OOC:
How would that device cause accidents? If I'm understanding it correctly, you need to stop the car before you use it. So, I don't see how it would cause any more collisions than stopping your car on the side of the road for any other reason.
And is this really a DBWI, given that, as far as I know, that particular type of car-phone was never produced?
How would that device cause accidents?
... Come to think of it, wouldn't simple phones that connect to some car service company every few miles along the freeway be very efficient if you have car troubles? I wonder why nobody ever thought of that...
He's parked on the wrong side of the road, facing oncoming traffic.
yours,
Sam R.
OOC: Are we assuming cell phones never got invented in this world? I find that rather doubtful especially since computing and information technology has apparently developed enough for *AH.com to exist.
Use of voice comms by aircrew is primarily in the furtherance of safety and efficiency, not so the co-pilot can have a pizza waiting when he lands...Aircraft pilots routinely use radio/voice communications, on multiple channels. Its a essential part of their job. Its safe in part because of training, and in part because the license and qualification screening filters out the people who can't handle it. I expect if automobile drivers were screened and trained at some equivalent level to aircraft pilots there would be be a problem with this. ...and it might solve a lot of other safety problems.
In the military we had internal intercoms between combat vehicle crew, and radio comms between vehicles and command posts. These were often in near continuous use by the crew including the drivers. Again those who were incapable & inept were screened out & the competent trained.
Use of voice comms by aircrew is primarily in the furtherance of safety and efficiency, not so the co-pilot can have a pizza waiting when he lands...
I never said a waiting pizza couldn't be efficient...That happened a more than a few times. But, my point was about the training that qualifies the operator to use the communications device without compromising safety. A very high portion of people holding automobile licenses will never be close to qualification for a aircraft operators license. In the military we disqualified a lot of people who had civilian drivers licenses, but who could not cope with a military vehicle and its internal communications.
For private automobiles, the safety focus has been on the equipment. Testing, training, and competency standards for the operator have at best stood still since the mid 20th Century. Drug and alcohol related disqualification being the exception. In some US states the standards have regressed in the last three to five decades. Would there be a economic gain had there been less attention to the hardware and more to the operators competency? Was if licensing standards had for the past 75 years cut out the bottom 10% in ability at safely driving a private auto? What about 20% ?