|
The technology exists and - like it or not - ALL new cars will eventually be fitted with sophisticated GPS maps linked to the engine management system to make it impossible to exceed the speed limit. Watch the new car market take a dive and the value of recent second hand cars soar when it happens. It's a few years away yet - for political not technical reasons.
|
Not a chance !
I have a GPS gatso device(Geodesy)and I can tell you that all you have to do to stop it working is cover up the antenna and bingo,no signal.
How are they going to police that one then!
|
|
Quite simply. If you are prosecuted for excessive speed in a vehilce made after the commecment date, guess you'll find a very large GPS guided book thrown at you !
|
So whats new ? Speeding is speeding regardless of anything "they" do.Why bother with a GPS driven device.Why not outlaw any vehicle that is capable of more than 70.Will YOU not stand up and say NO.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone !
|
Phoenix,
I started a thread about this a while back after seeing an article in the Daily Mail. A few people took the mickey, saying that the Daily Mail was bound to be hysterical about it and hadn't scared people for a few days.
Anyway, the thread can be found at www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?f=2&t=11...2
Cheers
Rob
|
|
|
|
>It is actually less than 7 per day(2001 figures) - including pedestrians.
Sorry, you are wrong - they are (nearer) right. 2001 = 3443 people killed = 9.4 per day. See:
www.transtat.dft.gov.uk/tables/2002/rcas/pdf/rcas0...f
He also quoted the spurious 30% due to speed - which we all know is cobblers. I think GPS controlled speed is likely to increase casualties as people will just drive around with their foot on the floor not really concentrating, as the computer is controlling their speed, so they MUST be 'safe'!! What we need is more money spent on driver education - after all 95% of crashes are caused by human error of one sort or another, whether that be exceeding the safe speed for the prevailing conditions (and I use that advisedly, rather than exceeding the legal limit), or other causes.
Maybe the Government will wake up, but maybe pushing 'Speed Kills' is easier.
Richard
|
"after all 95% of crashes are caused by human error of one sort or another"
Maybe - who really knows?
In the meantime, the number of people calling for "education" rather than enforcement FAR exceed the queues at local IAM groups.
Or are we talking of education for "them" rather than "ourselves"?
|
In my case 'me' as I did the IAM training - although I moved away and didn't actually take the test, then had a couple of unsuitable cars, so still haven't done it. I think I will do the ROSPA test some time soon. 100k miles over 7 years, no bumps, no speeding tickets, not stopped by police, very few 'heart in mouth' near miss moments - speaks for itself really! I would recommend advanced training to everyone, in fact would go so far as it should be compulsory, particularly driving at night and on m-ways.
Richard
|
In my case 'me' as I did the IAM training - although I moved away and didn't actually take the test, then had a couple of unsuitable cars, so still haven't done it.
Richard, I put off doing the IAM for years because of driving "the wrong car". Bottom line is it doesn't matter what the car is - you should still be able to drive to IAM standards in it and therefore past your test. RoSPA is apparently more difficult, especially if you are aiming for the GOLD level. After that try the HPC course with John Lyon - excellent training well beyond even RoSPA standards!
Needless to say I don't like the idea of GPS speed limiters.
I think that the bottom line is that most drivers do not have adequate driving skills and rather than something being done to put this right the government and other organisations have decided that it's better to tax the car and driver out of existence rather than teaching them how to drive more safely. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
RichardW
Yes you are right on the arithmetic - sorry - I made <70 a week less than 7 a day doh.
Actually the announcer(as opposed to the reporter) said most of these casualties are caused by speeding - it was also on the video in the BBC website. The reporter then gave his version - as you say.
C
|
Does the speed-limiter just lift off the accelerator, or put the brakes on too if necessary?
What happens if you pass a 30 sign still going at 60? - it takes a long time to coast down to 30, and you might be through the village by then.
|
|
|
|
He also quoted the spurious 30% due to speed - which we all know is cobblers.
