Road tractors and in-line trucks built in North America are often poorly designed for direct visibility, with their recessed cabs and prominent hoods, experts surveyed by La Presse agree. Should they come with front mirrors straight from the factory?
Published at 1:42 am. Updated at 5:00 am.
In Europe, almost all heavy vehicles have a front cabin and a flat front, which reduces the front blind spot. The fact is that since 2004, all new trucks weighing 7.5 tonnes or more must be equipped with at least one rear-view mirror – unless they meet the strict direct vision criteria – in order to operate in the Union. European.
PHOTO HENRIK KETTUNEN, BLOOMBERG ARCHIVE
In Europe, almost all heavy vehicles have a front cabin and a flat front, which reduces the front blind spot. Trucks parked in Finland in our photo.
On this side of the border, Transport Canada is responsible for vehicle construction standards.
The federal agency did not grant us an interview, but said in a lengthy email that it is conducting a research program on vehicle blind spots and consulting on technologies to improve safety. “Truck design and usage varies significantly between urban and rural environments, so a one-size-fits-all solution that requires, for example, the installation of some type of front mirror is impractical,” a spokeswoman wrote.
Transport Canada is instead focusing on the design of mandatory mirrors, driver assistance technologies and improving the driver’s direct vision.
For example, trucks with sloping hoods are not only more aerodynamic, but also reduce the blind spot at the front. Several models have been further developed in recent decades.
A fragile argument
“Although mirrors were added [antéviseurs] Although they can improve indirect visibility for drivers, they have the negative effect of reducing direct visibility,” a spokesperson told the Journal de Québec in 2010.
Since this statement from Transport Canada, our investigation shows that no fewer than 23 pedestrians have died in Montreal in situations that could have been prevented by additional mirrors.
In 2013, after the death of a 51-year-old woman under the wheels of a dump truck, a coroner wrote: “Transport Canada stressed that “the addition of anti-mirror mirrors likely would have allowed the driver to see the pedestrian” and avoid the collision .” »
“The mirrors themselves, along with the vehicle hood and front and center pillars, can create blind spots for the driver,” affirms Transport Canada in a document published in 2018.
“It becomes a choice,” notes Sébastien Bédard, an engineer at the Quebec Ministry of Transport (MTQ). Frankly, I don’t think Transport Canada has addressed the issue [en 2010], but there is a basis for the speaker’s statement: This type of mirror could create a very specific blind spot. In my opinion it is much better to have them due to the cost-benefit ratio. »
Mr Bédard explains that a simple movement of the head is enough to compensate for a blind spot caused by a mirror, which is not the case for the blind spot caused by the bonnet.
Julien Dufort, an engineer at Polytechnique Montréal, sees no dilemma: he and his team have found an adjustment method that virtually eliminates blind spots.
Focus on technology?
Another point in favor of the voluntary installation of front mirrors: “We didn’t want to limit technological development,” explains Mr. Bédard from the MTQ. As we get to about 2019-2020, many systems are evolving. Making equipment mandatory kind of sucks. [l’attention]. »
Julien Dufort, an engineer at Polytechnique Montréal, does not agree with this argument: “In transition [technologique]He believes it is never too late to enforce antivisors. There will always be a fleet of old vehicles that will not be able to integrate new technologies. It will cost too much. » And then, he emphasizes, “car mirrors have never prevented the development of other safety systems”.
The European directive also allows a camera system to replace certain classes of mandatory mirrors, in particular front mirrors.