Tiggs

i wonder.....in, say, 20 years what if most cars get fitted with devices that can tell what rd your on and limit the speed to match the limit? Due to cost, lets say this only happens around towns (although fair to say it may cover all roads) Would it be that bad?

Just think, no more speeding cameras, tickets, fines or points. Car makers would give up on top speed and outright power and pump money into comfort and ride quality.

As its likley to happen i wonder if its all that bad?


T

ps- while im prepared for lots of "you're mad" responses it would be good if ppl didnt bother with the "speed doesnt kill- inappropriate speed does and the police should arrest rapist instead" I think we all know that there are other things in the world of higher priority but just because speeding, drunk rapist imigrants may be at large doesnt mean nothing will happen to "normal" speeders!

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

The technology already exists, and by all accounts it works very well. Unfortunately, it's also extremely dangerous.

Consider this scenario: you're passing a lorry (limited to 56mph against your 70mph) on a dual carriageway, and another driver is tailgating you. The lorry driver isn't paying attention to you, and begins to pull out to pass a slower vehicle. If you jump on the brakes you'll be struck by the car behind, and if you stay put you'll be smashed into the central reservation. Ordinarily you could drop a cog and accelerate out of trouble, but the speeding nanny-box won't let you. Result? A completely avoidable, serious accident.

If you want a car that's had money put into ride comfort instead of performance and handling, you already have that option - for Scooby money you can have a basic Audi A4, or Lexus IS200, or 3-series beemer...

A.

STi wanna Subaru

iTrader: (1)

If this comes in then you may as well just plug me into the Matrix.

Devil's Refugee

I wouldn't be surprised that there will be a transmitter which will secretely send signals to the Police to charge you should you sustain a speed over the limit for any length of time or miles

Tiggs

andy,

i dont agree. the "you need to accelerate out of trouble" theory is a weak one. if it was't then why are low powered cars allowed on the road? in your example there are planty of cars that you could drop a cog on and they still wouldnt do much!
and as has been mentioned, the tech. will exist to prevent it anyway.

T

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Those cars would get squashed then, wouldn't they? That doesn't mean it's a good idea to introduce technology that would mean ALL cars would get squashed under those circumstances. With a well-trained driver, as they all should be, a more capable car is inherently safer.

A.

speedking

I've often wondered, say someone crosses the road in front of a sensor equipped car. They are quite safe because the time taken for them to clear the road is very small. But, the car sees a stationary (with respect to its direction of travel) object and jumps on the automatic brakes. Result chaos.

Also, an anarchic pedestrian or cyclist could wait in front of your car and you would not be able to pull away

On the plus side there would be no need for pedestrian crossings as pedestrians could stroll out into the road wherever they liked and cars would have to stop without hitting them. Result gridlock.

It ain't gonna happen in town.

Only feasible place IMHO is special highways where trains of cars can be established.

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

The government will NEVER endorse such devices due to the serious lack of revenue that will be generated from speeding motorists, also the police will never catch a stolen car because all cars will travel at exactly the same speed so will never catch the one in front but saying that the stolen car will never get away from the police so it will be stale mate, also the police will actually have to go out and catch real criminals instead of sitting at road side speed traps drinking tea and eating doughnuts

LG John

There is an element of truth in the claim that you can accelerate out of trouble. In the right hands (i.e responsible driver, experienced, etc) a car that can accelerate, brake and handle better can be used to get out of trouble in certain circumstances where a lesser car couldn't. Having spent the last 3 days in a 1.4 306 I've started to reaslise just how much I use the extra power of and braking of the scooby - usually to avoid situations before they become situations. Its all down to responsibility (with great power comes great responsibility ). For example a small chainsaw can take a tree down and can be opperated by a fairly inexperienced 18 year old muppet. If you give him a chainsaw that is 2 times bigger and 4 times more powerful he could potentially take the tree down a lot quicker but could also potentially take his leg off

So far we've talked about cars that won't let you tailgate and cars that won't let you speed. Why draw the line there? Why not just have cars that drive themselves....perfectly...all of the time. Of course, this spells the end for car enthusiasts like you or I, but at lease we'll all be safe on the roads

speedking

Give him a chainsaw 4 times bigger and he won't be able to lift it = Very safe.

The other thing is of course that it is the motorist who will have to pay for all the technology to be installed. No doubt Scoobtsport will produce a bypass chip that fools the system. Now that would be

Adrian F

The simplier it is the less concentration people will give it and the more road accidents we will have.

boomer

See http://www.abd.org.uk/pr/225.htm

The w4nkers at Leeds University obviously live in cloud cuckoo land - and we are paying for 'em!!!

mb

dnb

I could juts imagine it when these "safety systems" start to go wrong when these cars start to get old and sensors etc start to brake down...

It seems that certain manufacturers can't do robust airflow meters let alne something more fancy.

David_Dickson

I read an article about an idea for a traffic system that was basically like an autopilot. A convoy of cars would form up on a motorway and computers would control speed, lane-discipline etc and they would raz along the motorway in "trains" at high speed, only a few feet apart without the driver needing to do anything. The high speeds, small gaps and a computer planning maneuvers well in advance mean traffic congestion is eased.
Great in theory but what if one of the cars has a breakdown, or the central computer crashes?
A load of motorists snoozing with their feet up on the dash would suddenly find themselves dropped into the midle of a high-speed pile up.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Absolutely right. I got a puncture on Tuesday - the tyre overheated and I had to limp home to have it replaced. I wouldn't even have known about it had I not noticed the effect on the handling; had I been part of one of these fully automatic 'road trains', the tyre would have disintegrated with potentially catastrophic results, and I'd have had no warning at all.

