Slashdot Mirror
Australia, UK To Test Vehicle Speed-Limiting Devices
nemesisrocks writes "The New South Wales government is set to begin testing a device that will limit the speed of drivers because 'excessive speed is one of the primary ways that people are killed while driving.' Located on the dashboard, it senses a driver's speed with the use of GPS. If the speed of a car goes over the posted legal limit, a warning sounds. If the driver ignores the warning, the device eventually cuts all power to the car because a cut-off switch has been installed between the accelerator and the engine."
The Times Online reports that the same system will be tested in the UK this summer for use in taxis and buses.
... what could possibly go wrong?
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
One of the biggest problems with current GPS detection devices is lack of context.
The GPS needs to know the direction and actual road/lane I am driving in.
I get warnings about speed cameras and told to slow down - just because I am passing UNDER a 30mph road travelling in a different direction on a motorway (70mph).
liqbase
And what happens when the posted speed limit changes and the "device" isn't updated in a timely fashion ?
UK government official figures show speed is only the causing factor in 5-7% of all accidents.
That removing this device would be illegal.
I don't know of anything similar to this in the United States, but I recall reading about "black boxes" being installed in cars here. Something like this, but it says nothing about it being required.
I'm not sure how the Constitution would apply to something like this being tried here.
If you read the article, you'll see that it limits the engine's available power so that it can no longer go over the limit. It doesn't cut off the engine, or for that matter the battery.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
If you want to do something like this for commercial vehicles, it is much smarter to have a monitoring device with reports that go to supervisors. I mean can you imagine a bus barreling down the highway and having the power suddenly go off? How many folks do you think would be hurt or killed?
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Good luck selling crippled cars. I hope they come with soma.
When traffic gets too slow, I break out my M-79 40mm grenade launcher and start blowing apart obstacles^Wother drivers.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
So I start to over take a car who is going slower than the speed limit who (as I am in the middle of passing) starts to speed up. I exceed the limit to complete the overtake as the gap behind the car has been filled and a truck has appeared coming towards me... Computer detects speeding slows me down to limit.. Truck wins the fight..
Oh yeah sign me up for 1 of those.
This is a common idea that speed is the cause of the crash. Speed can make a crash worse of course, but the most common danger on highways that I see is people driving close together because one person is driving too slow in a fast lane. The bunched up traffic scares the hell out of me.
This fails to address either the legitimate need for speedy travel (medical emergencies, birth, etc.) and the possibility of error on the part of the system. If the system is taught that a particular road has a speed limit of 10kph when in reality, the limit is 50, it's going to do nothing but inconvenience people.
Wire them into the car chassis ground, and pop them over the GPS device on the dash... not quite as good as a faraday cage, but close...
Speed doesn't kill anybody.... It's that coming to a sudden stop that gets you every time!
My personal GPS jumps from 0 to 10MPH while I drive, and I'm not in a particularly fast car (hyundai elantra).
www.purevolume.com/martyd
All you have to do is get them to exceed the limit and the car stops dead so you can calmly walk up and kill the occupants.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Don't HGVs (heavy goods vehicles, artics, trucks, whatever you call them) have speed limiters on them as it is? I think this is so in the UK and some of Europe? (90kph/ 56mph)
Information welcomed.
'excessive speed is one of the primary ways that people are killed while driving'
Here was me thinking it was crashing into things that killed people, rather than simply travelling fast. Remind me never to fly again. Or take the train!
excessive speed is one of the primary ways that people are killed while driving.
From a physics point of view, I'd say that the absorption of kinetic energy is almost always the cause of death while driving.
I don't know if I'm a hacker because of my mindset, or if I developed the mindset from being a hacker, but I reflexively try to find unintended consequences of these things. Suppose I'm in the middle of nowhere and my kid got bit by a snake, or a woman is being chased by an attacker. The benefits of driving faster than lawful clearly outweight the risks sometimes.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
It does not cut "all power to the car". Think of what would happen to your headlights and your power-steering!
TFA explains that it limits the fuel going to the engine by instructing the engine management system to do so. In effect, it is just overriding the input from the electronic throttle that most modern cars have.
Just buy a car with an old-fashioned cable throttle connected to a carburettor and see how they cope with that. That $12m Ferrari that was sold yesterday would do the trick!
(You're going to correct me and reply that the Ferrari has fuel injection or something, aren't you?)
Not so good for medical emergencies, like when someone has been bitten by any of Australia's great many venomous critters and has to be transported to the hospital rapidly.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
"Cutting all Power" should mean cutting additional gas that accelerate...or I mean it just work like cruise control that instead of supplying more gas when it goes under speed, it stop supplying more gas when it goes over the speed.
But requiring GPS? Bullshit. Hong Kong's bus (which most of them are double deckers, and import from UK) has speed limiter installed for 15+ years. The bus can never goes over 70km/h no matter how hard you press the gas pedal (70km/h is the legal speed limit for bus on all road). There is a little red light on the dashboard to signal the driver the limiter is activated.
Technology? It's just based on the speedometer that every automobile has, just like all cruise control! Why do we need to pull GPS into the picture? I have absolutely no idea.
Ha, and what are they going to do when people mod their vehicles to circumvent this?
I know that they are talking about cars and not motorcycles -- but as someone who rides motorcycles, speed in a straight line isn't the hard part, speed in turns is. A lot of accidents are caused because people try to handle turns fast and fail.
Or cause idiots tried wheelies when they had no clue.
That's one of the reasons that the EU is starting its own GPS system; Galileo. As well as being able to give a much more accurate reading of speed than the US's GPS it will also give a much more accurate reading of location and allow the government to charge for using certain roads.
I've got no problems with speed limiting vehicles. Some are already here, if you rent a U-Haul truck, there's a governor on the engine that won't let you above 65mph. It doesn't kill the engine, but the truck just doesn't accelerate anymore. Why not just put the same thing on cars? Do we really need cars that are able to go 100+ mph? I know what someone will say, "but I need the engine power to accelerate if I need to..." I'm not saying we should nerf the engines, but just limit the max speed of the vehicle but keep all the HP/torque so you can go from 0-60 in 2seconds, but you top out at 85mph.
Btw, NASCAR does this already on some tracks for safety reasons. You don't see any of those cars going 200+ mph. Even though they are completely capable of it.
Most cars already have a limiter, my BMW is computer limited at 135mph. Though, I could spend $50 and get that part of the computer reprogrammed.
Now if they put speed limiting devices on cars the cops should have them to. Because no one is speeding right? Three weeks ago I had to pull into the ditch doing 140 KPH with a fire truck because a cop decided to pass me on the way to a car crash/explosion. There were two oncoming vehicles and if I had not pull over there would have been a head on collision. (It is illegal for a cop to pass a fire truck. Besides what is the cop going to do, piss on the fire if he gets there before me?) Now three weeks latter the same cop is goofing off and destroyed a brand new honda 1200cc motor bike injuring himself and a girl he was showing off to. And of course he doesn't get a ticket either. Really who needs a speed limiter?
Also are they considering the revenue they will be loosing from speeding tickets? I'm sure that they will figure out another way to get that money out of people.
that they didn't really care so much about how fast people drive their cars once devices like this eliminate the income they got from speeding tickets.
The big key is that this device is dependent on a GPS. It would be easy to design a system that limits the speed of a car, but making it depend on a GPS means they will have records of distances and times travelled, as well as the roads used. This kind of information will allow them to seamlessly charge tolls, access charges and peak travel time disincentives. Speeding is small potatoes compared to those new sources of revenue.
