Speed Limiters

[dazzleman]

What do you guys think of this?  Pretty scary, in my opinion.
____________________________________________________

Forget cameras - spy device will cut drivers? speed by satellite
Dipesh Gadher, Transport Correspondent

IT IS the ultimate back seat driver. Motorists face having their cars fitted with a ?spy? device that stops speeding.
The satellite-based system will monitor the speed limit and apply the brakes or cut out the accelerator if the driver tries to exceed it. A government-funded trial has concluded that the scheme promotes safer driving.

Drivers in London could be among the first to have the ?speed spy? devices fitted. They would be offered a discount on the congestion charge if they use the system.

The move follows a six-month trial in Leeds using 20 modified Skoda Fabias, which found that volunteer drivers paid more attention as well keeping to the speed limit. More than 1,000 lives a year could be saved if the system was fitted to all Britain?s cars, say academics at Leeds University, who ran the trial on behalf of the Department for Transport (DfT).

It is part of a two-year research project into ?intelligent speed adaptation? (ISA), which the department is funding at a cost of ?2m. Results of the initial trial will be presented to ministers this week.

A study commissioned by London?s transport planners has recommended that motorists who install it should be rewarded with a discount on the congestion charge, which tomorrow rises to ?8 a day.

The trial Skodas were fitted with a black box containing a digital map identifying the speed limits of every stretch of road in Leeds. A satellite positioning system tracked the cars? locations.

The device compared the car?s speed with the local limit ? displayed on the dashboard ? and sent a signal to the accelerator or brake pedal to slow if it was too fast. The system can be overridden to avoid a hazard.

?The trials have been incredibly successful,? said Oliver Carsten, project leader and professor of transport safety at Leeds University.

The DfT says it has no plans to make speed limiters mandatory but admits that it is considering creating a digital map of all Britain?s roads which would pave the way for a national ISA system.

Edmund King, of the RAC Foundation, said limiters might make motorists less alert: ?If you take too much control away the driver could switch on to autopilot.?

[ifcar]

Typically the people complaining are the ones who would be caught speeding with the device installed. :P

I don't have a problem with it myself, it could probably lower insurance costs (unless it catches you breaking the law), and it could perhaps be limited to individuals with a poor driving record.

[BMWDave]

This is an invasion of privacy...only convicted and continuous violators of traffic laws should have this in their cars.

[dazzleman]

Typically the people complaining are the ones who would be caught speeding with the device installed. :P

HAHA!  I guess you have a point there.  Guilty as charged.   Of course, I also get caught speeding without the device on occasion.   :P

Still, I think in general it's a bad idea for several reasons.  

One of them is the possibility of a large-scale malfunction that could be very dangerous.  Another is that sometimes it is necessary to speed up to avoid an accident, and this would deny a driver the ability to do so.

In addition, I think the trend of the car doing too much for the driver is very dangerous, as drivers get more and more disengaged.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the best drivers are generally those who drive manual transmission cars, because the manual transmission for them to be more engaged in actually driving, and less on talking on the phone, putting on makeup, eating, shaving, etc.  The speed limiter is a step in the wrong direction with respect to driver engagement in my opinion, a point made in the last sentence of the article.

I'd be interested to hear what some of the LEOs think of this.  Cynically, I doubt it will happen on a large scale because of all the speeding ticket revenue the government would lose.

[BMWDave]

Typically the people complaining are the ones who would be caught speeding with the device installed. :P

HAHA!  I guess you have a point there.  Guilty as charged.   Of course, I also get caught speeding without the device on occasion.   :P

Still, I think in general it's a bad idea for several reasons.  

One of them is the possibility of a large-scale malfunction that could be very dangerous.  Another is that sometimes it is necessary to speed up to avoid an accident, and this would deny a driver the ability to do so.

In addition, I think the trend of the car doing too much for the driver is very dangerous, as drivers get more and more disengaged.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the best drivers are generally those who drive manual transmission cars, because the manual transmission for them to be more engaged in actually driving, and less on talking on the phone, putting on makeup, eating, shaving, etc.  The speed limiter is a step in the wrong direction with respect to driver engagement in my opinion, a point made in the last sentence of the article.

