cars/bmw-laser-headlights-slice-through-the-dark(ieee spectrum) shows the actual working using very powerful but very small laser beam which is then diffused into a headlight's non-laser non-coherent beam. The only advantage of this is that a higher power level can be achieved with a very small form factor (smaller reflectors at the back of headlamps means lower costs) which is why OEM's are even trying it out.

Re:brighter?

[tgv]

Yes, indeed, but you've already mentioned the main problem: "quite powerful". If the light is more concentrated, it will also be more concentrated when it hits the eye of the driver in the other direction.

Re:brighter?

[Anonymous Coward]

If a car drives over a bump and a nearby pedestrian with fully open iris looks into the light, there is not that much distance for the divergence to spread out the power. If someone uses a telescope to spy on animals in a forest and suddenly such a car shines on him, much more power is collected by the large first telescope lens/mirror.

Re:brighter?

[c0lo]

There is a lights arms race on the streets. I wonder if we already passed the point of "more is safer".

Apropos fire the lasers: I think I'll wait until I'll be able to scream "fire the photon torpedoes".

Re:brighter?

[c0lo]

If someone uses a telescope to spy on animals in a forest and suddenly such a car shines on him, much more power is collected by the large first telescope lens/mirror.

A well deserved punishment, I might say, for breaching privacy rights of the said animals.

Re:brighter?

[c0lo]

... (unless he's in a go-kart or something.. Ariel atom maybe???)

Not necessarily: passing over the top of a hill, your headlight beam will be above the incoming traffic. Going down, there will be a moment when your beams will shine straight in the eyes of the drivers in the other lane.

Re:brighter?

[ArsenneLupin]

A headlight, through the use of dispersing phosphors and or lenses is designed to spread out and cover much more area.

What if you get into an accident that destroys the outer housing of the light (containing the dispersin phosphors and/or the lenses) while leaving the source intact?

So you've got a "deathray" shooting out from the accident scene wanting to involve more cars, until somebody turns it off...

Re:brighter?

[gordo3000]

absolutely, what I hate the most are the super brights on large SUVs when I'm driving in a smaller (lower down) car. there can be big distances where I'm completely blinded as the light is near my head level.

It gets even worse in europe where you have cars with RHS and LHS drive on the road (usually, headlights in the US have a slight angle to the right so your left headlight doesn't blind oncoming traffic as much).

The last thing I want is even brighter headlights. If current ones aren't bright enough for you to drive safely, you are driving too fast for your skills.

Re:brighter?

[necronom426]

I hate those horrible blue lights that some cars have these days. They are blinding. But worse, are the back lights that strobe! They are more dangerous than the headlights. I have to look away from them as they freak my eyes out. So I end up driving along behind a breaking car looking away from the direction I'm going in! How are these allowed? I'm thinking of getting a new car soon, and one of the things I'll be looking at are the lights. If it has LED lights at the back, or the blue blinding lights in the front, I won't consider it.

These laser ones sound worse than the blue ones.

Re:brighter?

[gordo3000]

how do you correct for various heights of cars (say, an AUDI Q7 vs an audi A3)? I am driving a non-SUV for long distances for the first time, and maybe I'm getting old, but I get blinded when there is an oncoming SUV with these modern headlights, far more than I remember when I was 16 in a car.

Re:brighter?

[crutchy]

i wonder if bmw offers x-foils as an option?

Re:brighter?

[jrumney]

Audi's demos at CES also included sensors that detect oncoming vehicles' headlights and actively steer the lasers away from them to avoid dazzling.

Re:brighter?

[jythie]

This looks like a job for a mirrors!

Seriously, I would love a mod that ads some smart-mirrors to my car and automatically reflects back really bright headlights at other cars. Just as effective as a spotlight but more ironic.

Re:brighter?

[jythie]

Oh we past that a long time ago. It has been "I am scared, can I have more then sheep at least?" for a while now.

Re:brighter?

[jythie]

Hrm... "just shut up and take this other person`s money".

I love the sound of that tech, but it strikes me as something which, unless you are altruistic, you mostly hope other people buy since few people place any blame on themselves for accidents caused by their headlights.

Re:brighter?

[bipbop]

I'm sure that'll help a lot, given that all pedestrians come equipped with headlights.

Re:brighter?

[Simon Brooke]

Strongly agree. The problem is (in the UK at least) the limit to legal brightness is set in watts; it needs to be set in lumens.

Re:brighter?

[rosshalz]

Most headlight aiming specs are decided based on the height of the headlights from the ground and a certain angle downward from there. The angle is decided based on rated brightness etc. A brighter headlight will be aimed further away from the car whereas a lower powered one will be aimed closer to provide minimum illumination. I'm not completely sure how the minimum distance the driver should be able to see would be deicided. Probably the typical speed that the vehicle is going to be designed for so I guess that would be independant of the model or segment. A fast sedan will have brighter headlamps aimed further down the road from the driver than a slow moving SUV. That's just my guess though.. not too sure... I work in the QC dept so I just get to check the vehicles according to the spec that the design department provides but this is as much as i could gather from my interactions with other departments.

Re:brighter?

[Simon Brooke]

Do they also detect pedestrians and cyclists?

Re:brighter?

[gtall]

You mean it will spread out until Billy Joe Bob takes it apart and "improves" it so that it becomes more like a light saber ready to blind you just as soon as you manage to tick Billy Joe Bob off. This cannot end well.

Re:brighter?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, a laser on it's own produces coherent light but it is not focussed. If you for example run a laser diode without any optics you will just get a big spot on the wall. It acts more like a spotlight than a laser beam (but you will get very annoying speckles from interference patterns since the light is coherent). This type of headlights has no focusing optic (well, there is one to direct the white light, but it will not focus it to a tight beam) that you will simply get a bright blue light instead of a death ray. Likely it is even eye safe at a distance of >30cm.

Re:brighter?

[MachineShedFred]

Unless the design doesn't have the laser emitter also pointed forward. Stupidly simple to not have that happen.

Re:brighter?

[Oligonicella]

The ones with the blue tint are very painful.

Re:brighter?

[GameboyRMH]

Well we're already deep into an impact safety arms race...

I wonder if part of it is that BMW/Merc drivers simply enjoy blinding the poors they drive past, forcing them to slow down and pull to the side to avoid an accident. It must inflate their sense of superiority for their car to inconvenience so many other people.

Re:brighter?

[Hal_Porter]

If you drive along a motorway in the UK there's a nominal 70 mph speed limit and you'll find you have the following lanes.

Inside lane : lorries limited to 70mph, cars that can't do 70mph, etc

Middle Lane: Most people will do about 80 mph on the speedometer. The speedometers in UK are marked down by 5% so this is really 66 mph. It is rumoured that police won't prosecute people they catch doing this speed in a 70mph limit. I do this and pull into the inside lane if it is empty.

Outside Lane: People do 90-100mph. The police will prosecute at these speeds. Still presumably they have speed trap detectors or a GPS app that warns them. Or they've done something illegal like register the car to someone who doesn't exist.

Now this works fine except for something I call Wanker Driver Syndrome or WDS. A driver with WDS will whizz up behind you in the inside lane in a BMW or Mercedes doing 90-100mph if the inside lane is clear and slam his breaks on to get back to 80mph. He will hang on your tail for a while with his lights on main beam to fuck up your dark adjusted vision and then - before you have a chance to change lane - whizz off in the outside lane which is always clear in this situation. His (and it's always a he) reasons for doing this are obscure since he could just stay in the outside lane. Or drive at 80mph like everyone else, Or switch to the outside lane when he wants to overtake.

It's completely different from the US where everyone sets their cruise control to the speed limit and leaves it at that. WDS suffers in the US get jailed or shot or something.