Insert pithy comment here.
I can put the peddle to the metal and never have to worry about speeding tickets! Woohoo!
Now, if they can only come up with a system that keeps the assholes from tailgating, weaving in and out of traffic, cutting people off, etc... everything else that causes deadly accidents!
Proof once again that if your hair is pointy enough, then all problems seem like they can be solved using technology.
It is the sudden deceleration.
Outlaw stop signs!
8-PP
"Speed Kills" is a lie used by the police to justify their lazy behavior and excessive and undeserved ticket revenue. The police are simply spreading the myth of the evils of speeding rather than trying to effectively target unsafe driving at any speed. It's far easier to set up a speed trap than proactive training and oversight. If the police actually bothered to patrol with the intent of ticketing poor driving and lack of courtesy, the roads would both be safer and faster. It's a crime that the police just sit back and hand out overly expensive tickets rather than put in the effort it would take to spot unskilled drivers, or, even better, teach people how to drive safely at higher speeds. North America would benefit from an autobahn type open sped system, sadly, our governments are addicted to ticket revenues.
to test this concept in the UK unless I misunderstood something. Seriously? Testing a speed-limiting device on the M25. How often is it that vehicles get to go over the speed limit on the M25? Hell, you would be lucky to be able to do 50mph most of the time.
They've invented the governor. Except it's a less reliable, more expensive bolt-on which misapplies GPS technology instead of using existing, trusted, and well-understood speed measurement instrumentation already installed in the vehicle.
Bravo.
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
excessive speed is one of the primary ways that people are killed while driving.
Excessive speed for the conditions, not merely breaking the speed limit. Yes, speeding should be discouraged, but if you're going to try and justify the new technology to do so, make sure your arguments stand up to scrutiny.
Would have been handy when I had to rush my wife to the hospital due to a major complication during pregnancy. No ambulance was available and she would have died if I never got her there fast.
Would I be able to sue the government for the death of my wife and unborn child?
heh, my wife's Garmin (530?) would, on occasion, register speeds of over 400mph on the history stats.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
The bus in Speed is gonna explode now.
"Transport for London (TfL), which will today announce a six-month trial of ISA, estimates that, if two thirds of London drivers used the devices, the number of road casualties in the capital could be reduced by 10 per cent." Most cars in London don't actually move fast enough to get to 20Mph, so how exactly would this system save lives? Most UK private cars have had their speedometer set 10% fast anyway (reads 33 when doing 30 and 77 when doing 70) in an effort to both slow you down and remove te vehicle manufacturer from any possible law suits regarding speeding fines.
I've never shoed a horse, but I once told a donkey to piss off!
So how will cars' speed governors know the maximum speed for a given stretch of road?
Any RF method of communicating that will eventually be cracked, to the great horror of most and amusement of the rest.
And, of course, we'll be completely unable to fight of the Cylon invasion.
I propose a limiter that cuts all power from the government when it exceeds the acceptable level of control over the public's actions, because "excessive power is one of the primary ways that people are supressed by governments".
US government is testing a device which will determine the thrust rate and force during a sexual intercourse, because it's determined that excessive thrust can lead to heart attack. All the citizens over age of 45 years will have the device fixed between their penis and heart. If excessive thrust is detected, the device will cut the blood supply to the penis of the offending party. (earlier version was designed to throttle oxygen supply to the heart, but it was thought to be too aggressive)
you are wrong. +/- 1mph.
So, how many people here can already see how this device can be defeated or bypassed completely? Or is it just me?
...jumps from 0 to 10MPH while I drive, and I'm not in a particularly fast car (hyundai elantra).
Indeed, I can run faster
The summary has left out a key point in that the device can be turned off by the driver. So we're back to square one. Another thing is that they've selected a horrible sample of individuals to test the device on. "TfLâ(TM)s trial will include a London bus, a licensed taxi and 20 cars driven by road engineers, traffic managers and highway inspectors." All of whom have a vested interest in sticking to the speed limit beyond avoiding being involved in accidents. They should have selected habitual speeders, people who are close to having 12pts in three years as well. Can't really say if a device is working as intended when you don't let the intended user test it.
Either (1) in case of "no signal" the system doesn't allow the car to move *at* *all*, or (2) allows the car to move without speed limits.
You know that for GPS, you'd need a clear view to the sky, right? You also know that even certain *paints* can weaken the GPS signal significantly, right? Or... an "accidentally" deconnected wire at the antenna?
"Gee, officer... I dunno, guess it must be broken!..."
Cut the power, seriously? Cuz there's nothing safer than suddenly losing engine power at 150 kph. Power steering, breaks, manouverability- all go out the window. Also, why use GPS for this? That's a surefire way to introduce errors into the system. Why not just hook into the cars existing speedometer?
just make a little tinfoil hat for this device :D
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
... there is a bomb wired to the underside of the bus and you have to maintain at least 55 mph regardless of the posted speed limit to prevent it from going off? You could put countless civilian lives at risk! Hopefully authorities would take such a possibility in to account and give drivers a way to disable the device.
They are BOTH computed in real time AND averaged over distance.
Recent court cases have proven GPS based speed monitoring is far more accurate even than most spedometers which monitor real time wheel speeds, and easily trump radar and laser accuracy.
As long as the speed is logged a dozen times a second or so, but averaged over periods of not less than 1.5 seconds, and updated in real time based on the fractional second, the speed on the screen should not be more than a fraction of a mile per hour less or greater than your actual speed, which is actually MORE accurate than a traditional spedometer, which unlike GPS can be effected by vehicle alignment, tire pressure, wether, and age of the mechanics behind it. Car speedometers today are only accurate on average to within 3MPH.
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
Oh, and they'd never use it to track someone's movements based on their unique GPS device. Nah, never happen!
Hitting objects or other people while speeding does.
(also, speed cause the flux capacitor to activate)
But really, what I think should happen is people and autos should be 'certified' for a given speed (instead of a blanket limit that is low for 80% of the people out there)
how long until
How am I going to out-race the zombie hordes now?!?
Technically speed is a factor in 99.9% of all accidents. If the car was stationary, no accident would have happened.
Then I'd guess the other 0.1 percent of accidents are rear-end collisions at intersections, where your vehicle is stationary behind the stop line but the perp's isn't.
its not like gps is difficult to jam http://www.favordeals.com/search/results.html?inc_subcat=1&search_in_description=1&categories_id=&keyword=gps+jammer they would have to allow your car to function with no signal because gps looses its fix in adverse weather, tunnels, trees, and many other things.
I don't want Big Brother in my car for the same reasons I don't want big Brother in my computer.
If it's not logging or reporting home, it's hardly Big Brother.
"Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
Speeding. 99% of respondents want to drive faster than the speed limit, it seems.
Remember that driving is licensed, it's not a right. You are permitted to drive on the road if you obey the rules of the road, and you expect your government, who grant you that licence, to enforce the rules of the road.
You would expect the police to arrest drunk drivers - they are abusing their licence. You should expect them to control road speed, for the same reason. The rules are there, it's not as if you don't know what they are, and whether you like them or not they all apply equally to you.
If you feel that you should be able to drive faster than you're presently legally allowed to, then win the argument and get the law changed. But please stop bitching about the way that a given rule of the road applies to you; those are the terms you agreed to when you stepped into your car.
They never played the movie 'Speed' in the UK. This law clearly endangers all buses with Keannu Reaves on them.