Boost II

iTrader: (1)

I think the future of speeding will be stealth cars - lots of matt black angular pannels, virtually invisible to laser and with a radar trace about the size of a small insect. Probably Novas will be the first to adopt these body kits.

fast bloke

The technology has been about to do this for a long time. I 'created' a system which could basically avoid 90% of accidents for my university thesis. The cost was less than £50.00 per car. All the cars could communicate with other cars within a 500 meter radius, and everything (throttle, brakes and steering) were fly by wire, so it would not let you do something stoopid (like pull out when someone was passing you, tailgate etc) If you brake, it tells all the cars within 500 meters that you are braking and your direction of travel, so all the cars going in the same direction will automatically ease up. If you indicate and brake, it would only cause the cars in your lane to slow down. The only flaw in the system, as with all driving was that if someone did not follow the normal rules, then it would shaft everyone. EG - I want to take the next left on a dual carriageway. I wait to the last minute an hit the brakes without indicating - everything behind me slows up. Very very safe, but potentially very frustrating. I can't see it ever being put into force on the roads, as the there could never be a big enough set of logical rules to cover every scenario. As above, pedestrians could wander onto a motorway with complete safety until someone got out of their car and beat them to death with the controller chip.

boomer

fast bloke,

what sort of security/protection would be implemented to stop some "terrorist" sitting at the side of the M1/2/3/4/5/6 etc with a laptop and a transmitter and causing total havoc/destruction??

Also, are you serious that a "fly by wire" system, including solenoids, transmitters/receivers plus probably a GPS system (for speed and direction of travel) would only be fifty notes per car????

mb

fast bloke

This was before GPS was realistic to put in a car. As it was only a thesis I didn't look at hacker security (1 man can only do so much in 9 months) but it worked from a basic motorolla MC68000 chip, 1 transmitter and 4 recievers on each car and a nifty(if I do say so myself) bit of triangulation programming. The transmitter would broadcast up to 2km, but outside 500m reflected signals became difficult to filter out. I was fortunate to go to Queens, so there was a big backing for motorsport/ motor safety (I'm sure you have heard of Dr. Fleck and Jeremy McWilliams) so we got to build the system and try it out at a local track that Team QUB used for testing GP bikes. I wasn't involved in the fly by wire stuff as it was from another research project, so I have no idea what it would cost to make a car do this, but the hardware required to do my bit was less than £50.00. I am quite sure that given the development costs of any current car, the technology could be researched properly with no significant increase in cost to the buyer. The problem is that no matter how foolproof a logical system is, there is always someone who doesn't bother with logic so the system will fail. Maybe as fuzzy logic and AI develop it will become feasible, but by that time there will be no oil left and we will all be walking anyway

p.s. - I should mention that we did get in some trouble from the brodcasting authorities as the kit we were using did cause interference to radios, TV's and those sleeping kiddie listening devices OH:

Tiggs

ok lets simplify this- all cars are limited to 80mph max, any probs with this?

fast bloke

Yep - Sometimes I drive in Germany, or on my 4 mile long private road to the house

GaryCat

The technology exists now to send GPS information of location and speed, and if you are exceeding the limit, to instantly send you a NIP direct to your phone via MMS.

All it needs is for some company to interface the various systems and geo-spacial data together.

G.

PPPscooby

they have technology to that measures your speed over a mile or say between two bridges on a motorway. Just imagine if they stuck it on every motorway bridge, no chance to speed then, but i think they like the idea of fining, easy way to get money.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Tiggs: re-read my example scenario and replace '70mph' with '80mph', which is the normal motorway cruising speed for many (most?) people anyway. Driver training is the key, not speed limiters.

Ever driven through motorway roadworks with a 40 or 50 limit in place, with a lorry behind you? How did they react to being forced to slow down from their usual foot-to-the-floor, brain-in-neutral 56mph limit?

Gary: GPS doesn't work reliably in tunnels, or built-up areas, or where the aerial has been disconnected...

A.

brickboy

If all cars on the road had the speed / distance sensing technology (IIRC Mercedes have tested this and got it to work), no-one would be able to tailgate because the on-car sensors would detect the distance and ease on the brakes to widen the gap.

This would happen all the way down a line of cars.

Edited to say I agree with the above, all these "active" driving safety devices are a double-edged sword.


[Edited by brickboy - 2/7/2003 10:56:00 AM]

Jerome

I agree with Andy that there are many times that more power enables you to accelerate out of danger. This is IIRC often given as a reason why bigger bikes have fewer accidents than mopeds etc.

My main concern about this nanny technology is that people will concentrate less on their driving because they don't have to worry about speed limits. Accidents will probably increase as inattentive drivers fall asleep at the wheel, plough into things because they weren't really concentrating etc. People will also constantly drive at the limit and it is often not safe to drive at the limit.

FFS, more people are killed in the home than in car accidents. Do we see satellite technology being applied to DIYers? We have the safest roads in Europe and people still seem to think the UK has dangerous roads.

[Edited by Jerome - 2/7/2003 12:06:20 PM]