So the benefit to the laser lights is safety for said WDS sufferer. You'll get a blast of light long before he has to slam the breaks on. It's very much not to the benefit of people who don't have WDS. I.e. the rest of us.

Re:brighter?

[dywolf]

oh goody.

now when some jackass is driving around with the highbeams on, he can blind even more people, from a farther distance.

just what we needed.

Re:brighter?

[AlabamaCajun]

Besides blinding oncoming cars it will only be as good as a new vehicle or one that is under service contract. Lets face it one we get them on the back roads of Alabama and in crashes and other mishaps they will be realigned into the oncoming traffic. It happens today with current lighting. Even if the lasers are still aimed correctly, when you as on a turtleback twin lane back road topping a hill those beams are going to shine the oncoming just as they do now.. A more widespread emitter is better such as an LED array than a single emitter. Some of the European cars of the 80s attempted to use single bulb small reflectors and they were dangerous when they aged as they were hard to see or burned out nearly slamming into the back of several of them when they applied brakes.

Re:brighter?

[JoeMerchant]

Because, as multi-billion earning international corporations, BMW (and the others developing this tech) don't have anyone on staff to raise concerns about bystander vision safety, nor the procedural government to make sure that these concerns reach decision making levels of management.

Seriously, if you go ripping laser diodes out of compact projectors and play around with them and some lenses, you might do some serious maiming.

Before a product like this reaches the hands of Bubba the shadetree tinkerer, it will be damn near impossible to modify it to make it in any way more dangerous than the current 65W incandescent high beams - or, if such a modification is conceivable, there will be educational warnings about it plastered on every imaginable surface of the product (car), including under the hood and the sun-visors.

But, then again, hundreds of professional, experienced engineers paid for thousands of hours to think about this might miss something, but odds are that at least a few of them read Slashdot, so they'll probably find that last little bit of eye safety wisdom they were overlooking here.

Re:brighter?

[JoeMerchant]

I like the '70s luxury car "side beams" that would illuminate in the direction of the turn signals, I wonder why those went out of fashion?

Re:brighter?

[LoRdTAW]

This.
The bright headlamp race has to stop. I drive on the highway daily for a total of a 50 mile(~80km) commute. I cant tell you the number of times I have been blinded by HID's and other overly bright headlamps. My coworker` even tinted the windows on his car...for night driving! Its that bad.

You want my take? Idiotically bright headlamps are most always found on luxury vehicles. Its a way for the driver to tell everyone on the road "Look at me, I'm rich!" Automakers have no reason to justify such intense light other than entering into a pissing match with each other. You also have the tools who leave the high beams on because, why not they paid for them? And its next to impossible to drive in front of such an asshole with HID's.

My thought: Fuck all of you luxury car makers and you're sick headlamp arms race. No one needs them - PERIOD.

Re:brighter?

[tgv]

Seriously, if you're going to get mad because that points about which there is uncertainty get discussed on a web forum, you should find another way of life.

And you don't respond to the problem either. You only say: trust these people. They know what they are doing.

So, let's start with a simple example. I'm sure that the engineers know how to design a system that raises and lowers electric windows. How come there are bugs in these systems? How come people can't close their windows after battery upgrades? How come people got locked in their expensive BMWs? How come there's still no answer on the Toyota cruise control? It can't be that hard, can it?

Re:brighter?

[beelsebob]

Right, I have in the past had to sit at a green traffic light for a while because I couldn't see, simply because the car in front of me's LED brake lights were embedded in the centre of my vision.

Re:brighter?

[Admiral_Grinder]

Right, but that only applies at night. What about during the day when you are catching glare from the sun? I find the conventional dim bulbs annoying and even more so when the guy has blackout covers on his lights. You can't see them at all then.

Re:brighter?

[maz2331]

The bright low-beams (especially HID Xenons) really need an intelligent system behind them to aim the lights away from any oncoming traffic. My BMW does that - I can see the beam actively avoid oncoming cars, and aim below the tail lights of any cars ahead of me.

Re:brighter?

[swb]

Yay, another rich asshole on my tail with even brighter headlights. Awesome.

Re:brighter?

[Bob the Super Hamste]

I think it is more that that people who buy luxury cars also have money to waste on HID lamps instead of the standard halogen ones that everyone else sells. Personally I prefer the long life bulbs to the regular or brighter ones they are dimmer but do seem to hold up better. As an added bonus they don't piss everyone off and with the very dim red/orange dash illumination my eyes don't have to adjust much when checking what is around me in the mirrors.

Re:brighter?

[Quila]

Most bad HID lights are aftermarket junk.

But this system looks pretty good. It has a camera that looks out for oncoming lights and dims them. If done really well, since it's laser, it could shape the beam to avoid oncoming cars while still lighting up the rest of the road. It would be nice if that were on all cars.

Re:brighter?

[Bob the Super Hamste]

The lights were dimmer when you were 16 and the number of people with SUV/trucks who will never need to haul, tow, make use of 4WD, or high clearance was much lower then as well.

Re:brighter?

[JoeMerchant]

You mistake amused for mad. Things are screwed up all the time, especially seemingly simple ones like power window control circuits. Our 1999 Dodge RAM has a seatbelt controller failure mode that's particularly annoying, locks you in the seat after 30 minutes, unlocks when the doors open... apparently they went back to "dumb" seatbelt controls a year or two later. If you want to read about potential automotive design flaws with serious repercussions, search for "Flaming Fords."

Back on "Laser" headlamps - presumably, the light will be distributed with greater control, but not greater intensity. If you want greater intensity, replace your 65W high beam bulbs with (not legal for on-road use) 100W bulbs - they're noticeably brighter, and available from J.C. Whitney since at least the 1970s.

If anything, with greater beam control, the laser headlamp's total light output is probably going to be lower than conventional bulbs - just to reach compliance with existing laws. I bet that energy consumption will be lower too.

Re:brighter?

[adisakp]

The BMW technology detects oncoming traffic as well as cars in front of you and automatically dims the beams so as not to blind other drivers.

Re:brighter?

[ColdWetDog]

Bell Bottoms, avocado and orange kitchens, wide lapels, afros.

Thank you very much, but some of us are trying to forget.

Re:brighter?

[tlhIngan]

There is a lights arms race on the streets. I wonder if we already passed the point of "more is safer".

Problem is, we still have "ghosts" - you know, those idiotic pedestrians who insist on wearing all black on those dark wintry days and jaywalking. No problem with all black at legal intersections, or jaywalking if they look for traffic. It's those ones that suddenly come up on you inching across the road oblivious to the fact you may not see them in time. (If they'd hurry across, then at least the natural human motion detection vision goes off).

Perhaps instead of better headlights, we need IR headlamps and thermal imagers that cause those idiots to at least light up.

And yes, I do admit to wearing dark clothes as well. However, I do not use my phone while I'm walking along the road and I try to be aware of traffic because well, I'd like to not be injured or killed and I don't want to assume the driver (who may be tired, distracted, etc) will see me in time to stop).

Alas, for now, brighter is cheaper than IR cameras or thermal imagers. (And where did all those innovations go? We've heard all about concept of IR illumination and thermal imaging for years now).

Re:brighter?

[Rinikusu]

I can't wait until some douchenozzle decides to remove the diffuser and blinds a bunch of people.

Re:brighter?

[Raenex]

The bright headlamp race has to stop.

I've also been stuck behind some really awful (as in blinding) LED taillights. They were on a Prius.

Re:brighter?

[Caedite Eos]

When you spend 98% of you time in your mom's basement, even regular lights seem blinding. Just sayin'.

Re:brighter?