What will the locals do for revenue? I can't drive through a nearby school zone, between 10 and 2, without being followed and timed. I wonder how long before someone sells a GPS transmitter kit so the car thinks it's on a unlimited highway.
It's a crime that the police just sit back and hand out overly expensive tickets rather than put in the effort it would take to spot unskilled drivers, or, even better, teach people how to drive safely at higher speeds. North America would benefit from an autobahn type open sped system, sadly, our governments are addicted to ticket revenues.
The main problem with your arguement is that the vast majority of north american drivers is their ignorance. They do not posses the basic driving skills which they would require in order to drive safely at faster speeds. everytime i drive on any major highways throughout and major city in either Canada or the USA, and you see the lack of skill on the drivers part. They will not signal their lane changes, they will drive slow in the passing lanes, they will not switch lanes to make room for emergency vechiles, they will pass a vechicle in whatever lane they like... these are but a few problems with the vast majority of all drivers here. Until these skills can be brought into check, we will never see the likes of an autobahn style road anywhere in north america.
We seem to live in a world where "technology" is the solution to all of our problems. Too bad. Everyone seems to want the instant solution, and in a defeatist sort of way goes about implementing the WRONG solution to a multitude of problems.
For example: The solution here? Driver Training. Speeding doesn't kill, it's irresponsibility. it's inability. A Bad Driver decides do do 90 through a school zone and kills someone - and "speeding" is to blame? No: It's an irresponsible idiot who thinks it's appropriate to drive at excessive speed in risk-sensitive areas. It's an irresponsible idiot without the SKILLS to drive at those speeds even where the road and conditions could possibly allow it.
I have seen, daily, drivers who don't exceed the limit that are more dangerous than the fastest drivers. Distracted, disinterested, and while licensed not qualified to drive a vehicle. Is there technology to save us from THESE people? Um... yes... how about lowering the 'standards' for dangerous driving (so that that asshole that was shaving as he changed lanes into me yesterday would be properly charged with reckless) and then trhowing the book at them. If you want to throw some high tech at the problem- how implementing technology (proper black box / telemetry recorders) to support the conviction of these drivers.
It's not how fast you go, it's what you do with the fast.
http://www.bistolas.net
So, what happens when someone gets hit from behind, and sues the manufacturer of this device because it cut off the accelerator and wouldn't let them gun it to get out of the way?
Learn about Photography Basics.
if its making a call your car turns off.
or just as well it hangs up after warning you you have thirty seconds to stop.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Speeding is one of the most preventable causes of accidents, though, up there with drink driving.
Bullshit. It's not the speeding that causes accidents, but careless/incompetent/aggressive driving while speeding. Look at Germany's accident rates for a quick demonstration.
but a stone-cold-sober human being can still get in the car and decide to pump their speed up by a sixth and their car's kinetic energy by a third.
Yes, and..?
I actually LIKE a spirited ride. I paid for my Acura... and I want to enjoy driving it. And occasionally I'd like to go faster than 55mph... just because I can. But I leave 50 meters+ in front and behind me, to account for the possible need to slow down rapidly... and I only do it when I am rested, and in peak form. Oh yeah, and I'm a good driver who's taken a number of advanced driving courses.
The HIGHWAY speed limits in the UK and US, as it stands, have little to do with safety, and much more to do with revenue generation. Sorry, but on a 5-lane road of new black asphalt that's 20cm deep, having a 55mph speed limit is simply stupid.
Just like a large number of people from the UK that I've encountered, you seem to have utterly no regard for any freedoms that you are currently not using. Moreover, these people seem to be relentlessly bent on curbing whatever freedoms they personally find "excessive" or "unnecessary". Well... I find English tea drinking unnecessary, and I think we need to install a cutoff switch in all milk cartons, to prevent milk from being poured into the tea.
Of course people get in trouble when they drive 100mph 20 feet behind another car, in a winding 2-lane road, while darting back and forth between the lanes. But it's ALREADY a crime to drive that way. There's no need to prevent you from BEING ABLE TO commit it. If you're going to go down that road, then why not just lock people in their houses. They'll be safe there.
I've just finished re-reading "Brave New World", and I have to tell you - I think it is already required reading for the UK government - they seem to be using it for 5-year plans...
Speed don't kill. Sudden deceleration kills.
Outlaw sudden deceleration.
"-Editor's note: The original version of this story was amended to reflect the fact that the unit can be turned off by the driver."
throw new NoSignatureException();
The slower people are forced to drive, the more congested (and therefore more dangerous, since tailgating is the #1 cause of accidents) the roadways become. It's (sorely lacking) common sense. If you drive 60 mph on a 1 mile journey, you are on the roadway for one minute. If you drive 30mph, you are on the road for two minutes. Cutting the speed limit in half puts TWICE AS MANY CARS ON THE ROAD at any given time. That is the main reason that as soon as you transition from an urban highway where the speed limit is 70, to an urban highway where the limit is 55, INSTANTLY there is much more dense traffic. Think about it a little. What if you are on a highway, and for a 20 foot stretch there is a sudden, totally enforce 10mph speed limit? A 20 mile backup ensues. Speed limits increase traffic density, and kill people. The autobahn engineers figured this out 90 years ago, but we are incredibly gullible and stupid. Speed limits are about control, and revenue, and power. If they really wanted to reduce traffic fatalities and injury, tailgating laws would be enforced. How many people have you ever met in your life that had a ticket for tailgating?
I'm guessing they use the GPS to determine speed zone, and the speedometer to calculate actual speed.
Belief? Hope? Preference?The Existential Vortex
It's senseless and no the government shouldn't feel responsible to keep me from killing myself through my own stupidity. Kill switches don't stop the road rage maniacs who have probably found a way around the system anyway, they stop the guy trying to get the hospital to save his friend's life or get his pregnant wife to the maternity ward.
#-#
Ad Astra Per Aspera
A rough road leads to the stars
Speeding is one of the most preventable causes of accidents
Not true...if someone wants to speed they will, and no propaganda (or technology) will stop them. The solutuion to this problem is to ban drivers for two or more serious speeding offences.
The main cause of crashes is Human Error, and this is often because, over time, people forget how to drive properly. What's needed is a joined-up system of assessment and testing for drivers to ensure that their driving remains at a good standard. We all forget things and lose touch with 'good practice'. A 'check-test' every 5 years or so would weed out those whose driving has become unsafe, and they could then be required to take some re-training to bring their driving back up to an acceptable standard.
Smivs on the intertubes!
.. cut power if over speed threshold. I can't wait to see the sorry bastard who needs the extra power in order to escape from a situation and is over the speed limit.
bastard: wtf, shit, shit! accelerate...
gov: uhmmm no.... die!
I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
I'm not sure what it's like for our neighbours to the South, but in Canada on major highways the speed limit is set to, say, 100km/h, but it's not enforced until you hit 120km/h. To me, this says that it's okay to break the law if you only do it a little. My point is, if we're going to start limiting the speed of a vehicle, we first need to decide what the real maximum should be and start properly enforcing it.
Pretty much every town would go bankrupt within 6 months. You can tell when ours is a little short or they need a new police cruiser as the police will be out in force for about a week ticketing anything that moves. They wouldn't ticket everyone who speeds either, as the public would rise up in revolt and petition in new speed limits if speeding was a guaranteed ticket.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
http://www.globalgadgetuk.com/Personal.htm
The big drawback I can see is that anyone will get a speeding ticket anymore. The government would not receive any income from that. They may limit your engine though a bit higher than the actual speed limit so they can still fine you.
