|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 25, 2012 11:20:29 GMT
Its a good idea, although 'purists' would argue that it doesn't take into account the fact that the driver isn't having to react to moves made by the runner in quite the same way they would in a real chase.
I also wonder if this might not be a little, well, tame - from the TV viewpoint having a 'real' chase would be more satisfying, at least as a final test. It could, however, be a viable way to do early testing safely - allowing them to get an idea as to any additional safety issues they need to consider as well as tricks that a runner might be able to use to avoid the car.
They do need to do an 'urban' test, although I'd say that they should also do testing on open ground - since chases do sometimes take place over fields and the like. (Not that this would be a problem, since anywhere they would be able to do testing is likely to be a wide open space to start with.)
These could almost as dangerous as being run over.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Nov 25, 2012 11:33:03 GMT
I was thinking the viability test as an early test to see if a runner COULD keep away from a car before any serious testing took place, so if they like the idea, "Let them run with it"... Ok, Home GROAN jokes aside.....................  |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 25, 2012 11:39:16 GMT
That was what I had in mind as well.
|
|
bioLarzen
Demi-Minion
"I reject your avatars and substitute my own."
Posts: 86
|
Post by bioLarzen on Nov 27, 2012 9:13:03 GMT
One thing to note is that a human who is running at top speed isn't going to be capable of turning quite as quickly as you might think True. But the same time, he can make use of roadside objects, like a lamppost or a tree to hang on and make a (near) full speed turn - the pedestrian equivalent of the grapple hook superhero-car turn they've tried earlier. That's a sub-scenario though, when there are such roadside objects to utilize When there's nothing of that sort, it's indeed trickier to make a sudden change of direction at full dash speed. bio |
|
bioLarzen
Demi-Minion
"I reject your avatars and substitute my own."
Posts: 86
|
Post by bioLarzen on Nov 27, 2012 9:19:58 GMT
BTW, it would be useful to know what those "insurace guys" allow the guys to do and what not. Hard to tell. I mean they allegedly didn't allow Tori fall off the conveyor belt from the back of the pickup truck in protective suit - but they allowed Adam being dropped from much, much higher in freefall, protected only by bubble wrap, although - supposedly - they didn't even know for sure it would protect him in the first place, since it was what they were testing... They also let them do the driving in the bus flipping episode.
Of course one gets the feeling they only use this insurance thing as an excuse to not do things they deem too dangerous (though I doubt Adam would have found the awning fall too dangerous...), because what those insurance folks let them do and what they don't seems pretty inconsistent.
bio
|
|
|
|
Post by c64 on Nov 28, 2012 9:28:50 GMT
There is absolutely no reason why you can't test this with a real car.
Just replace the runner or the car with an overhead spotlight. When the runner or the car hits the light, the runner hat lost.
TV studios use computer controlled spotlights which can move on at least 3 axis and control the with of the beam.
Either let someone run and record the path of the run to replicate it with the spot light for the test with the real car or create a program which duplicates the agility of a car and control the spotlight with it trying to hit the runner.
And just for show, you can overlay both videos for a more realistic show. Overlaying the takes of different athletes to compare them is done for years on TV now.
I remember a test where they compared an ice skater on an oval track with an Audi Quattro with spikes. First they had let the skater absolve his rounds, then had let the Audi turn that lake upside down and made a pretty clever overlay to show where the car and where the skater had advantages. The skater won since the car had to slow down a lot taking the corners.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Nov 28, 2012 9:44:01 GMT
{quote]And just for show, you can overlay both videos for a more realistic show. Overlaying the takes of different athletes to compare them is done for years on TV now.
That is what I had in mind....
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 28, 2012 15:20:21 GMT
{quote]And just for show, you can overlay both videos for a more realistic show. Overlaying the takes of different athletes to compare them is done for years on TV now. That is what I had in mind.... and I |
|
|
|
Post by WhutScreenName on Nov 29, 2012 18:07:18 GMT
Getting an idea..... Get someone to run a course "As if being chased"..... Get that person to dodge round a few corners, run zig-zag, etc. Then get a car to run EXACTLY the same course, maybe map it out with Cones or disposable cardboard poles..... Run the video of both runs overlaid and see exactly when the car catches up with the running person?.... (If at all?...) Maybe a bit too simple?.... what do you think?.... Exactly what I was thinking. Only instead of having cones, you simply have a monitor on in front of the driver so s/he doesn't know the course ahead of time and is actually reacting to the runner on the monitor rather than anticipating the turn in the cones. While it's 'simplistic', it's by far the safest way to test the myth, |
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on Nov 29, 2012 21:34:24 GMT
Both runner and driver are sequestered away from the course until it's there turn to run. The runner's course could be plotted into a GPS system to give the driver directions of the runner's movements. I would say to let the runner move about randomly, cones would make it too predictable; after all, this, to some extent, is a test of human instinct to find safety.
|
|
bioLarzen
Demi-Minion
"I reject your avatars and substitute my own."