[marcello_dl]

In fact, brighter lights, brighter semaphores, just makes it difficult to see the rest (e.g. pedestrians). Those with good night vision are impaired by brighter lights, those without are still in trouble.
It's like the road sign escalation.

Re:brighter?

[operagost]

"Merc" is short for Mercury.

"Benz" is short for Mercedes-Benz.

Thank you,
Mercury Automobile Memorial Society

Re:brighter?

[ColdWetDog]

As long as it works correctly. Given the half life of BMW electronics these days, I suspect that it will be fine for the first three weeks.

Re:brighter?

[The_Wilschon]

Did you know that common kitchen knives can also be used by Billy Joe Bob to blind someone, or worse kill them? Just wait until you manage to tick Billy Joe Bob off. This cannot end well.

Clearly, kitchen knives should not be made, either.

Look, if people are going to attack, maim, or murder someone, they've got plenty of options already. Adding one to the potential arsenal, especially one that would take significant technical know-how to be able to turn into an actual weapon, isn't really going to change things.

Re:brighter?

[MoronBob]

And there seems to be a big assumption that these headlights will never be misaligned like 4 out of 5 cars on the road today.

Re:brighter?

[pr0fessor]

Correction.

It's completely different from the US where everyone sets their cruise control to the speed limit and starts texting or facebooking on their cell phone.

Re:brighter?

[scottbomb]

THIS. 1000 x. Mod this up, AC or not.

Re:brighter?

[mark_reh]

Laser headlights do not direct laser beams onto the road. The laser is used to pump a phosphor that produces white light.

I have an Audi TT with HID lamps. When supplied by the factory, law requires that they have to respond to oncoming traffic and tilt the beams downward. The control system in my car reacts to bumps in the road, and turns the beams in the direction the car is turning. When starting the car the system tests itself- the headlights dip downward, then tilt inward, then tilt back up.

If you're being blinded by HID headlights it is probably from after-market kits that simply replace standard lights without any of the controls.

Re:brighter?

[slinches]

That sounds great as long as it's functioning properly. What happens when someone gets into an accident and busts the phosphor coated lens? Do the headlights turn on full brightness to ensure you can see clearly or turn off to prevent the exposed laser light from blinding oncoming traffic?

Not that I'm against improved technology, but lasers do have a few potential failure modes that are much more dangerous than incandescent or LED lights.

Re:brighter?

[MBC1977]

While yes some of the LED headlights are bright, I welcome them, because then I can see the road itself and other objects more clearly). However, given that it can be painful for some, perhaps we should consider making streetlights brighter, which would reduce the need for the brighter headlights. Being able to see at night is a must and brighter lights allow for that.

Re:brighter?

[zmooc]

Now we get to be blinded by lasers, great...

The FA states:

To ensure no one gets blinded, the lights work together with BMW's camera-aided digital high-beam assistant, which dims the light if it detects an oncoming car or another car up front.

Re:brighter?

[akpak]

I think it's actually making us less safe. I know that when I go from the highway to a smaller road with fewer cars, my night vision has suffered. Once I adjust, I have no trouble seeing at all with my non-HID headlights.

Re:brighter?

[Solandri]

I wonder if part of it is that BMW/Merc drivers simply enjoy blinding the poors they drive past, forcing them to slow down and pull to the side to avoid an accident. It must inflate their sense of superiority for their car to inconvenience so many other people.

This attitude that someone who is rich must be on an ego trip has always baffled me. It's hypocritical because your own ego is inflating your own self worth, making you think rich people are doing something which annoys you specifically to annoy you. The simple truth is, the rich are like everyone else - they don't care about you. It's just that being rich gives them more ways to not care.

The solution then is to make them care. I've always thought cars should have return mirrors mounted on the front and back at the level of the side mirrors. e.g. On the front of the side mirrors, and on the rear about where the center brake light is. The mirrors (three mirrors at 90 degrees to each other forming the inside corner of a cube) will reflect any light back at the source. Putting them on every car will cause anyone with misaligned headlights to be blinded by their own headlights any time they approach another car from front or behind. It'll give them a clear indication (and incentive) that they need to take their car to the shop to have their headlights realigned.

And the biggest culprit of headlight alignment misalignment I've seen aren't BMWs and Mercedes. It's off-road vehicles with raised suspensions whose headlights are not subsequently aimed lower. And cars with lowered suspensions whose headlight aim is then raised to compensate for the aiming point being lowered. A few states check headlight aim as part of their annual or bi-annual smog inspection before you can renew your car's registration. But most of the states I've lived in do not, so I think a more general and in-your-face solution is required.

Re:brighter?

[semi-extrinsic]

I sincerely doubt that is true. In Norway (which is not in the EU but strives to comply with EU regulations as far as cars are concerned) the limit has been in lumens for almost ten years. It's commonly called "E-marking" which is lumens and directionality combined and dumbed down for the regular person. Ordinary (non-HID) high beams are typically 12.5 points each, good external pencil beams are 40 points each, and you're at most allowed to have 100 points active simultaneously.

Re:brighter?

[freeze128]

"Merc" is short for Mercenary.

"Hg" is short for Mercury.

Re:brighter?

[semi-extrinsic]

The control system in my car reacts to bumps in the road, and turns the beams in the direction the car is turning.

This is what car manufacturers claim, but it's nowhere near true. The typical slewing time for the optics looks to be about 0.5 seconds from "standard" to "dipped", and that's way too slow for reacting to bumps/potholes when you're going faster than 30. I regularly get blinded by Audis, BMWs and Volvos with factory HIDs, but Mitsubishi seems to be worst. It could perhaps be that they are just worst at controlling chromatic abberations (since blue light blinds you more).

Re:brighter?

[jrumney]

The point of brighter lights is to more easily see pedestrians and cyclists. Do you really want cars to detect them and aim the lights away from them?

Re:brighter?

[Zxern]

The problem is that 4 out 5 cars on the road today with these super bright headlights and taillights were done with cheap aftermarket kits.

Re:brighter?

[ChrisMaple]

Cadillac had thermal imagers in heads up displays, and for all I know may still have them available. I'd guess they're neither cheap nor popular.

Re:brighter?

[toddestan]

The worst part is that a lot of those LED tail lamps aren't lit continuously, rather they flicker at some observable frequency (somewhere in the tens of Hertz) not unlike cheap LED christmas lights which makes them even more unpleasant to look at. For some reason Cadillacs are particularly bad about this.

Re:brighter?

[toddestan]

Hopefully it will be just like the turn signals which never light up once they've failed (which is usually immediately after purchase).

Re:brighter?

[Bratch]

Incredibly annoying and too bright, which is obvious when viewed within a group of cars with "normal" headlights. Also seems popular on a few (not all) lowered Japanese cars with big mufflers and SUVs with shiny rims. Maybe it's a local thing, but near the southern California border there are lots of Baja vehicles lifted just enough in the front to place their bright, white headlights directly into your eyes. Sometimes they have similar lights on the back, so they can get you in two directions.

Re:brighter?

[Bratch]

It's just so they can see better, doesn't matter if it makes everyone else see worse. Me me me me.

Re:brighter?

[ebvwfbw]

I can't be the only one who thinks that the headlights on certain luxury cars are already annoyingly bright to other drivers. Now we get to be blinded by lasers, great...

I get that with my 2006 Caddy. Dude flashes me thinking I'm on high, so I flash him and show him he's so, so wrong. Probably temporarily blinding him. There's actually two parts. A lower side and a high side and as you go down the road you can actually see the line on the things on the side of the road. Huge difference from my pitiful 2000 Chevy Venture's lights.

Now they want brighter? This is nuts. They should ban them.

Re:brighter?

[AK Marc]

The car senses the damage and refuses to turn on at night, until fixed. There's an override for emergencies, but the police are called out for operating an unsafe vehicle.