I hate signatures
I used to have a 1984 Nissan 300 ZX, I bought is used in the late 1990's, and not from a dealer. I was out driving with a friend one day, on a long stretch of straight highway, with lots of sun and NO traffic. And the car shutdown on me in a nice manner, just cutting the ignition. I pulled off the road, a little concerned since we were pretty far from civilization, and cell phones werent readily available. No CB radio either. It started back up, I took it to the dealer, explained what happened, and ask them to take a look at it. The guy asked me "Well, how fast were you going?" A little surprised I said, "well kinda fast" of course he answered "You were doing 156, it has a ignition shut off, there isnt a issue with your vehicle. Have a nice day". I was red faced, and left...and never did it again.
#include bier;
all over the dashboard should do the trick.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Most GPS units have a sampling rate of 1Hz. Some units are 5Hz. As far as I know, no consumer unit is higher, though 20Hz units are available.
I don't think moderate speeding is an issue at all, by moderate speeding I'd say speeds up to perhaps 85mph, but it also depends on the vehicle. It probably should be lower for economy subcompacts and SUVs.
Beyond the obvious decrease in response time there are quite a few issues that come with excessive speeding. There's loss of stability at speed, due to design of the vehicle, tire grip, potholes and pavement and the design of the road itself. The main interstate in more area, about 20 or 30 miles east of where I live is generally straight and smooth. It's easy to sustain speeds upwards of 90mph. In my area, however, there are more potholes and the highway has tighter turns, even 80mph is pushing it in some areas. And some areas, like New York City, where the roads are utter garbage and incompetently designed, 70mph is pushing it. The problem of course, is that people drive like the road conditions never change.
So the biggest issue ultimately is driver skill. To be frank, most drivers aren't nearly as good as they think they are, particularly those who like to drive aggressively. Your average driver isn't a problem, these guys are.
Aggressive lane changes and tailgating are a big problem I'd say the biggest source of accidents. These people are always the ones disrupting the flow of traffic. Of course, police officers are always going to report speeding as a cause, because it can always be argued that speed is a contributor. We wouldn't have any accidents if cars were all parked. And the problem is that it's pretty difficult to spot aggressive drivers, at least not without air support.
Another important problem is the speed differential. If one guy is doing 90 and everyone else is traveling at 60, that's dangerous. But if everyone is cruising at 80mph, it really isn't an issue. And actually, I'd say this is more of a problem in Europe where there's a big discrepancy between vehicle performance. You'll have some econobox straining to maintain 70mph, then some guy comes along comes along in a BMW and blows by doing 100.
And that brings up another problem which is slow driving, mainly from people who sit in the passing lane. This is not nearly as much of a problem in Europe where people respect the passing lane and almost always get out of the way. But in the US people tend suffer from this indignant self-righteousness where they believe nobody needs to drive faster than they're driving. So they sit there in the passing lane and refuse to move out of the way for anyone. So what happens? Faster traffic is forced to pass on the right, again causing a disruption in the flow of traffic.
I'd say proper driver's education and more stringent tests would reduce accidents. But then, that would also empower people and governments can't have that. If anything, I'd say politicians seem to be trying to make driving undesirable. I'm not really surprised this is happening, and it's only a matter of time before technology is at a point where cars can drive themselves.
Let's all take a moment and remember how insurance companies make money, then we can proceed from there.
Insurance companies make their money on investments. When the stock market crashes, insurance companies lose money. They try to price their policies such that they make exactly ZERO dollars ($0) on insurance. They want payout and pay in to be exactly the same. That keeps them competitive, and keeps the pool of money to invest large.
Insurance companies don't care how many people die. They don't care about payouts. What insurance companies care about is predictability.
They need to know how much will be coming in and how much will be going out. If too much is going out, they raise rates, cut types of policies, etc. They mitigate their risk by being INSURED. Yes, little insurance companies buy insurance on your insurance from bigger insurance companies.
So what an insurance company wants is the largest possible pool of capital. This MAY mean that they want more accidents. More payout equals more premiums and thus possibly more cash on hand to invest.
And they want predictability. So what insurance companies really don't want is change. They know what accidents were like last year and the year before. If this tech changes the numbers, and especially if it causes a sudden plunge and then a later correction, that's really annoying and makes it harder for them to do their jobs and make their money.
I'm perfectly capable of driving 85 down the freeway, shaving, talking on the cell phone, and rummaging through the back seat looking for the next CD, you insensitive clod!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Anyone have a Red Barchetta for sale...?
Truth, Justice. Or the American Way.
Have none of you watched the film "Fifth Element" ?
The bit where Bruce Willis gets his licence "Auto revoked". Now use your brains and put that tech into general practice.
You're catching on...slowly.
REVENUE RAISING. The Gov don't give a dead rats arse about speeding. They do care about raising dosh off "bad boys & girls" though. This tech WILL come to pass.
Something for you to chew on... I drive 44 tonners that are limited to 90kmh/56mph. Our Motorway limit for Heavy vehicles is 60mph. If nature (downhill) allows us to run over 56mph but NOT over 60mph we are still legal.. Correct ?
WRONG. I just got an arse kicking for "overspeeding" for longer than ONE minute.(58mph) The reason ?
Apparently I exceeded the vehicles designed maximum speed and that's an offence.
Y'know.. I recall quite clearly driving an ERF in 1985, before Max speed limiters where introduced and we generally drove at no > 100kmh even though they could do > 125kmh. Are they really telling me that tech has gone backwards ? Vehicles as an ENTIRE group are now considerably safer than they were back then.
It's all bullshit.
There has been and always will be.. Turbo nutters. By enforcing limiters on the general populace who exactly are they trying to slow down ? Joe Ordinary drives generally within acceptable parameters anyway. Joe Turbo prick will donk the limiter anyway. Just look at the (vehicles from the far west british isle) trucks on the motorway. There's a reason why they use Scanias Y'know.. It's called a fuse !!
Bit like ID cards isn't it.
Setting aside all the implementation and nanny-state issues: no government in their right mind would approve a device that would effectively stop people from speeding. There's simply far too much money in handing out speeding tickets.
We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I am speeding to get away from some would-be robbers and suddenly my car stops.
Yeah! just what I need.
...to have the car's in-dashboard printer write the speeding ticket automatically.
See Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedometer_Error#Error) for info about speedometer error. Alignment has almost nothing to do with speedometer accuracy.
GPS inaccuracies occur for any number of reasons (see http://www.kowoma.de/en/gps/errors.htm for details) and GPS speed measurements are widely known for being inaccurate over both short distances and short periods of time. My GPS is often ridiculously wrong--once it had me going 200 MPH, significantly faster then the top speed of my bike :-)
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
There's more to the term than referencing crap TV shows.
Presumably he meant in the 1984 sense, where 'Big Brother' is all about total control. Surveillance is merely one of the methods used to attain it.
To all those who bitch about the potential hardware/software glitches causing 20-car pileups when your engine power gets cut: the same argument could be applied to power steering, brakes, blinkers, etc.
Hell, what if my radio is defective and changing stations shorts out my car's entire electrical system so I grind to a halt on the freeway with an 18-wheeler barrelling up behind me?
Using (or not) various systems in our vehicles carry theoretical risks and we don't lose sleep over them, speed limiters are no different and completely irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not even theoretically flawless limiter is a good idea
When all of your wishes have been granted, many of your dreams will be destroyed - Marilyn Manson
So you're not aware of the black boxes major auto manufacturers started installing in cars?
