Slashdot Mirror
British Village Requests Removal From GPS Maps
longacre writes "The tiny village of Barrow Gurney, England, has asked GPS map publisher Tele Atlas to remove them from the company's maps. The reason: truck drivers using GPS navigation devices are being directed to drive through the town despite the roads being too narrow for sidewalks, which has led to numerous accidents. At the root of the problem lies the fact that the navigation maps used by trucks are the same as those used by passenger cars, and they don't contain data on road width or no-truck zones. Tele Atlas says they will release truck-appropriate databases at some point, but until then they advise local governments to make use of a technology dating back to the Romans: road signs."
Sounds like a great opportunity for the law enforcement officers of Barrow Gurney to make some money issuing fines.
They will take notice of a sign that says "Maximum clearance" though. :)
I like muppets.
I could see truckers ignoring them, especially if a GPS or map is advising them to take a different route. At least some of them are going to assume that the sign is wrong. Adding that feature to the software should be a priority.
"Maybe this world is another planet's hell"
Aldous Huxley
Big, giant speed bumps. Doesn't generate much revenue, but it will send a very effective message.
What?
they will need to find another solution. such as a no trucks sign and a cop with a bad attitude to hand out the tickets.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
1. Post sign at entrance to turn off that says "trucks over X lbs subject to 500 fine"
2. Station police officer 100 yards past sign.
3. Profit!
The cake is a pie
The request is totally unreasonable, information is not easily contained. A lot of roads are designated for non-truck use, if trucks don't obey signs, ticket the trucks, drivers, and companies they belong to. There's no need to create new laws and rules for such a simple thing.
This being slashdot, I'm expecting lots of people to post either agreeing that a few road signs are all that's needed, or some sort of opposite position, like hide the signs behind bushes and then ticket the hell out of the truckers.
The real problem is, for every trucker that actually is clueless and 'innocently' relies totally on the GPS info, there's another one who has heard the road is too narrow and difficult for trucks, but will try it anyway, and then claim he never heard any other driver say differently. The ones that will lie like hell about having foreknowledge are also the ones who will claim they made the decision to go that way based only on GPS info, and they assumed the GPS wouldn't mislead them. They may well claim that their dispatcher didn't say anything either, to shield their firm from potential liability, and try to make it look like the gadjet is the real source of the whole problem.
Now what happens if the truck didn't just clip a historic building or two (Which are pence a dozen in the UK), but, e.g., ran over a kid?
This is really about the difference in UK and US law. In the US, there are plenty of precedents that let the child's parents sue the trucker's firm, the GPS maker, or whomever has the deepest pockets. In the UK, there's much less ability to extend liability to someone only peripherally involved. A tangled mess of a case, with lots of arguments about just who is responsible for what percentage of total damages, tends to result in much more modest settlements there. One thing both locations share is that all too often average people tend to assume a computer based system doesn't make mistakes.
This means the town may be playing it smart - take away the GPS info, and the driver has to justify his decision based on paper maps, talking with the corporate dispatcher, or some other source of info, and if that's not a computer, the driver can't weasel out of much by claiming he assumed the source of info was infallible.
Who is John Cabal?
why does everything have to be harder to do in Windows?
Because you are an idiot and idiots have to deal with user error.
Now if only the money generated from problem 1 was used to address issues of problem 2, instead of going to the politicians' golf & booze "operational expenses", then both problems would correct themselves.
Just put up a sign saying "Toll Road for Trucks: XX $" and watch how truckers do a quick reverse and disappear forever.
It doesn't matter if you design the thing to block and be hit by a truck reasonably safely and not serve any other function.
At the entry roads to the village put up barriers that will block vehicles above a certain height. Most trucks are taller than normal vehicles that would fit.
Or set up a chicane designed to block vehicles which won't make it through the village.
Then put up a big traffic sign with red circle and a red slash across it with a symbol of a truck inside the circle - "No trucks". This is so you can justify the fines etc to drivers that ignore it and hit the barriers/chicane.
It's better to have the trucks stuck outside the village than inside the village - damage to stuff that's designed to take the damage, easier to clean up the mess, doesn't affect village as much, etc.
If you're lucky you might be able to place the barriers where it's much easier to tow the trucks away.
> Sounds like the route should be improved.
The route doesn't need improving. The town is under no obligation to make life easy for murderous truck drivers with a disdain for country folk. Best is to put up a blockade that is no wider than the narrowest street in the town. A sign could be put on the blockade, that says something like "good luck trying to get through this blockade". Then, economics would prevail and people would stop buying the gps units that advertise a road through that town. This is the most common sense approach.
Just callin' it like I see it.
...or they could just fix the map data. Have you ever asked a software vendor to add a feature or fix a minor bug?> Then economics would prevail and people would start spending their money on services provided near the bypass -- hotels, filling stations, restaurants and the like all tend to do well at the intersection of major roadways.
Then they could pave over everything and set up walmarts. Then they could bring in a chevron or two that light up half the countryside with glare bombs. Then they could use their common sense and start a casino. Not everyone is a "fool for the city", foghat.
Just callin' it like I see it.