I'd be interested to hear what some of the LEOs think of this.  Cynically, I doubt it will happen on a large scale because of all the speeding ticket revenue the government would lose.

You made very, very, valid points there.  Driving conditions, no matter how hard the government wants to believe, are not always regulated in the same monotonous way.  Different conditions require different speeds, like you said.  

[ifcar]

Typically the people complaining are the ones who would be caught speeding with the device installed. :P

HAHA!  I guess you have a point there.  Guilty as charged.   Of course, I also get caught speeding without the device on occasion.   :P

Still, I think in general it's a bad idea for several reasons.  

One of them is the possibility of a large-scale malfunction that could be very dangerous.  Another is that sometimes it is necessary to speed up to avoid an accident, and this would deny a driver the ability to do so.

From the article:

"The system can be overridden to avoid a hazard."

In addition, I think the trend of the car doing too much for the driver is very dangerous, as drivers get more and more disengaged.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the best drivers are generally those who drive manual transmission cars, because the manual transmission for them to be more engaged in actually driving, and less on talking on the phone, putting on makeup, eating, shaving, etc.  The speed limiter is a step in the wrong direction with respect to driver engagement in my opinion, a point made in the last sentence of the article.

According to the article, drivers with the device were MORE attentive than those without it.

...

[dazzleman]

Typically the people complaining are the ones who would be caught speeding with the device installed. :P

HAHA!  I guess you have a point there.  Guilty as charged.   Of course, I also get caught speeding without the device on occasion.   :P

Still, I think in general it's a bad idea for several reasons.  

One of them is the possibility of a large-scale malfunction that could be very dangerous.  Another is that sometimes it is necessary to speed up to avoid an accident, and this would deny a driver the ability to do so.

From the article:

"The system can be overridden to avoid a hazard."

In addition, I think the trend of the car doing too much for the driver is very dangerous, as drivers get more and more disengaged.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the best drivers are generally those who drive manual transmission cars, because the manual transmission for them to be more engaged in actually driving, and less on talking on the phone, putting on makeup, eating, shaving, etc.  The speed limiter is a step in the wrong direction with respect to driver engagement in my opinion, a point made in the last sentence of the article.

According to the article, drivers with the device were MORE attentive than those without it.

...

Can the system be overriden in time?  Most hazards occur pretty quickly, and require fast action.  And if it can be overriden, what you keep a driver from simply overriding it all the time?

As far as driver attentiveness, I don't believe the study.  I'm sure it has a political agenda.  I know from my own experience that drivers pay less and less attention the more a car does for them.

[TBR]

A couple of things:
1. This system can't be cheap, it would require a lot of tax dollars to get it running on a large scale

2. I suspect that an evil dooer could hack into the computer system, override the override, and control the cars to a certain extent. A new kind of terrorism maybe?

[280Z Turbo]

Big brother is nowhere to be found in my old car. What are they going to do about it?

[giant_mtb]

Umm...is there something in the Constitution that can prevent these from being put into all cars?  Isn't that sort of invasion of privacy?  I mean it's sort of like putting a camera in your car...they always know where you are and you can't get any privacy. <_<

[TBR]

It is certainly an invasion of privacy and I don't think they will try to force them on to people (who knows, they may not even implement the system at all). If they do, I think Raza will go to the Supreme Court himself and show them who's boss

[ifcar]

Their best bet would be to have it as an optional system (with an insurance break as incentive) or for repeat offenders as a substitute for losing their license.  

[Run Away]

I'm all for it, because there will undoubtedly be a large aftermarket to dissable them, and if the system goes into use (which it never will, not in the next 25 years anyways) there will also be less cops out.

So, simple solution for me is to bypass the system, and not have to be on the lookout for police.
It would be almost impossible for them to make the systems tamper-proof.

[Fire It Up]

I say go for it.



But if they have it in my car, it can go to hell.

[BartsSVO]

First, there's nothing in the Constitution that specifically gives an individual a right to privacy. Of course there are some cases that have established a precedent implying that one has a right to privacy in certain situations.