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Show me the person who doesn't think so and is willing to give up driving.
See, too many make the assumption that they are good drivers while others are not and that somehow this excuses them from obeying laws that really should only apply to those "other" people.
Just like Congress sucks but my Congressman is great, or public schools suck except for the one my kid goes to.
Stupid people are those who think that they should determine what is safe on a given day regardless of what the law states for the road. Apparently certain people think they can plan ahead for the errant car, animal, or person, doing the unexpected? I live by the idea of driving safely everyday; I tend to ride my motorcycle to and from work daily. Speed does kill, because the more of you have when that one slip occurs the more likely you are going to get hurt or skilled or worse do it do someone else.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Auto shutdown has been a bane to the lives of windows users for years. Why shutdown the engine? Surely the roads will just be clogged with 17 year old drivers disabled Vauxhall Corsa's and Ford Fiestas. Just limit the speed to the designated speed limit, making it impossible to drive too fast, till the system gets cracked at least.
If you want to do something like this for commercial vehicles
They already are. For decades, diesel trucks have had mechanical governors that can be adjusted (not in the cockpit.) For at least a decade, there have been dataloggers for fleets, some live...some memory-card based or short-distance radio (ie when you pull into the yard.) They record things like the driver bouncing off the engine rev limiter, engine speed, road speed, throttle, fuel consumption, etc.
A friend bought a new cargo truck a couple of states over, and the PO neglected to mention that the governor had been set for 53mph. One of his drivers drove the truck back while he followed in his car, and they did 53mph for 6 hours straight on a highway where the limit was 65.
Please help metamoderate.
And what do you do in case of an emergency? There are actually good, justifiable reasons for ignoring the posted speed limit at times, and without the user being able to kill the kill switch I know I wouldn't want it anywhere near my vehicle... and following that logic, if the user *is* given a opt-out of sorts for the kill switch how will it ever enforce itself? So you end up with either a) people not being able to speed in certain times that truly necessitate it or b) having a completely useless governor on the vehicle. Great options....
My Sig Sucks
what about the "teach people how to drive safely at higher speeds" part? just like they require and are able to do in northern Europe
Bypass the device in your crappy car then chase a BMW until his device shuts it down. Hijack, bypass and off you go. Its like wolves and goats. yeah, really smart until somebody gets jacked or killed.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'd be happy to see this as an option with a potential owner lockout to keep the teens from speeding along in Dad's turbo whatever. Or even as an idiot device for a lead footed driver.
My only problem is if someone decided not to make it with an over ride. Who's to say it's not a medical emergency? I can only imagine the kinds of lawsuits that would be filed if someone died trying to get to a doctor.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
there should be a zombie attack override, you don't want the car to die if you have a posse of zombies on your tail!
That's the trouble with doing this as an afterthought. The implementation is lame.
That's a terrible implementation.
There are several good ways to do it, most of which involve integration with the engine control system. One would be to provide a mechanical actuator which pushes back against the accelerator when the vehicle has reached the speed limit. A strong push can override it, but if you just press normally, you'll end up going exactly the speed limit. This is how Boeing does aircraft operating envelope protection in their fly-by-wire aircraft. It takes about 25 pounds of force to push through what the computers think the aircraft shouldn't be doing, and in a dire emergency, the pilot can choose to do that.
Some mid-1980s cars had something like that, but for a different reason. Computer engine control was just becoming widespread, but the computers weren't yet trusted enough to be given full authority over the throttle. So there was a bell-crank arrangement, with the accelerator pedal and a powered actuator both linked to the throttle through springs. You could feel some pushback when the control system wanted to briefly back off the throttle while the transmission shifted. Few drivers even noticed.
Killing the engine is just lame.
Lack of attention, people not looking where they are going, not checking their mirrors --- these are the factors that cause accidents and kill.
But, of course, getting people to actually pay attention while driving is a much more difficult task than jumping on a horse of "speed kills" and spending taxpayer dollars on bullshit measures like these.
I'm glad to hear Australia and the UK have enough money to be throwing around for NOTHING.. I'm sure these devices are going to be as secure as Larry's database.. "you can't break it, you can't break in".. ya.. a huh..
He heard it on Fox News.
Seriously guys, if I *ever* have to buy a car with some utter crap like this, I can and will rip it out before I even take it off the lot. Legalities be damned, I will not have anything between me and my car.
I don't know much about the UK's legal system, but that's already routinely failed Constitutional tests in the US. Ticketing the owner of the car is not the same as ticketing the offender. In my home state, red light cameras were pulled based on this argument: I shouldn't be held responsible for someone running a red light in my car. I do agree that politicians can be very creative when it comes to revenue. I can easily imagine a state that requires people to biometrically identify themselves before driving, then tickets them for even minor offenses...
We may not imagine how our lives could be more frustrating and complex—but Congress can. – Cullen Hightower
I'm not a good driver, and I don't drive (probably not good because I never practiced enough though).
I mostly agree with your argument though - _nearly_ everyone thinks they are a good driver.
The problem isn't necessarily that speed causes accidents - it's also that hight speed greatly increases the level of damage.
Sounds damn dangerous. Cutting off the power to a vehicle in the middle of a high-speed highway. Creating a situation that could result in a multiple vehicle pileup.
My first reaction to this was the disgust at how intrusive this system is. I now realize it is a well thought out and considerate system. My problem is that I don't think the system takes into consideration, same as posted limits, the multitude of driving conditions that can occur. If its white out on the highway driving the speed limit is going to get you killed. A clear day with no other cars around you could go 20 over without a worry. In front of a school I would drive slow during school hours. At 1 in the morning, you don't have to watch out for kids. These systems ignore the basic need to teach drivers how to drive safely considering the surrounding conditions.
I have always wondered about if it was possible to build a barcode scanner under a car.. if the car passed over a largish painted bar code on the road it could give you street information (speed limit/streetname). I guess you could use a chip but paint is probably cheaper. Though on road graffiti/wear might change the data.
_w_
As much as people think it's their god given right to drive, it's not. So the government, rather than tracking people, limiting their speed, using cameras, etc., should make the training and testing required to obtain a licence much harder.
Have an upper age limit on driving too and take old people's licences away.
When they do have a licence and do stupid things it should be taken away on the first offence. Anything the government does now is just profiting from drivers. If they really care about saving lives then quit fucking about and just get the bad people off the road.
> "If the speed of a car goes over the posted legal limit, a warning sounds.
> If the driver ignores the warning, <b>the device eventually cuts all power to</b>
> <b>the car</b> because a cut-off switch has been installed between the accelerator and the engine."
Since it isn't speed, but speed <b>differences</b> that cause the crashes in the first place, I predict power being cut off will cause more accidents.
Since politicians allow people to sue doctors and drug companies who cause deaths, I propose the same actions be allowed against politicians.
That will clear things up quickly.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
is too have entry/exit zones using rfid tagging system. When a vehicle enters this zone, governance is applied, when exiting governance is released. The added benefit to this is a car without the tagging can be weeded out and authorities alerted (like any toll system now). And it would be cheaper to make and implement.
-- if you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine
Of course, there's this quote here from a govt. official: If the device is successful the Government stands to lose more than $80 million in revenue collected from speeding fines, but Mr Daley says that is not a concern. "The incidence of speed-related fatalities and injuries costs our community billions of dollars each year. If speeding revenues were to fall dramatically, I'd be the happiest roads minister in Australia," he said. Yeah, right, I say. There is a local radio personality who always plays a quotation from our area water service. They say that since people have been conserving water and there is less usage, they now have to charge more for the water that the people *do* use. (boggle!) They'll find something else to ticket/fine/tax people over on this....