Posts: 86
|
Post by bioLarzen on Dec 2, 2012 17:08:34 GMT
There is absolutely no reason why you can't test this with a real car. Just replace the runner or the car with an overhead spotlight. I'm not sure you could realistically reproduce a running human's movements with a beam of light - unless the source of the light is attached to a running man... bio |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 3, 2012 2:35:55 GMT
There is absolutely no reason why you can't test this with a real car. Just replace the runner or the car with an overhead spotlight. I'm not sure you could realistically reproduce a running human's movements with a beam of light - unless the source of the light is attached to a running man... bio I would be more concerned about the driver having the same visual cues that he would have with a real runner. you can program modern remote spotlights VERY easily; and it could easily trace the path of a running man. it's the interaction between car and runner that would be the challenge. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 3, 2012 7:09:37 GMT
Got an idea.
Let the runner run free.
Map his course, but hide any changes in direction behind large paper screens...
The driver has to smash through the screen to progress.
Side idea... can you actually WILLINGLY mow down a pedestrian?....
I have this strange feeling that if I turned a corner suddenly and saw someone stood in the middle of the road, I am goina chuck the anchors out swerve violently and do anything I can to avoid them?... could I fight that impulse to actually mow someone down?... I am not sure.
If I am angry with them, how does that alter that?....
"The impulse to kill", does it exist freely in all or any non trained military personnel.
Are those that have it "Dangerous" anyway?...
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 3, 2012 15:34:59 GMT
so the driver knows to plan for an abrupt direction change at each screen? it's like the accident avoidance drills in driver's tests - the only surprise is WHICH way you're turning.
the biggest challenge is that the runner will make decisions based on what the car is doing, and the driver will make decisions based on what the runner is doing. this means that the runner will lose an important element of strategy if he runs without the car.
|
|
|
|
Post by WhutScreenName on Dec 3, 2012 16:07:18 GMT
If you are worried about the runner making different decisions with a car chasing VS just free running, then it's a matter of chasing the runner with something less intrusive. For the chase, I bet a runner reacts similar to a golf cart as they would a car, so use a golf cart in the chase.
Then use the monitor idea on the actual car and have the car "chase" the runner. If the car ever does catch up, it's only on a screen and no one is actually hurt. It'd still illustrate the point, and if MB really wanted to, they could edit in post and make it appear as though the runner was being chased by the actual car, even though they both did the 'course' at different times.
|
|
bioLarzen
Demi-Minion
"I reject your avatars and substitute my own."
Posts: 86
|
Post by bioLarzen on Dec 3, 2012 22:31:32 GMT
Got an idea. Let the runner run free. Map his course, but hide any changes in direction behind large paper screens... The driver has to smash through the screen to progress. A clever idea. One flaw maybe: the sight of the paper screen indicates that there's direction change coming. An early warning tha driver won't have at a real chase. Now, coming to think of it... including "blank" screens that have no direction change indication after them could eliminate this unfair advantage... bio |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 4, 2012 9:37:36 GMT
I was thinking of red herring screens that had no change just to keep it honest?....
I am also thinking big arrows on gantries that can be changed "At the last moment" to indicate left right straight ahead as paper would get expensive and be a waste?....
Or even a number of gates on a large car park with a flashing light above to indicate which gate to aim for next triggered at random....
Run with that, and set a sequence of which "gate" the runner and Driver must go through but dont tell them before they start, and see which gets there first?....as they pass each gate, light up the next gate?.....
|
|
|
|
Post by WhutScreenName on Dec 4, 2012 14:34:40 GMT
I think any time you have visual cues on the ground, it's going to skew the results, even if you have false cues. Seems like getting the person to free run isn't an issue, it's getting the car to do the same course without actually chasing the runner and putting them in danger. That's why I feel the monitor on the hood in front of the driver would be the best option.
Better yet, it wouldn't even have to be a monitor, it could be a set of 2 lights, a right and a left and whichever light goes on, the car turns that way until the light is off. Example, if it's a slight right turn, the light on the right is on just until the car turns enough to face that direction. If it was a full 180 with the runner going to the right, the light on the right side stays on until the car is facing the other direction.
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of the lights on the front of the car, it seems that would be the most realistic for the driver, never knowing which light is going to go on and when, and not knowing how long it stays on. Chasing a runner, just because they start to go one direction, doesn't mean they'll stay going that direction.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 5, 2012 9:16:26 GMT
WSN, Yes.... I like that idea....
I think you may have something there.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Urban Mythbuster on Dec 6, 2012 15:44:03 GMT
One other idea: set up two identical courses either at the same location or separate locations, just being sure that the terrain is the same. The runner runs a random course, the driver is given an earpiece that a spotter uses to relay the runner's actions.
|
|