Re:brighter?

[AK Marc]

The laser is directed around a bend. It's "impossible" to break the "outer housing" in a manner that allows the light to shoot out in a deathray manner.

Re:brighter?

[AK Marc]

Why are so many people worried about pedestrians? If you are driving a car, and are suddenly rendered blind, it's very difficult to be safe from that point. You can't stop safely because you can't see the safe place to pull over, nor can you continue safely. A pedestrian can look away and walk forward with great safety. The pedestrian can also stop where they are with great safety (assuming they aren't illegally crossing the road, and freeze in the headlights, waiting to get hit like a deer).

Blind pedestrians are "common" (I personally know a few, and I've seen others). Blind drivers are less common.

Re:brighter?

[AK Marc]

There's an easy fix to that. Limit the height of lights. If the lights for taller cars were mounted lower, there'd be no problem.

Re:brighter?

[AK Marc]

The rules should limit the height of the lights on vehicles. Or brightness specs that effectively do the same. (requiring a minimum lux at some point, and a maximum at another, then repeat for longer distances, at some point, you'd have to lower the lamp to hit the spec).

Re:brighter?

[AK Marc]

If brighter lights make it harder to see pedestrians, then we should have optimal lighting with no lights at all, right? Otherwise your assertion fails in the edge cases, and we should assume it fails in the middle just as much.

Re:brighter?

[AK Marc]

I need a model. Can you come stand in the middle of a street? Wearing black. For a couple of hours. I'll let you know how it goes.

How is this different?

[nullchar]

Audi tested lasers on sharks before BMW:

http://news.slashdot.org/story...

Re:How is this different?

[c0lo]

While Audi introduced it on concept cars, BMW are busy with the series production

Re:At what replacement cost?

[scorp1us]

Theoretically, none. The laser is all solid state, the phosphor is not a filament. It should outlast the car.

Warning

[JazzXP]

Do not look into headlight with remaining eye.

... And get fined $10.000 ??

[scsirob]

What if that nice bright laser hits a reflective object and then points toward a plane? Just a few articles back I read that will be rewarded with a $10.000 fine.
http://news.slashdot.org/story...

And as others have already pointed out, today's headlights are plenty bright, thank you.

Re:... And get fined $10.000 ??

[wonkey_monkey]

What if that nice bright laser hits a reflective object and then points toward a plane?

That same thing that happens when light from a normal (okay, a bit brighter) headlight points towards a plane.

I'm not sure whether you're imagining a couple of laser pointers taped to the front of the car projecting two coherent sub-centimetre dots onto the road 600m ahead, but... that's not what's happening. At all.

Re:I Don't Think So

[viperidaenz]

LED's are also single colour. They work exactly like these lasers: a blue light and a yellow phosphor.

Re:At what replacement cost?

[viperidaenz]

high power LED's have a life span between 20,000 and 50,000 hours. The hotter they get the shorter the lifespan.

Re: ..you'll be able to 'fire the beta!'"

[Anonymous Coward]

Die Beta!!! Die!!!!

Not actually laser beams shooting out

[slserpent]

From the video I just watched, there's some kind of lens in front of the laser beam that disperses it into a wider light beam. The laser should only be thought of as a bulb, then.

Re:Not actually laser beams shooting out

[BlueStrat]

From the video I just watched, there's some kind of lens in front of the laser beam that disperses it into a wider light beam. The laser should only be thought of as a bulb, then.

Wrong idea.

The lasers only illuminate a phosphor emitter, which then produces the actual headlight beam. No laser light is emitted at all. It's more akin to the way a CRT works.

A thousand internets to the first one that figures out how to make the lasers scan the phosphors CRT-like to produce projected video. Stuck behind a semi for miles at night and bored? Just project a movie against the rear of the trailer ahead of you with your raster-capable headlights!

Strat

Re:Not actually laser beams shooting out

[JaredOfEuropa]

Some guys already tried that, for a different reason. They mounted a projector in a car to act as headlight, and added a camera to track raindrops as they fell through the beam. A computer then predicted the path of each drop and made the projector not illuminate that bit, giving a much clearer view ahead during nightly rainfall.

Que the people whi argue that "this will cause people to drive much faster in unsafe conditions!". They said the same about seat belts and airbags.

Laser headlights + digital enhancement

[austinhook]

More interesting would be any kind of headlights, that don't blind the driver coming at you and are digitally enhanced so that with some kind of viewer, you could see the road ahead of you all night, as clear as or better than day.

Re:Laser headlights + digital enhancement

[Zembar]

I think pedestrians and motorcyclists might object

Laser defense

[hcs_$reboot]

As powerful as lasers may be, a (good) mirror should be enough to perform a "return to sender"...

Energy saving vs winter conditions.

[norttipertti]

So, new laser lights run with less energy consumption and cooler than traditional headlights. So either you waste energy on a heater that keeps lights clear of ice and snow or keep stopping often to scrape ice off the headlights.

I think I'll stay with the old technology.

Re:Energy saving vs winter conditions.

[Lumpy]

It's BMW, they will add heaters to the headlight assemblies like they already do. Heated headlights, heated tail lights, heated mirrors, heated steering wheel. Oh and heated windshield washer fluid.

Re:Energy saving vs winter conditions.

[Overzeetop]

Don't forget the heated seats that make it feel like you just peed in your pants.

Re:Energy saving vs winter conditions.

[Lehk228]

you sound jelly.

not of me, I drive an 11 year old Ford Taurus

but definitely jelly of someone.

Re:Energy saving vs winter conditions.

[norttipertti]

I wish we all could live at Florida, but alas - there's plenty of people on the north side of arctic circle.

I doubt that

[Anonymous Coward]

I am quite certain these laser headlights will be brighter and more blinding than even the current too-bright headlights are, regardless of what you say.

Re:I doubt that

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, as long as you're quite certain, then fuck science and actual testing.

Re:I doubt that

[sexconker]

How tf do you mod a completely unbased assertion as insightful?

With common sense. The whole fucking reason they're developing laser headlights is because of marketing. Lasers are cool, lasers are brighter. Cool and brighter sell. Give it a year and you'll have multi-color kits that let dipshits change the color of their headlights while they drive, have it cycle trough a rainbow, have it vary with speed, etc.

Have you ever driven at night in a city? Fucking scrolling LED signs, lights to light up pavement UNDER the car in purple and red, flashing lights and logos on the hubcaps and rims. Morons on the road are engaged in some sort of a pissing contest with after market lighting.

What is should say

[Anonymous Coward]

"The lighting system works by blinding everyone in approaching vehicles"

*sigh*

[Alarash]

I was already pissed off at people with Xenon headlights, now they get friggin' LASERS ?

great..

[epyT-R]

the xenons already burn my retinas.. It's bad enough they don't control the UV+ emissions from these things that well.. LASER light can cause serious damage.

Re:great..

[sonamchauhan]

The sun doesn't tailgate you at night.

Re:great..

[epyT-R]

Not quite the same thing.. I don't make a habit of staring directly into the sun, so it does not shine directly into my eyes while my irises are wide open for night visiion..

Re:great..

[Yosho]

But he does in the morning, that asshole.

Re:great..

[GameboyRMH]

Depends which way you're driving. The sun shines directly into my eyeballs from just above my rearview mirror on my commute home.

Re:great..

[GameboyRMH]

Nope it's a '95 and very spartan. Newest car I own in fact. I have a '91 where the two sun visors are contoured to fill that space.

Re:I Don't Think So

[jklovanc]

There are flashlights with a single emitter that can cast a beam over 900 meters.

But can it throw the beam over the same area as the headlight? The more focused the bean the longer the throw the less area covered. It may only light up a few square ft. Is that useful as a headlight?