If your wife is having a baby, or your kid ate drano or you're out in the woods and your friend just put a hatchet through his foot, make sure you call for an ambulance and wait patiently, citizen. If they are too slow/late, maybe you can sue somebody for the death.
Sounds like typical legislation from an inbred bunch of former lawyers to me.
Your link provides data associated with 2 sattelite conversion. Typicaly GPS will key off of not less than 4 sattelites, and as many as 7, concurrently. Not less than 8 sattelites are in range, and as many as 11, depending on the time of day and location on earth.
Recent action by Obama lifted governemnt regulations as well on the civilian accuracy of GPS. GPS owned by civilians are no longer required to use SA (selective availability) signals, which artificially and randomly throw off GPS data by 10-100 meters. GPS can now accurately guage to within 10m consistantly when interference is a non issue.
As an additional enhancement, L2C sattelites were deployed in 2008, providing a seperate signal in addition to seperate sattelites. The variance in frequency between 2 frequencies transmitted from the same sattelite allows for a greater error correction potentially improving accuracy by 10x. use of an L2C compatible GPS receiver, with SA now disabled, should be able to provide accuracy to within a specific lane on a road, not just to a specific road.
inexpensive consumer GPS, and older models were never really designed for anything more accurate than simple positional reference. They were for navigation, not real-time data. It only had to be accurate enough to guess your location on a road to within a couple hundred yards of an intersection, and guage direction over time. Determining accurate speed was never a requirement.
New GPS units employing advanced algorithms, multi-frequency systems (there are now 2, by 2013 there will be 4), and much more powerful microprocessors are capable of not just real time positional data (accurately), but can process much more advanced mapping technology as well, and many also collect real time information from other combined sources like a-GPS (cellular networks), providing for further improved accuracy.
New GPS units typically record date in 10Hz. Over a 1.5 second window, you're averaging 15 locational samples. At speeds over 30MPH, a less than 10m variance, averaged 10 times a second, over 15 samples will provide a matematically accurate average speed to within a fraction of a MPH.
Your current GPS likely was either responding to SA signaling at the time (it was only recently disabled), had poor sattlite connectivty, or MUCH more likely, had difficulty guaging your location and direction based on 1 second intervals (or 5 second intervals) with variance up to 40m per sample (also considder the x axis). The GPS likely flipped your direction for 1-2 seconds, then reverted you to your current course, all withing its sample averaging period, and that made it look to the simple MPH calculator (designed for reference not accuracy) that you did a very fast circle.
Devices with highly accurate sensing, and properly coded MPH metering, are vavailable. They cost a premium currently as the accuracy improving features and real-time feedback with high sample rates are usually reserved for top-shelf models. That is NOT to say embedding one in a car specifically for speed monitoring would still cost top shelf pricing for the government...
Vehicle allignment, specifically an out of alignment wheel that is the metered wheel for the spedometer, can have an increased spin rate compared to other tires due to it riding on edge which has a slightly smaller circumference. Also considder tire wear on poorly aligned tires, typically thinner than a properly aligned tire on the other side of the car. It's minor, but so are each of the other effects, yet combined, a 2-3 MPH difference is easy to achieve. My Wife's car and my car have dramatic variances (hers ready about 3.5MPH fast due mostly to new tires that are slightly smaller than her old ones) and mine shows about 1MPH slow, so when I'm doing just under 60, she thinks I'm doing nearly 65.
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
means to punish those who film speeders by providing to DMV the footage and license plate of said speeder, who is contacted by insurer who informs speeder of being dropped for coverage, who then hires a lawyer to root out and frag the person who set up and operated the camcorder.
Yep, such a thing happened in Silicon Valley, in the hills of Highway 17 south of Los Gatos. Some ASSHOLE who decided HE had to be in front of everyone, everyday, put at risk the lives, property, vehicles and employment-access-means of every other motorist out there, by speeding liek a mad-ass demon. He so unnerved a home resident that the resident mounted a camcorder and got enough footage enough times to convince the DMV it HAD to act on this asshole. They did their thing, and the insurer did the right thing. Then, the camera operator/resident got outted, fragged, and dragged through court. It seems OBVIOUS that if DMV and an insurer do the right thing, the punished/speed-demon ASSHOLE should not even be allowed to bring the case. Whether DMV de-registered the car or de-licensed to operator or the owner, public safety should come first, even at the expense of the driver who LENDS the car to a reckless friend. The insurer has to keep claims exposure to a minimum, and their move was simultaneously good for the public.
Now, i'm not clean-- i've in my youth done my share of reckless driving, but once the smarter of us realize we're not invincible, or get too many tickets for speeding, and get falsely cited by greedy cops, we cut wayyyy back on driving, or ditch the car for multiple other convenient reasons-- like paying rent, having good local transit, and poor at/near-home parking options.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Revenue from Speeding tickets would decrease. Unless of course they made it a requirement to have the device and then charge you $500 to install it. But who really wins, oh yeah the company selling this crap.
Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
Haven't they heard that at least in Europe there is this kind of thing in trucks. They are limited to 82-89km/h (I've driven alot of trucks and I can confirm it varies).
Why don't they just build such a thing in cars that they can't go over 130km/h as it is the biggest speed limit in most of the world as far as I know. (barring autobahns, of course)
155 KPH or 155 MPH? We can all assume that you are talking about 155 KPH, but I would rather not assume.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
All 18-wheeler will pass you if you drive the speed limit.
Some right wide boy racers, particularly on the bigger roads out west, Hammersmith flyover and that area. One gangster knocked my brother coming home from work clean off his 125cc motorbike about 2am doing way too fast in a boy racer car. Thankfully my wee brother wears proper armour and as it was 2am there were no other cars on the road so my brother and his bike just went skidding down the road and bounced off the kerbs a couple of times til they came to a halt. Could have been messy if more traffic was about.
Wide boys frequently do high speeds late at night on the bigger London roads "because there's nobody about so it's safe" - until they hit innocent people like my brother quietly chugging along home minding their own business, or crossing the road, etc.
I noticed the summary was tagged "bigbrother" but this isn't really big brother this is more nanny state. Which, granted, to a certain degree 1984 was a nanny state, but more so through the cripple of minds than the crippling of freedoms.
Soon children will wear devices that monitor their bloodsugar and hormone levels and if the levels drop too much (i.e. the kid is hungry) for too long, parents will be charged with criminal negligence and thrown in jail and the kids put into foster care where they won't be so horribly mistreated.
Skiffy is Spiffy, but Ort is tort.
Ooooh! I am going into a visionary trance again. OMG! Oh, it is teh futures! Everyone (except cops, the ruling class, other important people) has speed enforcement devices fitted to their vehicles. Oooh! I see cops giving out tickets and fines and lecturing shame-faced motorists! I see tax-funded television safety campaigns. I see huge taxpayer-funded inquiries! The new crime is inappropriate positioning on the road! Crazy madmen are varying the distance their vehicle is from the curb while travelling! Will no-one think of the children? The cops are calling for funding to combat this menace. Roadside billboards say 'Don't kill a bunch of children, keep 0.9 metres from the kerb!'. Oh, the vision is fading now. Fading.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
I have a GPS unit that I rarely use anymore because the unit would become easily "confused" near most freeway exchanges in downtown L.A. and near roads that parallel the freeways. The unit would alert me that I made a wrong turn and state across the top of the screen that I was on the freeway or side street near the freeway I was actually on. I don't know much about the roadways in the UK but I would think this 'could' cause some problems 'if' the GPS becomes confused and thinks a taxi or bus on the express way is on a near by side street.
