Skip to main content

Rear-view cameras ‘more effective than parking sensors’

Rear cameras are more effective than parking sensors at helping drivers avoid objects while travelling in reverse, but they don't help in every situation, a new Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) study shows. The study, conducted with volunteer drivers in an empty parking lot in the Los Angeles area, indicates that cameras would help prevent more reversing crashes into pedestrians in the vehicle's blind zone than parking sensors. Surprisingly, cameras by themselves worked better than sensors a
March 14, 2014 Read time: 3 mins
Rear cameras are more effective than parking sensors at helping drivers avoid objects while travelling in reverse, but they don't help in every situation, a new 7120 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) study shows.

The study, conducted with volunteer drivers in an empty parking lot in the Los Angeles area, indicates that cameras would help prevent more reversing crashes into pedestrians in the vehicle's blind zone than parking sensors. Surprisingly, cameras by themselves worked better than sensors and cameras combined.

An estimated 292 people are killed and 18,000 injured each year by drivers who back into them, usually in driveways or parking lots. Young children and elderly people are most likely to be killed in such crashes. Back-over risk is increased by the large blind zones of many vehicles, which prevent drivers from seeing objects behind the rear bumper, especially objects that are low to the ground. SUVs and pickup trucks typically have the biggest blind zones, and they are involved in more reversing crashes than cars.

The research with volunteer drivers was the second of two IIHS studies that looked at how parking sensors and backup cameras increase visibility and help drivers avoid reversing accidents. The first one measured the visibility of children to an average-size male driver in 21 vehicles, all 2010-13 models, and the degree to which each kind of technology improved visibility and detection.

In the visibility study, researchers used a pole painted with different bands to represent the average height and head size of a 12-15 month-old, a 2½-3 year-old and a 5-6 year-old. The pole was placed at various points behind each vehicle to see which portions of it were visible. The band representing the 12-15 month-old was much harder to see than the bands representing older children. On average, if it was anywhere within about 27 feet of the rear bumper, it couldn't be seen using glances and mirrors alone.

Without added technology, large SUVs were found to have the worst rear visibility, while small cars had the best. In general, the larger the vehicle, the worse the visibility.

However, the Hyundai Sonata, a midsize car, was an exception. At 263 square feet, its blind zone for a 12-15 month-old was 42 percent larger than that of the F-150 pickup truck. The Sonata's large blind zone is due in part to an extremely sloped rear window and tall rear trunk lid, while the F-150 benefited from large side mirrors designed to help with towing.

Backup cameras reduced the blind zone by about 90 percent on average. Parking sensors, which use ultrasonic sound waves or radar to detect objects around the vehicle, also reduced blind zones, but not as much. In the eight vehicles that had both technologies, the parking sensors had a small added benefit of 2-3 percentage points beyond the reductions provided by the cameras alone.

Related Content

  • March 16, 2015
    Report analyses multiple ITS projects to highlight cost and benefits
    Every year in America cost benefit analysis is carried out on dozens of ITS installations and pilot studies and the findings, along with the lessons learned, are entered into the Department of Transportation’s (USDOT’s) web-based ITS Knowledge Resources database. This database holds more than 1,600 reports and periodically the USDOT reviews the material on file to draw conclusions from this wider body of evidence. It has just published one such review ITS Benefits, Costs, and Lessons Learned: 2014 Update Re
  • September 15, 2014
    CCTV brings transit safety into view
    David Crawford looks at camera-based vulnerable road users protection systems.Safe and efficient operation of road-based transit depends on minimising the risks of incidents involving other vehicles or vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, cyclists and passengers boarding or alighting from buses or trams. The extent and quality of the visibility available to drivers is crucial in preventing and avoiding incidents. Conventionally, they have had to rely on fairly basic equipment - essentially the human
  • April 29, 2015
    Foundation funds research for informed campaigning
    ITS International talks to Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the transport research and lobbying organisation, the RAC Foundation. It is through the eyes of an economist that Professor Stephen Glaister, emeritus professor of transport and infrastructure at Imperial College London and director of the RAC Foundation, views current and future transport problems. Having spent 30 years at the London School of Economics and another 10 at Imperial, the move to the RAC Foundation was a radical departure from
  • August 19, 2015
    Tolling industry volunteers help Oklahoma boys find ‘home’
    IBTTA volunteers restore and upgrade facilities at an Oklahoma boys home during its annual Maintenance & Roadway Operations Workshop. Oklahoma receives an average of 55 tornado strikes each year. Some are small; others are huge and violent. All inspire fear. “It sounded like a freight train was headed for my house.” That’s how people often describe the sound they hear just befo