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[Rainwulf]

An accident waiting to happen can be applied to anything sharp, hard, fast, heavy, chemicial, high voltage or high current or controlled by a human. What a stupid riposte to a cool new technology.

The dangers of this have aready been taken into consideration, being a lot of safeguards and cut offs that fail safe. Your response has been used against anything possibly dangerous that has ever existed or been created. You must be a conservative.

Two Strikes

[SuperKendall]

I can't be the only one who thinks that the headlights on certain luxury cars are already annoyingly bright to other drivers.

Yes they are. So why not make them more directional so you can get brightness in a more specific area without dispersal... I wonder what kind of light technology could make that possible.

Oh and beta sucks.

Can't get a boycott right either I see. The overall quality of writing on Slashdot has improved this week, why not joint the rest of them and increase it further.

Re:Two Strikes

[swilver]

...only to be defeated by a hill in the road.

Every little bump one of these cars hits already is making me think they're flashing their high beams because the angle of the light that should be pointed at the road is now pointing in my eyes.

Making it even brighter? W...T...F...

Re:Two Strikes

[SuperKendall]

...only to be defeated by a hill in the road.

What we need is a light technology inherently more amiable... hmm...

Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[aepervius]

My understanding is that the laser is used to pump energy efficiently in a light emitting substance, thus making it a classic point light which expand spherically. They are not using laser directly to light the road which would be pretty much useless (you want a rather wide cone to show the whole road and a bit on the side).

Nonehteless I am betting such light would be forbbidden in many country in europe where the maximum intensity you can pump is limited by law. And rightfully so, the "normal range light" are okish but the "long range" light are already quite blinding, and usually leave me blind fully for 3 to 4 seconds when one is oncomming and forgot to switch back to normal range light. I can't imagine regulator allowing even more powerful long range light being able to light everything on 600m.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[wvmarle]

Nonehteless I am betting such light would be forbbidden in many country in europe where the maximum intensity you can pump is limited by law.

BMW being a European company will take those limits into account in their production vehicles, don't worry.

And rightfully so, the "normal range light" are okish but the "long range" light are already quite blinding, and usually leave me blind fully for 3 to 4 seconds when one is oncomming and forgot to switch back to normal range light.

That's another matter. It's for a reason it's called "dipped" resp. "blinding" light. Now the problem for some areas, like what I see happening in China all the time, is that everyone likes to drive with blinding lights on at all times. I don't understand why - the result is that no-one can see anything properly. But then, it's not that those Chinese drivers care much about what's going on around them anyway...

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[locofungus]

Nonehteless I am betting such light would be forbbidden in many country in europe where the maximum intensity you can pump is limited by law.

It might have changed, but I believe that it's not the maximum light output that is limited but the power input.

So from tungsten filament that the law was written for to the thermodynamic limit gives about a 50x increase in brightness that is allowed.

Similar games for bicycle lights. The reason it's almost impossible to get a bicycle dynamo that will output more than three watts is because that's the legal limit for the front light. In true lawyer fashion, you're allowed to have extra lights (provided they're independently controlled so you can turn them off without your legal light) that are brighter but the lamp the law requires is limited to a maximum of 3W (input)

Many of these laws have been changed relatively recently - for example LED lights weren't allowed at all for bicycles, not sure what the situation for cars was - but they are now.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[Simon Brooke]

Nonehteless I am betting such light would be forbbidden in many country in europe where the maximum intensity you can pump is limited by law.

BMW being a European company will take those limits into account in their production vehicles, don't worry.

The problem is that the legal limit is (in the UK at least) 60 watts. As there lasers will emit many more lumens per watt than the incandescent bulbs in use when the law was written, this doesn't stop them being much too bright.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[EmperorArthur]

The problem is that the legal limit is (in the UK at least) 60 watts. As there lasers will emit many more lumens per watt than the incandescent bulbs in use when the law was written, this doesn't stop them being much too bright.

So what you're saying is lawmakers didn't understand the technology they attempted to regulate, and ended up passing regulations that affect the wrong thing. (lumens vs watts) What a shock. Say it isn't so.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[gtall]

The Chinese problem might be due to air pollution in the cities, they probably forget when out in the countryside.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[Alioth]

It's also likely a product of when the law was made, and I wager this law was probably made when there were no conceivable technologies for car headlights other than incandescent bulbs (probably the legislation was written before LEDs were even invented, let alone the power illuminator LEDs that are available now). It was probably drafted by a civil servant then rubber stamped by parliament too.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[semi-extrinsic]

What GP is saying is just plain wrong. If he were correct, aftermarket HIDs would be legal in the UK, and they're not.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[AK Marc]

Taller vehicles are a greater blinding problem than these will ever be. Most SUVs are illegal under Texas law, but Texas hasn't pressed the issue because the feds say it's ok, and the last time Texas messed with the feds was in the 1860s and that didn't work out so well. "[all headlights must be] aimed so that no part of the high-intensity portion of the beam on a vehicle that is operated on a straight, level road under any condition of loading projects into the eyes of an approaching vehicle operator." But I've passed plenty of vehicles violating that, even with stock low-beams.

Re:Not blinded by laser but blinded nonetheless

[AK Marc]

Now the problem for some areas, like what I see happening in China all the time, is that everyone likes to drive with blinding lights on at all times. I don't understand why - the result is that no-one can see anything properly. But then, it's not that those Chinese drivers care much about what's going on around them anyway...

The only thing out of the ordinary I noticed with Chinese drivers is that lights don't get turned on when it starts to get dark. Almost like it's manly to be the last one to turn them on. It'll be well-dark before they are on with any regularity. In the US, they start coming on when the sun is very low. We don't even wait for proper dark. Had you noticed that too?

nice and all..

[SuperDre]

Yeah, that's nice and all for the driver, but even with today's new headlights, it's a nightmare for oncoming traffic, headlights are so much brighter these days it blinds you as an oncoming driver.. And it's great if you can see for 600meters, but most people don't watch where they're going anyway..

Re:nice and all..

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in a rural area (aka: fly-over country) and the roads here follow the shape of the land. Instead of bulldozing first roads are just built on top of every little bump and dip in the landscape. That means that on my twenty minute drive home I'm hit in the face dozens of times by the headlights of cars "coming over the hill" in the opposite direction. (Hooray for narrow two lane roads!) The blue headlights now utterly blind me, I can't imagine what beams twice as intense will do to my night vision.

Google needs to hurry up with their self driving car because every "improvement" in headlight tech makes it more difficult for people to drive at night.

Re:nice and all..

[Xyrus]

Yeah, that's nice and all for the driver, but even with today's new headlights, it's a nightmare for oncoming traffic, headlights are so much brighter these days it blinds you as an oncoming driver..
And it's great if you can see for 600meters, but most people don't watch where they're going anyway..

Obligatory music reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Re: Blindness / Bad Idea

[psiclops]

Hear hear

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[sonamchauhan]

What a stupid riposte to a cool new technology.

Repeat that to the first person blinded by these headlights.

The dangers of this have aready been taken into consideration, being a lot of safeguards and cut offs that fail safe.

Hmmm... Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island. Your turn now -- tell me three great towering achievements of "safeguards and cutoffs that fail safe." :)

Your response has been used against anything possibly dangerous that has ever existed or been created. You must be a conservative.

Pleased to meet you! You must the laissez-faire capitalist. :)

And besides all this... I'm tired of all the rich kids with ultra-bright headlights making it unsafe for the rest of us to drive at night.

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[u38cg]

I am pretty sure that if we were all driving around in our own personal nuclear reactors we would have applied some reasonably stringent safety standards to them.

It's too bad the Hyundai Tiburon...

