Video Camera instead of a windshield?

[Glen]

I have pictures of a couple of streamlined motor cycles and as I recall Jack Castello had one of his liners (4wheel) and had visibility problems at the lakes and was asked to remove it. He did. These were parascope  type. It seems once they get a little off course or lose the cone line and start searching for it is where the problems begin.  There have been a few cars with limited side vision that have lost the course.

[hotrod]

It is the sort of thing that any reasonable designer would wire two independent cameras and video displays or have some sort of physical backup even if it is only a very small peep hole. As you say loss of electronic vision would be the sort of event that should result in instant deployment of the chute and cutting power.

Speaking of electronic aids another interesting concept that could augment electronic vision, would be to add an in car GPS display with way points marked for key reference points on the course.
It would prevent folks getting totally disoriented out on the course at the end of a run and wandering across other courses trying to find the return road.

Depending on camera location and screen size, course visibility could in some respects be better than what you would see through periscopes and some very small windows.

If I were designing such a system there would be a lot of time spent thinking about backup power, and emergency options if the display went blank.

A three camera system with some oblique view would help eliminate the "losing the course" situation.

Larry

[dw230]

I swear Pat, if you are having such a hard time with the rules why don't you move on to something else?

DW

[tortoise]

On one of the HPV bicycle racers, the driver lays on his back with his head to the front, looking up to see forward through a mirror.  Having the widest part of the body at the front is a definite aero advantage. Sometimes he doesn't fall.

[SaltRat]

There was a HPV 'liner that used video.

Can't remember the name offhand, but if you google HPV streamliners you could find it.

Of course, trying to go 80mph (he didn't) and trying to go 280mph are a little different.

I'll stand behind the start line, thank you.  (not saying it can't be done, but that I don't want to get run over out at the 3 mile w/ my beverage.)

[grumm441]

I'll stand behind the start line, thank you.  (not saying it can't be done, but that I don't want to get run over out at the 3 mile w/ my beverage.)

Over on course 4 
G

[Glen]

Without black lines to drive between it would be so easy to lose direction. The cones and mile markers go by pretty damn fast at speed and easy to drift off course with a camera or periscope type device for proper directional visibility. You also have to factor in the sun or even salt spray getting on the lens.

[dw230]

If you aim the camera 1/4 mile down course the black markers and orange mile signs will be in your view. Next time you are at the salt sit on the ground with your head at about the same height as a streamliner driver pov. The makers look pretty solid from there. When you are sitting in your 4 wheel drive, 30" tired truck the pov is not the same.

DW

[Milwaukee Midget]

Sheesh, there's an awful lot of smartass replies in here considering how many other vehicles today are driven (or flown!) with synthetic vision or computerized optics.  

Yes, but . . .

There is EXTENSIVE training involved, both in simulators and in the air.  If an operator is capable of finding a place to practice, logging the hours necessary to pilot a video monitored LSR vehicle to the point of competence, and construct a simulator to offer up the potential sensations and problems one might have in order to develop the skills to do this, and the SCTA is comfortable letting a qualified person do it, it would indeed be a step forward for technology.

But please let me know when this vehicle is going to head down the salt - prudence suggests that until this technology is fool proof, I'll want to be somewhere behind it.

I'm not dismissing the idea, I just don't think we're there yet for LSR.

[Tman]

To go along with Nathans reply..................WhyTF, would you NOT want to see your pass first hand!? Anyone can watch Youtube or Vimeo and save the cost of actually building and running a car

[dieselgeek]

Sheesh, there's an awful lot of smartass replies in here considering how many other vehicles today are driven (or flown!) with synthetic vision or computerized optics.  

Yes, but . . .

There is EXTENSIVE training involved, both in simulators and in the air.  If an operator is capable of finding a place to practice, logging the hours necessary to pilot a video monitored LSR vehicle to the point of competence, and construct a simulator to offer up the potential sensations and problems one might have in order to develop the skills to do this, and the SCTA is comfortable letting a qualified person do it, it would indeed be a step forward for technology.

But please let me know when this vehicle is going to head down the salt - prudence suggests that until this technology is fool proof, I'll want to be somewhere behind it.

I'm not dismissing the idea, I just don't think we're there yet for LSR.

I guess I didn't realize minivans require extensive pilot training and simulations before soccer mom's can learn to use the backup cameras.   


I understand your points, but am suggesting we all not be so afraid of technology.   

[Stainless1]

you guys are going to make Freud get a rental car with a backup camera to test this theory.... 

[Tman]

you guys are going to make Freud get a rental car with a backup camera to test this theory.... 

I'll buy the beer and bring my lawn chair to watch!

[McRat]

IIRC, Charles Lindbergh had no front windshield on the Spirit of St. Louis.

One of his famous quotes:

"What kind of man would live where there is no daring? I don't believe in taking foolish chances, but nothing can be accomplished without taking any chance at all."

[Tman]

Oh! And submarines don't have windshields either!!!!!!!!!!