Pre 1985.
robthedog:
damoq:
Mirror Cam is just another piece of technology like auto boxes, digital tachos, AEBS etc that we will all get soon, like it or not. No doubt all manufactures will offer mirror cam as standard within a few years anyway.
I wouldn’t want to go back to manual gearboxes and tachos now anyway, and no doubt will feel the same about mirrors when it all eventually goes mirror cam.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Since when haven’t they had tachos ?
The timeline for having a tacograph fitted was from Jan.1980 to Oct. 81. I’m not sure from when they had to be used though.
If you can be bothered there is a long parliamentary dialogue on the subject in Hansard.
Somewhere I will have an invoice for having a tacho fitted to my Commer in 1981.
robthedog:
damoq:
Mirror Cam is just another piece of technology like auto boxes, digital tachos, AEBS etc that we will all get soon, like it or not. No doubt all manufactures will offer mirror cam as standard within a few years anyway.
I wouldn’t want to go back to manual gearboxes and tachos now anyway, and no doubt will feel the same about mirrors when it all eventually goes mirror cam.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Since when haven’t they had tachos ?
I meant analog tachos [emoji85]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
elsa Lad:
Old John:
Anyway, I’ll try to be like the Maoster, and reserve judgement until I’ve driven a lorry with cameras instead of mirrors, when I will be able to make an informed judgement. ( a somewhat unusual circumstance among some members, myself included, I think)Personally I am looking forward to having a go in one, then I make a judgement after that. Why knock something you haven’t tried?
Why would I need to try it to know that replacing a 3d rearward vision system with a 2d one is not ony retrograde it’s dangerous.
Carryfast:
nomiS36:
the maoster:
I’ll give my opinion on mirrorless lorries once I’ve driven one, right up until then any opinion I give is essentially false and based on prejudice. Just saying like.+1
The fact that it’s replacing a 3d infinite range finder, in the form of a mirror image combined with human eyes and brain, with an inferior 2d camera image isn’t an opinion.
Nor is the fact that they couldn’t create a 3d camera system with that type of range ability even if they wanted to.
So effectively they’ve replaced, a viable 3d system of rearward vision, with a viewing area of around the size of a 1970’s ERF A series mirror, but also reduced to a 2d image at far greater expense and unreliability.That’s progress.
Also be interesting to see what those TV screens look like with bright sunshine on them.
Carryfast has once again googled something he barely understands, and now proceeds to copy-paste a piece of drivel he believes to be grou breaking truth…
I think (though one can never be too sure regarding anything cf posts) what he is actually getting at is nothing to do with 2d or 3d but more to do with “dynamic viewing”… Let me explain…
With a mirror if you looked at what it’s reflecting without moving either your body or your head you are looking at a static reflection/image, however once you move either left, right, forward or backwards that reflection/image dynamically moves/changes also .
With a screen/monitor though it doesn’t matter how you look at it it will only portray what the camera relays to it and unless you physically interact via a button or touchscreen press will remain constant.
Do we need 8K TVs. Did we need 4K TVs. 1080p even.
I watched Baywatch in the 1990s on a big old CRT monitor and that was good enough for me. If it ain’t broke then don’t fix it.
My dad still tells me stories of having to turn the TV over with a pair of pliers. I think I might buy one of them to really watch Emmerdale old school. And why are TVs wide screen now. What was wrong with the old 4:3 format.
Anyway, that’s enough talk about trucks and TVs, I’m off to do mi washing.
the nodding donkey:
Carryfast:
The fact that it’s replacing a 3d infinite range finder, in the form of a mirror image combined with human eyes and brain, with an inferior 2d camera image isn’t an opinion.
Nor is the fact that they couldn’t create a 3d camera system with that type of range ability even if they wanted to.
So effectively they’ve replaced, a viable 3d system of rearward vision, with a viewing area of around the size of a 1970’s ERF A series mirror, but also reduced to a 2d image at far greater expense and unreliability.That’s progress.
Also be interesting to see what those TV screens look like with bright sunshine on them.Carryfast has once again googled something he barely understands, and now proceeds to copy-paste a piece of drivel he believes to be grou breaking truth…
As in most other cases I actually ‘googled’ the answer to a question I personally already knew for the benefit of the sceptics.
