News & Analysis
Comment
Sheetal.Pandey
Its a great idea to have rear view camera for blind spots. Mnaytimes it hurts ...
selinz
This proposal is insane. Are people too lazy to look over their shoulder? The ...
Growth seen for rear-view cameras
Mark LaPedus
1/6/2011 8:34 PM EST
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A proposed mandate from the U.S. Department of Transportation will cause sales of new cars with rear-view park assist cameras in the country to quadruple, according to iSuppli, now part of IHS Inc.
''The mandate calls for all new motor vehicles weighing less than 10,000 pounds sold in the United States to incorporate backup cameras by Sept. 1, 2014. The cameras are designed to eliminate blind spots behind cars that contribute to backover collisions,'' according to iSuppli.
''Because of this, all new cars sold in model year 2015 are expected to include rear-view park assist cameras, up from iSuppli’s previous forecast of only 20 percent,'' according to iSuppli.
ISuppli now projects that from 2011 through 2017, 71.2 million new cars in the United States will be sold with rear-view cameras for park assistance. The pre-mandate forecast predicted only 19.1 million for the same period.
With the U.S. market beginning to accelerate dramatically in 2012, sales will rise 119.9 percent to 2.8 million units, up from 1.3 million units in 2011. Sales then will increase by 117.4 percent in 2013 to reach 5.98 million, and will climb another 91.1 percent in 2014 to hit 11.4 million. By 2017, a total of 17.1 million cars, representing the entire estimated new-vehicle fleet, will be sold with rear-view cameras in the United States.
However, there is a down side. ''The rollout of rear-view camera technology on the massive U.S. automotive fleet will be costly. NHTSA estimates that a rear-view camera system will cost from $159 to $203 when installed on a vehicle without an existing display,'' according to the report.
''The mandate calls for all new motor vehicles weighing less than 10,000 pounds sold in the United States to incorporate backup cameras by Sept. 1, 2014. The cameras are designed to eliminate blind spots behind cars that contribute to backover collisions,'' according to iSuppli.
''Because of this, all new cars sold in model year 2015 are expected to include rear-view park assist cameras, up from iSuppli’s previous forecast of only 20 percent,'' according to iSuppli.
ISuppli now projects that from 2011 through 2017, 71.2 million new cars in the United States will be sold with rear-view cameras for park assistance. The pre-mandate forecast predicted only 19.1 million for the same period.
With the U.S. market beginning to accelerate dramatically in 2012, sales will rise 119.9 percent to 2.8 million units, up from 1.3 million units in 2011. Sales then will increase by 117.4 percent in 2013 to reach 5.98 million, and will climb another 91.1 percent in 2014 to hit 11.4 million. By 2017, a total of 17.1 million cars, representing the entire estimated new-vehicle fleet, will be sold with rear-view cameras in the United States.
However, there is a down side. ''The rollout of rear-view camera technology on the massive U.S. automotive fleet will be costly. NHTSA estimates that a rear-view camera system will cost from $159 to $203 when installed on a vehicle without an existing display,'' according to the report.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
daleste
1/7/2011 10:38 AM EST
I think it is a great idea to have the backup camera on your car, but I don't think the government should mandate it.
Sign in to Reply
Robotics Developer
1/7/2011 11:05 AM EST
I agree, less government mandates more personal choice/responsibility. If the camera is a good idea for the price it will sell, if it is too expensive or not valued it should not. Would the backup protection be better served with the radar currently in use in some cars? Is this a more cost effective means: no display just an indicator light/sound?
Sign in to Reply
DrQuine
1/7/2011 11:13 AM EST
Will "The rollout of rear-view camera technology on the massive U.S. automotive fleet be costly?" Many cars incorporate display panels because they enable multiple existing functions to be consolidated into a single space. Rear-view cameras are just one additional function for that display - and cameras have become very inexpensive. I wouldn't be surprised if the wire from the back to the front of the car provided to be the most expensive incremental cost. There will also be additional benefits. As cars become quieter, pedestrians are at risk of being hit when the cars back up. These cameras will provide an additional safety net. Finally, with reduced parking damage, insurance rates should drop enough to cover the added hardware costs.
Sign in to Reply
Duane Benson
1/7/2011 11:14 AM EST
The radar with just an indicator would likely work just fine. Comparing it to the camera would be a lot like comparing a warning light to a gauge. Wouldn't the radar be more expensive than a camera and display though?
If just a blind indicator is sufficient, than perhaps a camera with object recognition software, even if it doesn't have a display, would do the job.
Even with the camera, some sort of warning would be a good idea as people will backup without looking at the display.
Sign in to Reply
SS012373
1/7/2011 12:52 PM EST
What's the basis for the price of $159-203! That's not clear...
Sign in to Reply
selinz
1/7/2011 1:35 PM EST
This proposal is insane. Are people too lazy to look over their shoulder? The vehicles that need them are the big, heavy vehicles that have poor rear visibility... Are people too lazy to look over their shoulder?
Sign in to Reply
Sheetal.Pandey
1/7/2011 4:59 PM EST
Its a great idea to have rear view camera for blind spots. Mnaytimes it hurts very badly to turn at through shoulders and at high speeds. Looking at how big and influential the automobile market in US, its a business decision more than passenger safety.
Sign in to Reply