If you are being pedantic then I think that speed is a factor in 100% of road deaths. If 1½ tons of metal wasn't travelling towards you then you probably wouldn't be killed/injured.
As for a previous thought - ban all cars that are capable of more than 70mph, that is a good point!! However this does nto take into account driving at 70mph in a 30mph zone.
As for GPS moderating speed, I always thought that the US governemnt owned the satellites that operated the systems and that they might not be too happy having an extra 30 million units taked onto their machines.
To be honest I cannot see any government implementing this - except a European one, which could catch the necessary flack. If a UK gov tried it they would not win the next election! It all comes down to why we object to being stopped from speeding.
|
If you are being pedantic then I think that speed is a factor in 100% of road deaths. If 1½ tons of metal wasn't travelling towards you then you probably wouldn't be killed/injured.
Touche!!
RW
|
|
|
As for a previous thought - ban all cars that are capable of more than 70mph, that is a good point!!
Not a good point at all really. Speed of itself isn't the problem, it's inappropriate speed. 70 is far too fast for passing a school at chucking-out time, but is fine on an open, clear motorway. Also, a car that only has power to do 70 will really struggle in hilly country, will probably be less fuel efficient (engine being worked harder) and won't be popular with families. (After all, if you can only do 70 with the driver in, think how much 4 passengers will slow you down?)
As for GPS moderating speed, I always thought that the US governemnt owned the satellites that operated the systems and that they might not be too happy having an extra 30 million units taked onto their machines.
They do, but as GPS is read-only (i.e. the satellites just send data) then it makes no odds to them whether 1 unit or 1 billion are using it.
As for blocking the antenna to bypass the system (as someone else suggested) the simple solution to that is to limit the speed to 30 if there is no signal and put the hazards on.
|
So every time someone drives through a tunnel or underpass etc,every vehicle will slow to 30 with hazard lights flashing away merrily!
|
|
Or when driving in a no signal zone of which there are quite a few !
|
|
I think most areas will be OK for GPS signal - it comes from triangulation from at least 3 satellites, and isn't related to mobile phone coverage, which is much more patchy. Of course, a bit of cloud could play havoc...
|
|
|
|
|
Either have a time-out, or have a back-up system that takes a signal from a transponder at the start and end of the tunnel which will over-ride the GPS system. You are unlikely to be out of signal range for any stretch of time, so the system could easily carry on with a previous signal for a minute or two - any period longer than this either means a fault or an attempt to block the system.
|
Scenario.
You have just started your car and immediately get on a motorway.Your GPS has not yet locked on,it might take a couple of minutes it might take 5.So are we going to crawl along the motorway in the rush hour at 30 with hazards flashing while it locks on ?
Like a lot of intelligent people,probably including the guys that thought this stupid idea up,common sense itself is in short supply.
They will spend thousands if not millions of (probably) taxpayers money proving a point without standing back to look at the big picture.
|
How long does it take a GPS to get a fix anyway? Surely if it takes as long as 5 minutes then it's not much use for this sort of system anyway, as you can go through 3 or 4 speed limits in 5 minutes.
Actually, ISTR a good while back there was a similar system demonstrated (on Tomorrows World?) where they had transmitters in every speed limit sign which told the car how fast they could go. I suppose the only down-side of this system over GPS is that it would require more infrastructure.
Wouldn't it be more sensible to implement some form of active distance control rather than implementing a speed limit system that probably won't make much difference?
|
Regarding how long to get a fix...
I recently used a Snooper device. It would take anything up to 10 minutes to get 1st fix of the day. It seemed to acquire the satellites quicker betwen journeys. (I think it is something to do with the distance the satellites have moved since last fix).
Once it had acquired, there were only very few occassions when it lost contact, during a journey
|
|
May be a daft point, but would there be any need for these devices to power down? If getting a fix is a problem, then just leave them 'always on' - the drain on the battery will be minimal.
|
|
|
The GPS will be permanently 'on' - independent of ignition so no time will be needed to acquire a signal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