Fact replacing a mirror combined with the human brain and two eyes with a 2d camera system is a case of replacing an infinite 3d range finder with an inferior 2d image projector.
The bit I’d got wrong was the positioning of the screens which proves the fact that I only googled all the information after the fact of what I’d originally said not before. 
Reef:
I think (though one can never be too sure regarding anything cf posts) what he is actually getting at is nothing to do with 2d or 3d but more to do with “dynamic viewing”… Let me explain…
No it’s deffo an issue of 2d v 3d.It wouldn’t even be possible to make a 3d camera system which works over the range required and which is provided by a mirror, a brain and two eyes.
Blind auto boxes were the first pathetic attempt at road going AI now they’ve excelled themselves with the stupidity of it all.
Let’s save pennies in fuel costs, including the loss of tax revenues, which will need to be replaced, at the cost of fatal accidents, resulting from botched lane changes, or turning into traffic , involving millions at a time.That’s progress.
Carryfast:
Total unbelievable idiocy.
Going back to basics mirrors are in an arc line of sight scanning from left to right and right to left and ahead through the windscreen.
It’s obvious that staring at a TV screen on the dash at below windscreen height totally zb’s up that scanning process.
Running into something or someone while watching a TV screen would be grounds for a charge of dangerous driving so why not in this case.
Well look on bright side old bean, wont be affecting you will they? Good as ever at knowing facts I see too, they aren’t below windscreen height or on dash as I see you found out after spouting your opinions, how unusual 
Carryfast:
It’s like auto boxes that can’t see a roundabout or a hill ahead.Let’s replace the best combination of eyes and limbs with inferior electronics so someone can make a profit from the needless tech.
So Carry old fruit what is the most recent auto truck you’ve driven that you base these opinions about autos on? Because heaven forfend you have opinions based on no real world experience at all 
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
Total unbelievable idiocy.
Going back to basics mirrors are in an arc line of sight scanning from left to right and right to left and ahead through the windscreen.
It’s obvious that staring at a TV screen on the dash at below windscreen height totally zb’s up that scanning process.
Running into something or someone while watching a TV screen would be grounds for a charge of dangerous driving so why not in this case.Well look on bright side old bean, wont be affecting you will they? Good as ever at knowing facts I see too, they aren’t below windscreen height or on dash as I see you found out after spouting your opinions, how unusual
Firstly that proved that I didn’t get the information by googling it.
While if they’re stupid enough to think that replacing a nice clear mirror, two eyes and a brain 3d rear vision system with an inferior 2d TV system then I can surely be forgiven for thinking that they’d also be stupid enough to put the screens on the dash. 
While putting them on the door posts just creates the other issue of tv screens washed out by bright sunlight just as even many other types of dash mounted info screens often are.
It’s just another attempt by the modern generation techno freaks at creating an expensive, inferior, less reliable solution to a non existent problem as a type of needless job creation scheme.
When they really need to stay where they belong in the electronics industry and leave proper mechanical engineering to the proper mechanical engineers. Like proper old school manual transmissions mirrors being a case of it ain’t broke don’t fix it in that regard.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
It’s like auto boxes that can’t see a roundabout or a hill ahead.Let’s replace the best combination of eyes and limbs with inferior electronics so someone can make a profit from the needless tech.So Carry old fruit what is the most recent auto truck you’ve driven that you base these opinions about autos on? Because heaven forfend you have opinions based on no real world experience at all
He must have been driving an actros to be thinking that about autos.
Terry T:
Do we need 8K TVs. Did we need 4K TVs. 1080p even.I watched Baywatch in the 1990s on a big old CRT monitor and that was good enough for me. If it ain’t broke then don’t fix it.
My dad still tells me stories of having to turn the TV over with a pair of pliers. I think I might buy one of them to really watch Emmerdale old school. And why are TVs wide screen now. What was wrong with the old 4:3 format.
Anyway, that’s enough talk about trucks and TVs, I’m off to do mi washing.
All the stuff you listed that has been modernised are improvements to an old system, and a better system.