Why GPS? what ever happened to the good ol' speedometer?
Also speed governors are nothing new. Many larger consumer vehicles (trucks, vans) have them and set around 90-100 for many years now. The power doesn't go out, but the gas gets cut as if releasing the pedal until your speed drops. My old work van (stock) was set for 90.
from 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
to 45 2F 6E 40 3C DF 10 71 4E 41 DF AA 25 7D 31 3F
Higher speed limits on the interstate can decrease accidents, but only if traffic already moves faster than the speed limits. It's not high speeds that are necessarily the problem, but rather variation in speeds. That should be the argument against these things, not that higher speeds save lives. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2621023 http://www.science.org.au/nova/058/058print.htm http://www.consumersunion.org/other/speedlimits/speed031500a2.htm http://www.roadsafety.org.uk/information/publish/article_127.shtml http://sense.bc.ca/disc/disc-09.htm http://www.motorists.org/speedlimits/
But then I realized the cable was blue, so I only gave it one star. I hate blue.
'excessive speed is one of the primary ways that people are killed while driving.'
With the exception of vehicles randomly catching fire, carbon monoxide and the like, it's pretty much the only cause of deaths while driving.
But excessive speed (i.e. not being able to lose what speed you have and avoid a collision) is not the same thing as speeding (going over an assigned number that may or may not be appropriate for current road conditions).
If you're a pedestrian, getting hit by a car doing 40 in a 50 doesn't make you any less dead. Getting hit by the asshat talking on a phone, still doing 65 in a 65 and not noticing that you and the rest of traffic have stopped doesn't make a huge difference vs. the guy hitting at 75. Trying to go through 30mph turns at 30, on a frozen mountain pass, will still kill you.
A device that know what the current speed limit for the stretch of road you're on, and stops you from exceeding it, will reduce some of the excessive speed deaths but nowhere near all of them.
Plus, how long before someone's unit runs with about the accuracy of current GPSs? Mine regularly decides I'm suddenly on the overpass or the access road while I'm actually on the freeway - or vice versa.
How much safer are you when your car suddenly decides that 35 is quite fast enough on a freeway - because the access road to your side is posted at that speed - and you get slammed in to from behind?
How much safer are you when you're doing 35 on that access road and the idiot who's now so used to his car ensuring he's in the right ploughs in to you at the 65 freeway speed his car is picking up?
I think what we really need is a device that will prevent people from going 55 in my 80 zone.
Instead of adding more crap to vehicles lets start taking some of the crap out of them. Let's make vehicles safer by making them simpler. I am not suggesting we take stability control or antilock breaks out of cars or the other true safety features. Let's remove the crap that interferes with the drivers ability to actually focus on the task of driving. Remove all cell phones, video screens for navigation and entertainment, complex controls, richly featured stereos, etc. Let's remove the complex crap that doesn't directly add to the drivers ability to drive safely. Next let's train our new drivers better. The last time a vehicle hit my vehicle it was a taxi driven by a fresh off the boat imagrant who just that day got his drivers license and felt it was OK to try and push other vehicles out his way at stop signs. That is how it worked back in the old country. Granted this example I hope is rare, but it did happen. So before we put more crap in cars look at what really needs doing to improve safety.
This makes about as much sense as requiring citizens (drones) to have a license in order to watch television! I have an idea. If the govt. thinks the average citizen is too stupid to operate a vehicle safely, why don't they just ban cars? If they're so dangerous, then get rid of them. A government employed taxi driver should be made available to take you anywhere you want to to go at anytime.
Nope. They will make sure it is illegal for "citizens" to sue the govt. I had an "issue" once that I won't go into detail about. But at the end of a very long and tedious process about which I had a legitimate grievance I received and official letter that said, and I quote, "The Federal Government is not liable for mistakes made by it's employees."
Seriously, this is about the dumbest idea I've ever heard of. Try passing this off on the Top Gear crowd and I guarantee that something will happen in the courts in England! LOL Having said that I do think people should obey the speed limits and the rules of the road (most of the time). However, this electronic device is begging to create accidents. There are occasionally times when I am on the highway and need to accelerate to pass, etc and it would not be good to turn off the engine at the second I am trying to pass someone. This sounds like an initiative from someone who has too much time on their hands and just wants to benefit the business of a buddy who will be manufacturing the devices. Surely there are more important things to worry with. *yawn*
Depends on the GPS. This works just fine in my track car, confirmed by other speed devices. Its all about how much you're willing to spend (or to make others spend).
Do not fold, spindle or mutilate.
What causes accidents isn't speeding, is the stupid SLOW people! If they were going the speed limit you wouldn't have to pass them, and thus set up a situation in which an accident could occur.
Sooo you and your 8-months pregnant wife are out picnicking and she goes into labour despite the doctor having assured you that the baby wouldn't come early. You can't make it to the hospital on time without speeding, so you speed. BEEEP BEEEP BEEEP - car shuts down - "Sorry honey, I guess we lose this one. I'm so glad the government protected us from unsafe speeds, aren't you?"
Its the sudden deacceleration when you hit something which kills ;)
But seriosuly: Speed by itself does not kill. What does kill is **inapprorpriate** speed. That can be driving too fast OR too slow for the current road conditions and the flow of traffic.
--- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
There's nothing like being cut off just when you needed a little extra 10 seconds punch passing on a two way road.... just to have a little comfort when going head to head with an incoming truck.
Forcing such limiters is daft, a while back I was driving a Mercedes A Class (horrible car BTW*) and it came with a speed limiter of a different sort. You could set a maximum speed on it and then unless you put your foot down the car would only ever do the speed you'd set into it. After driving it for 4 hours I was pretty good at switching between motorway and residential limits. I found it very easy to stick to speed limits but could quite happily go faster if I wished.
I honestly think this sort of device should be pushed into the car market as its considerably better than cruise control and it helps alot with residential/motorway driving.
*the only way I could get the mercedes to handle was to use the hand brake and as I understand it that breaks the controls which stop the car from falling over. Secondly the automatic gear box sucked horribly, by taking direct control of what gear I was in I got much better MPG (5 MPG more)and acceleration out of the thing. The speed limiter was the saving grace, it took the need to concentrate on my speed away.
A little device you put somewhere close to that GPS' antenna. Jamms all GPS signals and sends its own to make it believe you are sitting somewhere.
Only way to remove human error from driving risks is to have fully automated self-driven vehicles.
We already have self landing airplane autopilots, how much harder would it be to create a car's autopilot?
Who paid you fiat money?
Pardon me, but isn't a GPS signal rather easy to jam?
After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
[ ] many drivers drive too fast
[X] many drivers drive too slow
[X] many drivers tailgate / travel too close
[X] many drivers have poor lane discipline
[X] many drivers can't read the traffic / have no road craft skills
[X] many drivers are incompetent
[ ] many drivers are idiots
[X] many drivers think that their job is to form a rolling roadblock to force everyone else to drive at their speed
[X] many drivers are unlicenced/suspended and unregistered/uninsured
[ ] many drivers are drunk/drug affected
[x] many drivers are too busy playing with radio/cd/GPS/cell phone
[x] many drivers are too busy watching speedo for fear of getting booked by hidden cop/ speed camera
[x] many drivers don't know how to overtake safely
[ ] there aren't enough visible police on patrol
[X] there aren't any visible police on patrol
[x] the speed limit changes every hundred metres
[x] knee jerk responses by politicians
Of course, none of these will be solved by using GPS to restrict car speeds as most people don't speed here anyway.