[lourd_baltimore]

...is out of production. These would have suited it quite well for the evil mastermind on the go.

Re:It's too bad the Hyundai Tiburon...

[GameboyRMH]

We don't have Tiburons...but we do have some ill-tempered Plymouth Barracudas.

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[Alioth]

Some safeguards and cutoffs that failed safe and prevented disasters:

- Countless runaway trains have been prevented by failsafe brakes (vacuum in the early days, air brakes today).
- Countless boiler explosions prevented by safety valves
- Several nuclear explosions prevented by failsafe arming mechanisms when the bomber carrying the nukes crashed.

There's three. The thing is you only get to hear about the failures. A failsafe working and preventing a disaster is not news so no one ever reports it. But I can guarantee you every day dozens of industrial disasters are averted by failsafe devices like safety power cutoffs, pressure activated safety valves, braking systems that come on when there's an air leak, signalling systems that fail to "stop" when there's a system failure etc.

If we had your attitude we'd still be insisting a man with a red flag walk in front of every car.

There is no laser light comming out

[Ivan Stepaniuk]

Blue lasers positioned at the rear of the assembly fire onto a set of mirrors closer to the front. Those mirrors focus the laser energy into a lens filled with yellow phosphorus. The yellow phosphorus, when excited by the blue laser, emits an intense white light.

There is no coherent laser light coming out from the headlight.

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[wonkey_monkey]

If "people might be hurt when there's an accident" was a reason not to do something we wouldn't have cars in the first place.

It's a laser illuminating a phosphor. First guess is that the laser is not designed to/doesn't have to stay in a tight beam for more than a few milli- or centimetres.

Old news

[Tyrion Moath]

This story was run a month or two back. It's only lasers for the highbeams, and only at high speeds. The regular headlights are normal.

Re:Old news

[dargaud]

Haven't they heard, high speeds have long been banned everywhere except some autobahn portions in Germany. What's the point ?!?

i know what caused this...

[crutchy]

...apparently skrillex is popular in europe

Re:At what replacement cost?

[stealth_finger]

since 3D printing will be the last technology we'll ever need, indeed invent. It's the Eschaton, the Singularity, the future.

Until you can 3D print me a teleporter keep on inventing.

Add a normal laser too

[Issarlk]

Unless the headlight can vaporise oncomming blinded cars before they crash into you, you'll also need a normal laser to take care of them.

Can't see anything

[M1FCJ]

Brilliant. Really brilliant. I already can't look at BMWs and Audis with their extreme bright blinding lights, now I will be completely blinded with the tosser's lights.

But why white light?

[grunter]

Newer streetlights are usually orange / yellow light, because (as I understand it) our eyes are more sensitive at those wavelengths.

So why are car headlight beams still white? The idea is to see more, so shouldn't they be the same orange / yellow light as streetlamps?

Re:But why white light?

[Lehk228]

because they appeal to wankers, and the world is full of wankers

Re:But why white light?

[Alioth]

Streetlamps are orange or light orange not because of a design decision to use a wavelength at which we're sensitive, but merely because low pressure sodium lights are still by a country mile the most efficient high power lighting we have. Since LEDs are now beating high pressure sodium lights (the lighter yellow type), these are being increasingly replaced by LEDs.

We don't use sodium lights as car headlights because if you wanted to drive at night, you would have to get in your car and wait five or ten minutes for the lights to get up to temperature before you could drive anywhere. Watch one of the orange streetlights come on some time - they start a dull red (which always makes me crave strawberry ice lollies) - that's just the inert gas mix glowing - and it takes a while for the lamp to warm up enough for the sodium to vaporise before you start seeing the orange colour. High pressure Na lights start off a dim bluish white colour (mercury discharge) until the sodium has vaporised and they become full brightness.

Back when we started putting sodium streetlights up the only technology that could produce enough light for a car headlight and was also instant on was the incandescent bulb.

Will they cost more than Xenon?

[gelfling]

Because those $500/each headlights are pretty awesome. They'd better last forever.

Re:Will they cost more than Xenon?

[Lumpy]

$500? are you talking the economy model 10 years from now? These are expected to cost nearly $2500 each.

You're living in Shatner days....

[Virtucon]

Dude, Quantum Torpedoes are where it's at...

Photon Torpedoes are so like the original NCC-1701

high-tech solution to the arms race

[Virtucon]

Install automatically controlled mirrors that will reflect the light back to the source once the intensity reaches a certain lumen value. That way either 1) You'll get the a-hole tail-gating to you dim his lights and back off 2) You'll cause him to get a taste of his own medicine and crash because of being blinded by his own stupid headlights. It could be cobbled together pretty cheaply.

Re:high-tech solution to the arms race

[canadiannomad]

I'd rather see all headlights be polarized, and have polarized windshields that limit the light that comes through at the standardized angles....

Re:high-tech solution to the arms race

[Lehk228]

you don't need active control at all, a small sheet made up of corner reflectors will do nicely.

It Burns!

[Tekoneiric]

The light it burns, it burns!

Seriously I wonder what the power rating is on those lasers. If replacement lasers are cheap enough I can see a huge application for the maker crowd.

funny...

[Lumpy]

"already efficient LED headlights"

That are actually inefficient as hell. HID still blows them away for lumens output at power consumed. LED's only advantage is a nearly 60K mile life on a car, but replacement is $450 each instead of the $45.00 each for an HID setup, or $4.00 each for halogen.

Re:funny...

[TrekkieGod]

HID still blows them away for lumens output at power consumed.

Do you have a source? Every google article that I hit while searching "HID vs. LED" says that although HID is a bit more efficient (not blow-away efficient) than LEDs at light-generation, there are a ton of losses in the lamp, related to light being reflected back, and absorbed by lenses and protective covering. Comparing actual lumens output from the lamp, instead of generated lumens at the source, LED seems to come out the winner, by a lot.

It's possible I only hit biased sites. This one website listed warmup of 5-10 minutes for HID, but I assume they've solved that problem if they're using them as headlights. I wasn't able to find an HID-favorable source, though.

Re:funny...

[Lumpy]

The source is my driveway. HID headlights on my old car versus the new LED ones on the new car. Old car is insanely brighter and drawing 2.7 amps (35 watts ish) per headlamp when running at 13 volts ( car off running off of battery measured at the battery terminals 12.9Volts) the new car they are drawing 3.5 amps and are visibly dimmer yet the same color. (45.5watts around 4500K based on the known color of the replacement bulb I purchased recently for the old car.

Both cars aimed at the SAME white garage door. the HID lights are visible brighter than the LED. Light pattern is almost identical.

Oh the claimed warm up time is hogwash. I get full HID light within 30 seconds, useable light within 2 seconds.

Re:funny...

[jeffb (2.718)]

I can see why you're convinced, but the rest of the world doesn't seem to be seeing the same results you do. Maybe your new car has a bad light-handling design, or poor driving electronics, or maybe there's a measurement error. How are you measuring current? Are you sure you can accurately measure a high-frequency chopped DC signal with lots of harmonics?

Re:funny...

[Lumpy]

The rest of the world is based on speculation. Please show me one that has real data with real A-B testing, because I have been looking today and I cant find any.
Because I would like to know of the headlights of the new car are screwed up and the dealer owes me some free repairs.

Re:funny...

[Lumpy]

"Are you sure you can accurately measure a high-frequency chopped DC signal with lots of harmonics?"

If that is how they are drawing power from the DC system then it's a major failure, why in the world would they have the headlight system draw power from a battery with high frequency chopped DC signals? That explains why they are dimmer, very poorly engineered. I can see driving the LED directly that way but what silly person would measure that? It is a useless measurement. you measure the total draw including the driver circuitry. so you check at the main power input leads coming from the car's power system which is a steady DC power from the battery.