Like I said, the cameras are an alternative system to one that did not really need changed, and unlike your other examples is hardly an improvement, nor a necessity imo…except maybe for those who are unable to blindside reverse, (where practice to hone skill would have been a better option rather than the usual dumbing down scenario favoured today… )
DickyNick:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
It’s like auto boxes that can’t see a roundabout or a hill ahead.Let’s replace the best combination of eyes and limbs with inferior electronics so someone can make a profit from the needless tech.So Carry old fruit what is the most recent auto truck you’ve driven that you base these opinions about autos on? Because heaven forfend you have opinions based on no real world experience at all
He must have been driving an actros to be thinking that about autos.
Firstly an auto box doesn’t have eyes so it can’t see what’s ahead of it which sort of zb’s up the idea of always being in the correct gear for the situation.
Probably because, like TV cameras instead of mirrors, the thing couldn’t see in 3d anyway to know what it’s looking at and where it is and how fast it’s approaching.
But saving legs and arms from wear obviously matters more.
No such excuse for trading good old fashioned 3d mirror imagery so no one gets wiped out by dodgy lane changes and turns.
Also who’s going to pay for all that lost fuel tax revenue.
I’ll leave Carryfast to misunderstand the concept of 3D versus 2D, and flog that bag to death…
Meanwhile, I would like to hear more experiences from those who actually drive them, about their performance in the dark (the mirrors… ), and inclement weather. . Are the backlit screens a nuisance, and do your eyes have to continually adjust? Do they induce fatigue?
What is a definite huge improvement, is the removal of the wardrobe doors and their horrendous blindspot.
Reef:
I think (though one can never be too sure regarding anything cf posts) what he is actually getting at is nothing to do with 2d or 3d but more to do with “dynamic viewing”… Let me explain…With a mirror if you looked at what it’s reflecting without moving either your body or your head you are looking at a static reflection/image, however once you move either left, right, forward or backwards that reflection/image dynamically moves/changes also .
With a screen/monitor though it doesn’t matter how you look at it it will only portray what the camera relays to it and unless you physically interact via a button or touchscreen press will remain constant.
Exactly.
the nodding donkey:
Reef:
I think (though one can never be too sure regarding anything cf posts) what he is actually getting at is nothing to do with 2d or 3d but more to do with “dynamic viewing”… Let me explain…With a mirror if you looked at what it’s reflecting without moving either your body or your head you are looking at a static reflection/image, however once you move either left, right, forward or backwards that reflection/image dynamically moves/changes also .
With a screen/monitor though it doesn’t matter how you look at it it will only portray what the camera relays to it and unless you physically interact via a button or touchscreen press will remain constant.
Agree…also, if you are long sighted, do you need to stick your reading gigs on, every time you need to see what’s behind?
Carryfast:
DickyNick:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
It’s like auto boxes that can’t see a roundabout or a hill ahead.Let’s replace the best combination of eyes and limbs with inferior electronics so someone can make a profit from the needless tech.So Carry old fruit what is the most recent auto truck you’ve driven that you base these opinions about autos on? Because heaven forfend you have opinions based on no real world experience at all
He must have been driving an actros to be thinking that about autos.
Firstly an auto box doesn’t have eyes so it can’t see what’s ahead of it which sort of zb’s up the idea of always being in the correct gear for the situation.
Probably because, like TV cameras instead of mirrors, the thing couldn’t see in 3d anyway to know what it’s looking at and where it is and how fast it’s approaching.But saving legs and arms from wear obviously matters more.
No such excuse for trading good old fashioned 3d mirror imagery so no one gets wiped out by dodgy lane changes and turns.
Also who’s going to pay for all that lost fuel tax revenue.
Nice avoiding of the question. What’s the most recent auto box you’ve driven that you base your opinions on Carry?
switchlogic:
Nice avoiding of the question. What’s the most recent auto box you’ve driven that you base your opinions on Carry?
I’ve never driven a full auto box in a truck in my life.
What auto box would I have needed to drive to know that the thing is blind it can’t see what’s ahead of it so it obviously can’t predict what gear it needs to be in anywhere at any time.
So why couldn’t they rig it with a camera system in that regard.Here’s a clue for the same reason that cameras are no good for determining what’s happening behind and at the sides of the truck.