Don't tailgate - the end is near!
What would happen, if say I took my street legal GT3 to the track with this thing on it? Would it shut me down on the track?
This thing sounds like it will be too much of a legal nightmare to do in America - thank God.
..........FULL STOP.
0-60 4.7 sec top speed 174 - that's right an SUV that goes 174.
no bloody freaking governor either.
..........FULL STOP.
How long until "limiter-disabling" chips are released? We've all seen how well anti-modchip campaigns for consoles have worked (ie. not at all). What are they going to do, remotely upgrade the firmware on your car? In which case, wait for the "firmware upgrade disabling" chip.
If the chips are designed well enough, they'll be hidden from view and most likely able to be switched off if a cop pulls you over for any reason.
Or as previously mentioned, a pair of wire cutters might be all that's needed (although that may be pretty obvious if someone looks under the dash/hood).
Homonyms are fun!
You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.
Reducing the unpleasant side effect of traffic, such as accidents, noise and pollution is rightly seen as a high priority by the current UK government (and will most likely also carry on be being seen as such by who ever comes next).
Decreasing vehicle speed so that it is within the specified (design) limit for the road is a very simple thing to do and it will help reduce the side effects by varying (and arguable) amounts.
So question boils down to best do you go about it?
The current approach in the UK of putting up hundreds of speed camera's is
- expensive (huge numbers of cameras/signs to install/maintain)
- will never cover all roads (it's never going to catch the chavs in my side street)
- brings with it its own safety problems (clock watching, stop start speeding)
- wildly unpopular (nobody likes having temptation in the form of a nice cars that'll go well over the limit dangled in front of them, only to be spanked in the wallet and/or license the second they give in).
Compared to more of this, having a car that will not exceed the speed limit seems like a fantastic idea.
This car is a marvel of safety technology, including the system that automatically emergency brakes the car and will avoid a rear ender in speeds up to ~25kph. And at higher speeds it'll still brake in order to reduce the impact.
Adding to this, systems such as the BLIS (blind spot information system or something like that), it's a pretty impressive feat of engineering - if you can afford it!
According to my bro who's put an order for the 2010 model, the test version he tried also alerted him to proximity to the car in front when driving at higher speeds.
For me personally I'm quite intrigued by laser cruise control systems... that would be of huge benefit to me.
ISO certified == THX certified
I think there should be a way to send anonymous messages to any vehicle owner (since it's not really feasible to ID the driver) just by knowing their license plate number. You don't get to know who they are, but you can leave them a message. It could be anything from "hang up and drive" to "your left brake light is out" to "my hovercraft is full of eels". In order to be able to read the messages, you would need to enter the numbers below the barcode already printed on your annual registration.
Make sure to include the time and date of the encounter, and the vehicle owner will probably know who the driver was.
Mal-2
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
This was trialled* in Victoria, Australia about 2 years ago. Biggest problem was keeping the speed limits which change uptodate with the GPS speed zone GIS layer... which was very difficult.
I thought development had moved on from this rather dated tech to more car / sign interaction by putting sensors in signs that 'talk' to the car to let them know the speedzone.
* slightly different system though, when you sped the accelerator would push back at you harder and harder, so to go way over the speed limit you would be almost standing on the accelerator pedal.
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. -- Leo Tolstoy
...At least people will get where they're going faster.
Not everyone who speeds gets killed or kills someone immediately. I used to take my motorcycle over 100mph almost every time I took it out, and I rode all seasons for 20 years.
Never had a problem with accidents, just cops.
Special "turnout" areas are sometimes marked on two-lane roads. You should pull to the side in these areas and allow cars behind you to pass. Other two-lane roads sometimes have "passing lanes." If you are driving slowly on a two-lane highway or road where passing is unsafe, and five or more vehicles are following you, pull to the side of the road wherever you can safely do so to let the vehicles pass.
[UID-HeinzIntel]
You need electric or vacuum brakes on the trailer. A bit of a touch on the trailer brakes is a much more sure way of pulling it straight, and should be a prerequisite for high speed towing.
You just need to get a jammer that will conveince the car you want to overtake that its in a 40km/h zone. It's limiter will cut in, and you can drive past easily.
Could be fun working out how to build something to convince the GPS receiver in other cars that they're in a different speed zone, and force them to slow down.
G'day, According to the Queensland 2003 Transport data which is the only data published, less than 4% of crashes involving a fatality or serious injury are CAUSED by exceeding the posted speed limit. This fact is supported by international research. The Queensland government, and all Australian state governments use the line that "in 20,27,25,22,16 percent (insert appropriate percentage) of serious crashes, at least one vehicle was speeding. Speeding is defined as exceeding the posted speed limit or exceed the speed appropriate for the conditions. However, even the police forensic crash investigators only claim their estimate of the pre crash envelope speed is accurate to 10% to 15%. No government will (or can) tell you how much speed contributed to the crash or even how it contributed. Write to your transport department or your transport minister with these questions and they conveniently ignore the question and any data presented. They reply with the standard bunch of lies. Surprise, the government tells lies. Of course the speed excuse is most palatable to the masses who don't know how to drive and don't want to. It is a cheap and easy option. Stuff 'em, they cannot make you retro fit these devices and they won't work id retrofitted, especially to by 35 yo car. Best Regards, Royce R. Vines When you come to a fork in the road, take it. ~ Yogi Berra
"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) H.L. Menc
Recent action by Obama lifted governemnt regulations as well on the civilian accuracy of GPS. GPS owned by civilians are no longer required to use SA (selective availability) signals, which artificially and randomly throw off GPS data by 10-100 meters. GPS can now accurately guage to within 10m consistantly when interference is a non issue.
No, Clinton disabled SA. The reason he managed to do so was because it was totally ineffective, due to correction systems like DGPS. (Also, 10m is the normal accuracy; GPS can be thrown off closer to 20m occasionally. You can get better accuracy with a WAAS-enabled receiver, but only if you're in the US and in a plane at the time.)
As an additional enhancement, L2C sattelites were deployed in 2008, providing a seperate signal in addition to seperate sattelites.
Nope. L2C-enabled satellites are replacing the normal GPS satellites. I don't think there are enough of them yet to get a fix with L2C enabled, though, even if you could get a receiver that supported it. (The only receivers that do support L2C are the high-end, and expensive, RTK surveying/agricultural GPS units. Adding support is far from easy, and requires hardware changes since it's a different frequency.)
New GPS units typically record date in 10Hz.
Only the really good ones. Most of the common GPS chipsets are 4 or 5Hz at best; a lot of the stuff that claims to be 10 Hz is using interpolation.
They had the technology to forcefully limit car speed for years. They didn't. Why? Speed tickets are part of regional and municipal entities' income. Any system that prevents speeding would cut deep into this income.
Suppose you are at the limit on a highway, and you need to pass a vehicle going at 5miles under. You start to pass, note danger (other cars are on your tail too) and need to accelerate to pass. You go from 60mph to 80mph, and the kill switch comes in and zaps power. You can die, and take others along with you.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
Deceleration did that.
Acceleration doesn't even come close to the bodycount deceleration has and SPEED itself never ever killed anyone EVER.