I think you are confused as to how power in cars works, all cars have a somewhat 13-16 volt steady DC with a lot of electrical noise.

Re:funny...

[jeffb (2.718)]

Perhaps, but it seems like you're confused between voltage and current. If a driver uses a switching current regulator, and doesn't have a supply-side filter, it's going to be drawing full current for part of its duty cycle and no current during the rest. Maybe it has a filter to smooth that demand, maybe not -- as you said, a car's electrical system is pretty noisy to begin with.

It might be that all the publications quoting efficiency figures for LEDs and HIDs are wrong. Or it might be that your current meter is wrong. For that matter, it could be that your eyes looking at your garage door aren't quite as accurate as, oh, say, a photographic exposure meter, never mind an integrating sphere. I'm not saying that your HIDs aren't brighter than your LEDs -- just that, without specifying what you're using to measure current or brightness, you're not giving us much to go on.

I got mine! Screw you Jack.

[willy everlearn]

Who care about blinding on coming traffic? I can see just fine!

Re:Bright Headlights Blind Drivers, High Beam Only

[Lumpy]

Then you will hate me. My motorcycle has a pair of 3W red led lights that blink 5 times then go steady for my brake light. It's to make the drooling moron car drivers actually SEE that I am stopping.

The reason tail lights are getting brighter is because car drivers are getting dimmer.

Most important advantage not mentioned

[Wdi]

With laser lighting, illumination in rain can be dramatically improved, but avoiding to shine the laser onto rain drops.

http://iq.intel.com/iq/33831801/future-headlight-technology-could-make-rain-disappear

Why the arms race ??

[Prch]

Wonderful in the lab or test track in Germany, but will be a major nuisance on the roads:
. Bends: most motorists round here on full beam fail to dip until they can see oncoming cars appear round the bend, so oncoming rivers can expect serious dazzle
. Hills: same problem
. Cyclists: already get it in both eyes from LED headlights remaining on full beam, and lose any night vision once the car has gone
. Pedestrians: can now expect dazzle from 600 metres instead of 300. Great news!
. Comatose drivers: On an average 45 minute commute, I meet 2-3 motorists driving around on full beam, oblivious to others flashing them – or perhaps they borrowed the car and can’t find the controls.
. Flashing other motorists: It’s nice to let others out of side roads by flashing your headlights briefly to main beam. They’re usually 20 metres away, not 600 so will emerge from a junction temporarily dazzled. Great contribution to road safety

Seriously, this is a solution looking for a problem and shouldn’t be type approved.
I’ve updated my bike lights to twin triple Crees just to force oncoming cars to dip beam.

Re:Why the arms race ??

[Alioth]

Try also wearing something retroreflective if you're out on the bike at night. Anyone with full beams still on will get it reflected straight back at them (your retroreflectives will look as dazzling to them as they are to you). The plus point of retroreflectives is that the drivers of cars on dipped beams can see you well outside of the nominal range of the dipped headlights so they'll be able to recognise what you are a lot further away.

Re:At what replacement cost?

[evilviper]

If you're buying an Audi or a BMW, the price of replacing a headlight is not something that's going to concern you...

And the up-front price is very misleading... While a basic halogen headlight may only cost around $10, it uses 8X more electricity than an equivalent LED, and only lasts perhaps 1/10th as long. So you'll save money with LEDs from not having to replace them as often, not to mention the benefit of never having your lights burn out for the lifetime of the car. But the real savings comes from using 1/8th as much electricity... The conversion losses from gasoline to kinetic, then to electricity are huge, and the electricity savings from switching to LEDs will noticably affect your gas mileage on any reasoably fuel efficient vehicle.

Fun, wow

[Maury Markowitz]

So the focused ones that blind me every time they go over a bump in the road is now going to be even worse?

Great.

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[sonamchauhan]

Good. My favourite is a human failsafe -- a Russian officer who refused to classify radar anomalies as an American ICBM launches, hence preventing WWIII.

Now I ask - are these really 'great towering achievements'? Or rather, are these just accounts of near-disasters narrowly averted by the failsafes that they sorely needed.

My point is simple - when the incremental risk is out of all proportion to incremental benefit, its best to scrap that technology.

In my book, that includes nuclear power (with the failsafes on offer now), nuclear weapons, and now... 'laser headlights' on cars.
The reasons:
  incremental benefit = 30% off on the small fraction of gas which powers headlamps, doubling the range of headlights.
  incremental risk: dazzling other drivers, blinding accidents (when lenses break), ubiquitous availability of technology that can be used to permanently blind large crowds of people

Not in germany at least

[aepervius]

My old dynamo was 6 watt , and I replaced it with a fully legal 12 watt dynamo. There is no limitation on input energy , which would be downright stupid, but on output "lux" over a specific surface.

Re:Not in germany at least

[locofungus]

That's rather interesting because:

http://www.nabendynamo.de/prod...

Electric Power: 6V / 3W according to German government's road traffic regulations (StVZO)

German Mark of Conformity: ~~~ K 687 for 16"-28" (400-716 mm) in combination with Linkhinweis Edelux

Correction

[aepervius]

the german norm I read states lumen and candela.

First ones I see

[ThatsNotPudding]

I'm narcing to the FBI. 3. Profit!

dupe

[umafuckit]

dupe.

Re: ..you'll be able to scream, 'fire the lasers!'

[binarylarry]

Actually, based on the quality of Facebook's services, I'm led to believe it's more of a DERPA initiative.

Just don't drive towards a plane

[Lawrence_Bird]

or risk a 10K fine

No...

[Type44Q]

But the coolest part of all this?

The dealer getting to charge $7,000 for a replacement OEM headlight??

Shark

[JoeMerchant]

Gotta get these on the Hyundai Tiburons!

Imaginary problems

[sjbe]

And what happens in an accident... when the lens is smashed open, when the blue laser beam accidentally shines into a first responder's eyes?

Will never happen. This is an imaginary failure mode. It's about as likely as the first responder being blinded by a unicorn fart.

Mountain = Molehill

[sjbe]

Repeat that to the first person blinded by these headlights.

I will be happy to in the even that this ever actually occurs. Since it won't though I'm not terribly worried.

Hmmm... Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island. Your turn now -- tell me three great towering achievements of "safeguards and cutoffs that fail safe."

Nice bit of reductio ad absurdum. A nuclear power plant is clearly exactly like a headlight in an automobile. Please save us from these lights that are out to kill us all!

Re:At what replacement cost?

[scorp1us]

Good call on the programmer part.

The Vacuum Tube is not considered a solid-state device. Your bulb most closely resembles a vacuum tube - and that filament bounces around and is subject to various stresses that solid state electronics are not.

The other consderation is that with lasers, a primary concern is heat dissipation. Top lasers are only about 33% effective, meaning you generate twice as much heat as you do light. Therefore from the get-go cooling is a concern. Whereas with LEDs cooling is the last thing anyone thinks about.

How's that for a 'programmer'?

PHOSPHOR, not "phosphorus"...

[jeffb (2.718)]

The stuff that glows yellow when you hit it with blue light is a "phosphor". Yellow phosphorus is the stuff that catches fire on exposure to air. Different materials. I've seen a number of news articles that get this wrong.

It gets confusing, because while phosphors are intended to be luminescent (emitting light when stimulated by another form of energy), they can be phosphorescent (continuing to glow after the stimulus is removed) or just fluorescent (only emitting while the stimulus is applied). But "fluor" apparently never caught on as a noun, I guess.

Pedantry aside, your main point's correct, though (and deserves more mod points). These lights don't emit "laser beams", just LED-style white light (a lot of blue mixed with a broad range of green through red).

