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
UK government official figures show speed is only the causing factor in 5-7% of all accidents.
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?
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.
Speed doesn't kill anybody.... It's that coming to a sudden stop that gets you every time!
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.
"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.
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.
I imagine that it lets you drive over the limit for more than the minute or so that an overtaking manouvre takes. We have these things called "engineers" who can anticipate problems.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
Proof once again that if your hair is pointy enough, then all problems seem like they can be solved using technology.
"That removing this device would be illegal."
So is speeding.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
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.
"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!
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.
There are roads in my area that have different speed limits in different directions on the same road! Speed limits that jump and drop 30 miles per hour more than once in a single mile! Speed limits that vary by time of day (school zones, etc), and more.
There are new roads being paved daily, others widening or diverted by construction. Temporary speed limits are posted by construction workers constantly. If the device can't react to these as well, it's useless, and probably more dangerous since "if it's not beeping, i'm not speeding" could potentially become a LEGAL defense!
Also, what happens when you are trying to pass a car that's going slower than you, and while trying to pass your engine power drops!?!?
What happens if you have a software glitch, or your device looses calibration. It could hold you to 10 or 20 miles less than the posted speed limit. It could simply fail, and cut engine power output. It could fail to engage and allow you to speed dangerously. It could simply prevent you from driving at all...
The ONLY safe application I can see for this system would be to apply while driving under cruise control, and be an alert-only system.
This is also something too easy to abuse by officers. If it's mandated to be installed, and everyone is being tracked, then entrapment starts to be an issue.
There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
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.
And all laws are inherently just and right, and should be obeyed blindly and without question.
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.
So is speeding.
Nope. It's not illegal, just heavily taxed. ;)
It's illegal, but A) you (generally) can't (or won't) get arrested for it, B) 100% enforcement is impossible (at least without something like this), and C) you can get out of most speeding tickets.
The bottom line is that speeding is mostly (ab)used by localities for revenue generation.
My blog
Speed don't kill. Sudden deceleration kills.
Outlaw sudden deceleration.
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!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I say all the time up here in Canada, if they really cared about speeding, they'd nail everyone going more than 1km/h over the speed limit.
They don't though, because they don't really care.
The police officer driving past me at 140 without his lights on doesn't think speeding is bad, he's doing it himself.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You've apparently never dealt with an insurance company. While investments may be their main business, they do have a little side business doing actual insurance work. Which, to an insurance company, means
1) Collecting premiums
2) Not paying claims unless they absolutely have to, and lowballing the insured when they do.
They'd love for claims to go down. That provides them with a windfall. Predictability? Well, a predictible _maximum_ level of claims is fine, but even insurance companies don't object to a windfall in the form of lower costs.
Since these are auto insurance companies, who have managed to wangle laws requiring auto insurance, they need not worry about reduction in demand for their product; they have the State to provide that for them.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
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.
He heard it on Fox News.