Pain's inspiration | The Columbus Dis...

Pain's inspiration | The Columbus Dispatch

There are 8 comments on the Columbus Dispatch story from Oct 19, 2009, titled Pain's inspiration | The Columbus Dispatch. In it, Columbus Dispatch reports that:

A family tragedy inspired a Bradenton resident to invent a product he hopes will save lives.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Columbus Dispatch.

Stu

Mount Vernon, OH

#1 Oct 19, 2009
Bravo to Jack Roe! Sad he had to go through such pain...but sadder still if the auto industry doesn't adopt his idea.
sulee

Columbus, OH

#2 Oct 19, 2009
I think this is a horrible idea. I just purchased a 2009 vehicle and the rear window as well as the rear side windows are all tinted. I HATE it. While I would agree that driving facing the sun is not fun, that's what visors and sunglasses are for. I hope this concept never materializes.
Sunny idea

Portsmouth, OH

#3 Oct 19, 2009
If it where the only option I could afford on a car I would have it!! More than once I"ve been terrified by the blinding of the sun even with Sunglasses. My fear was WHO I was going to hit not what. WHen driving in the morning and passing kids on their way to a bus stop and blaring sun it would be a real safety feature. I would even have my winshield replaced with one of these if avaialable.
skjk

Columbus, OH

#4 Oct 19, 2009
sulee wrote:
I think this is a horrible idea. I just purchased a 2009 vehicle and the rear window as well as the rear side windows are all tinted. I HATE it. While I would agree that driving facing the sun is not fun, that's what visors and sunglasses are for. I hope this concept never materializes.
Did you READ the article and what he was proposing? Perm tint is not what he's saying at all. God, people, read before commenting. TRANSITIONAL tinting is what he's suggesting. Not deep tint that is permanent and deep.
READ IT FIRST! Sunglasses and visors do not help every situation.
Wondering

Columbus, OH

#5 Oct 19, 2009
How wonderful if he can make this happen. What a great way to honor his daughters life! I'd like a transitional windshield, that's for sure. Fumbling for the sunglasses or the visor is just another distraction while driving!
Bill in Columbus

Galion, OH

#6 Oct 19, 2009
Lets give it a try in rear and side windows first where we now have permanent tint and see if it helps with vision on cloudy days and at night.

The problem with this glass in glasses has always been the delay when you enter a dark area after being out in the sunlight. It takes time for the glass to become clear enough to see in the reduced light.

This may be fine for glasses because you can take them off until they change if you have to but you can't do that with the windshield of your car.

This is an area where government and/or manufactures need to move very carefully.
Jim

Columbus, OH

#7 Oct 19, 2009
Bill in Columbus wrote:
Lets give it a try in rear and side windows first where we now have permanent tint and see if it helps with vision on cloudy days and at night.
The problem with this glass in glasses has always been the delay when you enter a dark area after being out in the sunlight. It takes time for the glass to become clear enough to see in the reduced light.
This may be fine for glasses because you can take them off until they change if you have to but you can't do that with the windshield of your car.
This is an area where government and/or manufactures need to move very carefully.
How old are your transition glasses. I have transition lenses as well, new transition lenses change in moments not minutes. I don't see this as a problem.

Since: Jul 09

Marion

#8 Oct 19, 2009
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't these photo sensitive lenses wear down over time?

One thing for sure is they react to UV light, not visible light. The sun is always producing UV rays so in effect would the glass always be "tinted"?

From Berkley Labs..."Full coloration of the prototype device from transparency to its darkest state requires about 10 minutes."

Also from Berkley on disadvantages to large scale use of the photochromatic glass..."They include the lack of adequate reversibility (switching back and forth from transparency to a colored state), instability of the material over the long term, and high cost."

In theory, it is a good idea. However, the current state of photochromatic glass makes this proposition costly and inefficient.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Patent / Trademark Law Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'You're Fired' may be harder than Trump thinks ... Sep 13 Uncle SamLee 7
News Judge Mayer's Concurrence in IV Shows the Probl... (Oct '16) Jul '17 Operator NumberTwo 8
Stupid question about TESS (Oct '15) Jul '17 Operator NumberTwo 5
News PowWow Energy Releases Automated Water Records ... Jul '17 American PieJamboree 2
News Apple's next MacBook could completely reinvent ... (Mar '17) Mar '17 Michael852 1
Can a name like this be trademarked? (Mar '17) Mar '17 chrisjchrisj 1
News EDITORIAL: A case involving The Slants, an Asia... (Jan '17) Jan '17 Anar 2
More from around the web