Re:PHOSPHOR, not "phosphorus"...

[Ivan Stepaniuk]

You are right! According to Wikipedia "Phosphorus, the chemical element named for its light-emitting behavior, emits light due to chemiluminescence, not phosphorescence; hence it is not a phosphor.", go figure!

To make it even more confusing, as a native Spanish speaker, I use the same word "fósforo" for both the chemical element and the luminescent substances.

Re:PHOSPHOR, not "phosphorus"...

[jeffb (2.718)]

To make it even more confusing, as a native Spanish speaker, I use the same word "fósforo" for both the chemical element and the luminescent substances.

As an embarrassingly typical American, I'll try to remember that if I ever manage to learn Spanish as well as you've mastered English. :)

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[Alioth]

But is the incremental risk out of all proportion? You've not demonstrated this. First we know it's an LED laser. LED lasers tend not to put out a collimated beam - your laser pointer for instance isn't just a laser diode with a bit of protective glass on the front, it also includes a collimating lens to keep the beam narrow. Without this lens the beam of the naked laser diode would have about a 30 degree angle on it. The danger from powerful lasers is due to the beam being highly collimated (all the energy focused into one very small spot). If the beam without a lens spreads out at 30 degrees without a lens, it's not more dangerous than any other type of lamp of equivalent power with a beam spread out over an equivalent angle.

It's also highly likely that the laser, phosphor and lens will be one moulded assembly, so if you break the lens you're also pretty much likely to break the laser diode at the same time, and any significant disruption to the assembly will also ruin the heatsink causing the diode to overheat and fail quickly. It'll also not be trivial to disassemble, and will still require the addition of a collimating lens system to form a dangerous narrow beam.

Re:Aircraft?

[PPH]

That could be an unintended benefit.

Pilot: "Gee. What's that BMW doing up here in the clouds?"

Re: tighter?

[wasteoid]

I believe the correct phrase is "wrapped up like a douche"

nuclear cars

[wasteoid]

I prefer to think they would detonate on impact into a small mushroom cloud, similar to how it works in Fallout 3.

Re:At what replacement cost?

[jeffb (2.718)]

The other consderation is that with lasers, a primary concern is heat dissipation. Top lasers are only about 33% effective, meaning you generate twice as much heat as you do light. Therefore from the get-go cooling is a concern. Whereas with LEDs cooling is the last thing anyone thinks about.

How's that for a 'programmer'?

About the same as a lighting engineer saying "with computers so fast today, code efficiency is the last thing anyone thinks about."

You'll find that cooling is the first thing almost everyone thinks about when designing high-power (multi-watt) LED lighting systems, because LEDs will cook themselves in a jiffy if you do it wrong.

As best I can tell, blue LEDs in general are more efficient than blue solid-state lasers, but not by a whole lot -- less than a factor of two. But with a blue-LED emitter coated in yellow phosphor, you've got all the heat from both LED inefficiency and phosphor inefficiency being dissipated in the same small area. With the headlight design here, the emitter and the phosphor are separated, and I'll be that makes the thermal engineering a good bit easier.

Re:At what replacement cost?

[scorp1us]

Well he'd be right for the most part. Unless you're dealing with very large data sets, no one pays much mind. They all use Python, or PHP or JavaScript. (point is things are trending to higher level languages without JIT, save for Java and C#) And it's true for the most part. If you're not looking at asymptotic running times, the practice of buying a faster processor outweighs developer time and risk in producing constant-time (shaving time off an operation) or linearly (shaving time off each item of an array) faster code. Meanwhile $50/hr developer optimizing code for just 1 hour can take you from a
$50 Intel Celeron G1610 Ivy Bridge 2.6GHz LGA 1155 55W Dual-Core Desktop Processor BX80637G1610 to a
$100 Intel Pentium G3430 Haswell 3.3GHz LGA 1150 54W Dual-Core Desktop Processor Intel HD
then add in the risks of producing more complex, harder to debug code, and constant-time or linear-time speedups are not of much concern. Of course when dealing with (O)N^2 or more, optimization is very important.

But the LED *itself* wasn't designed for white light or heat dissipation, the junction is somewhat isolated though recent designs with the interest of highpower LEDs have resulted in substantial improvements. But it's till the same "bolt a heatsink on the backside" approach. I'm very interested in lighting technology. I thought the most efficient for high-power white light was inductive gas excitation, where a chamber of gas the size of a grain of rice was able to produce 100W bulb equivelent at a fraction of LED. I can't find the article at the moment.

The article claimed that he laser system is 30% more efficient than comparable LED systems. And yes the separation should help heat dissipation.

Re:At what replacement cost?

[ColdWetDog]

Until you can 3D print me a teleporter keep on inventing.

Oh, he can stop as soon as he gets to Girlfriend v. 3.01.

Re:I Don't Think So

[ColdWetDog]

For $180 that flashlight better cook breakfast and kill zombies in it's spare time.

Umm, high-beams?

[holophrastic]

My car, with it's thirty-year old headlight system also has the ability to having greater and brighter operation. They are called high-beams, and they are totally useless when there's another car within three kilometres of me. Modern bright low-beams already blind me, forcing me to swerve two-cars back and high-beam the guy who was low-beaming me until he pulls off the road to ask me why.

Putting the sun into a car isn't helpful.

Does *anyone* here actually, you know, drive?

[whitroth]

At night? Or do you only drive on streets that are 100% of the time tangent to the surface of the Earth?

I've always hated you idiots with blue headlights, which are brighter and more blinding that regular, and then there are the states that are so "free" that they don't have annual safety inspections which include ALIGNING YOUR HEADLIGHTS.

I know, no one here knows what that means.

And now, lasers, or LEDs, or whatever? Great, if I get totally blinded by your bloody headlights, I'll make sure that when I have my accided becase of that, I'll slam into your driver's side door at full speed.

                  mark

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[TangoMargarine]

Hmmm... Fukushima, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island. Your turn now -- tell me three great towering achievements of "safeguards and cutoffs that fail safe." :)

The very fact that they work well means that you won't hear about them.

Re:At what replacement cost?

[toddestan]

That should be good enough for a headlight. If you assume an average lifetime speed of 30 MPH and the lights are always on when driven, the lights will last for 600,000 to 1,500,000 miles which is well beyond the lifetime of a typical car.

Re:At what replacement cost?

[viperidaenz]

The HID lights some cars have been using for the last decade or so last the life of the car too though.
They're not quite as good as LED in terms of efficiency, but they're brighter than a 55W halogen and consume 35W.

They don't die a premature death when they get hot though. Like when you install them next to an internal combustion engine idling in traffic on a hot day in direct sunlight...

Re: Sharks with frickin' BMWs

[billstewart]

Lawyers seem to buy a lot of BMWs.

So they don't blink like LEDs? Good!

[billstewart]

What I really hate about LED lights on cars or road signs is that they're blinking fast enough that you don't notice it if you're looking at it straight on, but if you turn your head the blink turns into a trail of images because of the speed that your eyes and nervous system process such things. That would be really annoying to have in oncoming headlights.

Re:So they don't blink like LEDs? Good!

[Immerman]

That's not something inherent to LEDs though - that's all in the power system. Usually it's a sign that they're powered by cheap half-wave rectified AC (a.k.a. they are a polarized device plugged directly into AC), though even full-wave rectified AC causes some minor flickering if unfiltered. Powered from DC though there shouldn't be any flickering, unless there's some using pulsation based "digital dimming" involved.

Re:Blindness / Bad Idea

[AK Marc]

The laser goes around a corner of delicate mirrors. It's impossible to "smash" then lens in a manner that leaves it operable in the manner you describe.

Why do you hate technology?