Tele Atlas have a complete monopoly on GPS maps, why the $£%@ cant they be FORCED to put height and weight limits on their maps by the government, on pain of having their rights to sell removed.
Its not only me, I know a load of drivers who have e-mailed tomtom and the like over the last 7 years, asking for the ability to enter the fact that I am in a vehicle 40ft long and 16 foot high and 8 foot six wide on the screen and not be sent down 7 foot wide roads with 9 foot six high bridges.
We dont do it for fun. You try reversing it when you come to the restriction.
As for the arseholes who suggest fines:
(a) For most drivers the company pays, and a lot of the rest are based in east Europe, and would not pay anyway.
(b) No driver would go there if he knew how to avoid the problem. Its not about saving money or time, its about lack of info on the alternatives - how do we know the other road is better if its not shown as better?
Teleatlas could fix the problem but won't. regulation is needed.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
In theory, every £1 collected through fines = 1 less £ collected through taxes. There's absolutely nothing wrong with making rulebreakers pay the costs associated with their offenses (total damage cost + reasonable enforcement cost + reasonable deterrent cost), as opposed to the general taxpayers.
The problem is that this never happens. Whenever there is a budget surplus, it is never, ever, ever, translated to reduced taxes. Instead, the money is immediately started to get channeled through cover programs (Personal Development programs, Outreach programs, Social Networking programs), until it is sufficiently laundered, and inevitably ends up in the pockets of those politicians for their booze & party expenses which then they write off, as grandparent noted. Then, politicians claim the credit for "improved social standing" at their next election, all while the taxpayer still has to pay every single penny of the real expenses, and cheer for the politician while laying the blame squarely on the rank-and-file cops when wondering why they aren't doing their jobs well in any capacity except those of taking their money.
One solution could be to petition the government to upgrade the highway through town or build a ring road.
Another, considerably less friendly option, is to install one helluva hairpin turn in the main road. Easy enough for a passenger vehicle to navigate at playground speed, but impossible for a transport truck.
Maybe the ideal solution is to install a toll booth system. If a vehicle exceeds a certain weight (or physical dimension), they'll need to pay at the initial toll booth. Then, install a series of toll booths along the route with a police radar of some fashion. If the vehicle exceeds the posted speed limit, they need to pay another toll in order to proceed to the next segment.
In short order, one of two things will happen. The traffic will find an alternate route around the town, or the town will have earned enough money to build their own ring road.
The reason you don't understand the problem is that you have no history, and you have too much space.
My house was old when the United States Constitution was first drafted. Am I going to tear it down to make way for trucks? No. My village also doesn't have physical space for a ring road, without some major engineering - a bloody great bridge over the sea on one side, a tunnel or a massive cutting through the hills on the other. The solution isn't demolishing half the villages of Europe to make way for trucks, it's to ban the trucks from places they can't go. And, ideally, ban trucks of this size all together.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
There once was a time when most trucks had TWO people in the cabin, the driver and the "bijrijder" (no idea what the english word his, but his job is to lend a hand). There also used to be "relaxed" schedules. Upon arrival the trucker would be directed to the kantine and be given real coffee and perhaps something to eat while his truck was loaded/unloaded.
Nowadays even trucks with frequent stops and for innercity work do NOT have a "bijrijder", an extra set of eyes, a person who can go out of the cabin and direct traffic, a person who keeps the driver awake and alert. The schedules are intense while the number of delays has only increased. Unless the loading/unloading is at a wharehouse the trucker now often has to help with the loading/unloading.
This all makes for drivers who are tired, overworked and in constant fear of their jobs being taken by whatever is the next low wage country where none of the rules apply.
All in pursuit of the almighty buck. Notice how especially trucks from companies like DHL and other delivery firms that are always pushing the limits drive incredibly unsafely. I know how the routine goes, deliver 100 packages and next day they give you 110. Deliver them, and you get 120. Traffic jam? Just work overtime, that is increasinly hard to get overtime PAY for. The odd thing is that if you look at maintenance records this practive is very bad as the trucks are pushed way too hard and this actually costs a lot of money. Plus the invevitable accidents really start to affect business.
But hey, the package has to be delivered NOW and for as little money as possible.
That is the reason many truckers are a danger on the road.
It is the same reason tech support (who are on orders to handle as many calls as possible) often just says "reboot/reinstall" and tries to hangup.
Want good service/behaviour? Stop squeezing the margins, introduce strict laws and make sure people ain't forced to push the limits just to make a living, because they won't always get it right and a rude tech support guy is bad enough but an asleep driver of a truck is another thing altogether.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Problem with this is that it's primarily a farming community so tractors are always pottering around.
If the parent poster were the ignorant American you picture him to be, he wouldn't have called it a 'ring road.'
Hell, they don't even look before they change lanes. I had one force me over a lane just the other day. They're crazy if they think truckers will just turn around and go another way if the road says "no trucks".
If you don't respect the trucks blind spots, then don't be surprised. Their blind spots are huge and because of this I give them wide berth or make sure I pass them quickly.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
That's got to be an urban legend. I would have to assume it's pretty common knowledge to let air out of the tires when stuck, because I know it was a couple of decades ago when it happened to a friend of mine and a produce delivery (box) truck.