Australia, UK To Test Vehicle Speed-Limiting Devices

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Australia, UK To Test Vehicle Speed-Limiting Devices

Posted by Soulskill on Wednesday May 20, 2009 @02:19AM from the sounds-like-a-great-prank-device dept.

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.

15 of 859 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

All I have to say is... by just_another_sean · 2009-05-20 02:20 · Score: 5, Insightful

... what could possibly go wrong?

--
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
1. Re:All I have to say is... by Nazlfrag · 2009-05-20 02:33 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Tunnels.
  Drift.
  Valleys.
  Echoes.
  Poor reception.
  Software bugs.
  Hardware bugs.
  Insectoid bugs.
  I'm sure there's more. On the bright side, you could be travelling down a steep enough incline to roll home when the engine dies.
2. Re:All I have to say is... by Asic+Eng · 2009-05-20 02:33 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  ... what could possibly go wrong?
  If implemented as described in the article: not much. With "cut power" they actually mean "limit power to reach only the maximum allowed speed" and you can override it if you wish. (Emergency transport to the hospital, speed limit out of date etc.)
3. Re:All I have to say is... by MozeeToby · 2009-05-20 03:01 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  How is this information not in the summary?
  Summary: If you go too fast, they kill the engine and leave you stranded.
  Article: If you go too fast, they limit your speed to the legal speed limit and you can override it with a push of a button.
  Summary is designed and implemented to piss off and scare the slashdot crowd. Article is a reasonable, if very intrusive, approach to reducing traffic accidents.
  We'd complain if the mainstream media had a headline like "New Nuclear Power Plant Will Mutate Your Children?" and the article says "No, no it won't" wouldn't we? How is this any different.
4. Re:All I have to say is... by Hatta · 2009-05-20 03:14 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  And what happens when the guy in the lane next to you spins out and you have to make a split second decision to punch the accelerator and get clear, or get in an accident?
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
5. Re:All I have to say is... by StikyPad · 2009-05-20 04:13 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  1) It's not just about how well you can maneuver your vehicle along the road surface, it's also about what sort of a hazard your vehicle traveling at high speed presents to other motorists, and what risk they present to you. (And let's face it, everyone thinks they're a better driver than they really are).
  2) Do you really trust everyone around you to judge what is "safe for conditions"? The phrase is a legal catchall for circumstances when a driver is not exceeding the posted limit, but should have known that it's imprudent to continue at 75MPH in freezing rain. It's not a justification to push up against the laws of physics.
  3) How do you define "safe for conditions"? As fast as you can possibly travel? What margin of error do you leave, if any, and how do you calculate that? There are plenty of professional drivers who have trouble doing that on a closed course with known variables. Changing the venue to a public road only makes things worse, unless you put a higher priority on your driving freedom than most people's desire to be free of wanton carnage.
  4) Speed limits are appropriate in most circumstances. Residential and commercial districts have a lot of activity, and it doesn't really matter how straight and flat the road is when a kid runs out in the road, or a traffic light turns red, or someone has to edge their car out into the road a bit just to see if it's clear to enter the roadway.
  5) Rural highways are really the only place that a high speed limit is appropriate, and left of the Mississippi, we have rather high limits -- 75 to 80. There are many places where this could be safely raised to 120+, but the problem is that this isn't Germany, and there are many, many cars on the road here that can't go over 80 or 90. Good luck convincing America that everyone's car *must* be capable of at least 120MPH (and all the parts and maintenance that go along with that).
  6) Speed doesn't kill, but speed differential does. When you have people traveling at 70, 140, and 210MPH all on the same road, it's just asking for problems. What happens when the guy doing 140 changes lanes in front of you, doing 210, to pass the guy going 70? You slam on the brakes, and the guy rounding the curve behind you (driving "not too fast" for conditions) plows into you. Congratulations -- you just got killed and nobody was legally at fault.
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
GPS needs to know road directions by LiquidCoooled · 2009-05-20 02:21 · Score: 5, Insightful

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 :: faster than paper
That's strange.. by Pvt_Ryan · 2009-05-20 02:22 · Score: 5, Informative

UK government official figures show speed is only the causing factor in 5-7% of all accidents.
1. Re:That's strange.. by FTWinston · 2009-05-20 02:30 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  You wouldn't possibly be implying that someone was grossly exaggerating the figures to hype up their own pet cause, would you? In this day and age, that would be simply unimaginable.
2. Re:That's strange.. by Kugala · 2009-05-20 02:33 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Speed doesn't kill, stupid driving kills. A good driver should be able to determine the appropriate speed for the road, traffic, and conditions. A bad driver will get into accidents anywhere, because they don't pay attention or plan ahead.
3. Re:That's strange.. by sunderland56 · 2009-05-20 02:42 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Technically speed is a factor in 99.9% of all accidents. If the car was stationary, no accident would have happened.
  
  But, more sensibly, it is lack of driving ability that is the cause of these accidents. A skilled racing driver could undoubtedly drive safely at a speed far above the posted limit; a 79 year old grandmother with cataracts is unsafe even when driving below the limit. The police should list "lack of skill" as a cause, not speed.
4. Re:That's strange.. by 16Chapel · 2009-05-20 02:55 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  If they could create a device that cut your speed when you drive too close to the guy in front, THAT would save lives. It's incredible how many stupid drivers think it's OK to tailgate.
5. Re:That's strange.. by Anonymous Coward · 2009-05-20 03:15 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  i constantly see people driving right next to tractor trailers, boxed in with nowhere to go, and they just stay there, refusing to speed up or pass because they're going the speed limit and won't dare go a single tick faster. i bet if you asked them why they were doing that, they'd say it was because they were being "safe" in obeying the speed limit - but what the hell is so safe about camping uncomfortably close to an 18-wheeler and riding along side him at 60 MPH?
  there is more to being safe than blindly obeying speed limits.
"Cuts power" not "cuts all power" by Sockatume · 2009-05-20 02:23 · Score: 5, Informative

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?
Re:bad assumption by PPH · 2009-05-20 02:39 · Score: 5, Interesting

True. But look at it from the insurance companies (or gov'ts) point of view. The total cost of all accidents is the number of accidents times the cost per accident. Speed affects the cost per accident to a much greater degree than their probability of occurrence. To the individual, its more important to avoid an accident altogether. But the insurance industry wants to lower the overall cost.
The proper solution to lowering accident probability might entail something that would remove the worst drivers from the roadway*. This is definitely not in the auto industries best interest. It lowers insurance premium receipts and the market for new vehicles. So the industry is motivated to reduce the cost per accident and keep Mr Magoo on the road.
*My personal preference would be to increase the minimum standards for possessing a D/L to the point at which it would remove sufficient numbers of drivers from the roadway so as to reduce traffic congestion. We only have room for X drivers. We'll only issue X licenses to the most competent.

--
Have gnu, will travel.