I think it is a dumb idea though. Most of the fear of speed in this country is unfounded and has largely been brought on by the "speed kills" crowd who manipulate statistics to say that "speeding" (the act of exceeding the posted speed limit) is the cause of most accidents. My answer to these Big Brother black boxes is just to buy stuff that doesn't have it. Automobile manufacturers will be the loudest voice against these things if enough people state they won't buy new vehicles that are equipped with these kinds of devices.

Even IF they became mandated by law there are always ways around such devices.

[280Z Turbo]

Henry David Thoreau must be rolling in his grave right now. :o

When technology starts to control us rather than us controlling it, there is a problem.

[Raza]

Speed doesn't kill, you fucks!

[Fire It Up]

Its not the speed that kills, its the idiot in front of you.

[Raza]

Its not the speed that kills, its the idiot in front of you.

Inattentiveness is the most dangerous thing on the road.  That can happen at any speed, more often at lower speeds.

[L. ed foote]

When technology starts to control us rather than us controlling it, there is a problem.

IMO, there has been something of a "movement" to isolate the driver from the driving experience.  It seems that while driving people want to do everything except drive.

[dazzleman]

When technology starts to control us rather than us controlling it, there is a problem.

IMO, there has been something of a "movement" to isolate the driver from the driving experience.  It seems that while driving people want to do everything except drive.

Dude, I completely agree with you, and I think this isolation of people from actual driving is much more dangerous than most speeding.

I've noticed that people who drive cars with manual transmissions are generally better drivers than those who cannot.  This, in my opinion, is because manual transmissions force you to be more engaged with driving than manual transmissions do.

The more cars do for drivers, the less engaged they are with driving, and their attention wanders to other things, like eating, shaving, putting on makeup, or reading.

I'd rather be on the road with a guy who's driving fast but paying close attention, than a slow driver who is distracted.

[thewizard16]

I know I'll sound like an echo, but my only real concern with a system like this is how you'd be able to "override" it in time to quickly gun it out of a sticky situation on the interstate that would otherwise cause you to be semi bug splatter. Seriously, it's an interesting idea, but I don't see any good way to make it work safely.

[SargeMonkey]

Well lets see, there is no computers in any car I drive, exept the camry, and then well I don't know, I just don't like it.

[NomisR]

When technology starts to control us rather than us controlling it, there is a problem.

IMO, there has been something of a "movement" to isolate the driver from the driving experience.  It seems that while driving people want to do everything except drive.

Dude, I completely agree with you, and I think this isolation of people from actual driving is much more dangerous than most speeding.

I've noticed that people who drive cars with manual transmissions are generally better drivers than those who cannot.  This, in my opinion, is because manual transmissions force you to be more engaged with driving than manual transmissions do.

The more cars do for drivers, the less engaged they are with driving, and their attention wanders to other things, like eating, shaving, putting on makeup, or reading.

I'd rather be on the road with a guy who's driving fast but paying close attention, than a slow driver who is distracted.

It's not just the manual transmission thing.  Auto tranny is just fine as is.  My biggest problem is simply disconnecting the driver from the road.  I'm not talking about bone jarring suspension but some suspensions, you can't feel the road, it's like your riding on  clouds, couple with mind numbing steering, it feels like you're playing the arcade, not driving.   The steering wheel gives little to no feedback, the suspension absorbs every single bump and then some, how are you suppose to know if anything goes wrong?  No wonder I found that Toyotas on the road are typically dangerously driven with rampant lane camping since the drivers are so disconnected from the road.

[Raghavan]

what a major invasion of your privacy. sheesh. And like dazzleman said, how the hell can you disable the thing fast enough to speed up out of the accident? by that time, you'll be IN the accident. i'd think these things'll cause more accidents this way.
The problem isn't speed, it's carelessness. We've all been brainwashed with this 'speed kills' thing that now people are paranoid about speeding, and now we have these dumb boxes in cars that drive for you. This system is going to cost hell of money, that we'll be paying. just put manual transmissions in all cars if they're going to be so paranoid, not some crap box that invades your privacy and drives for you. :angry:

[R33 GT-R]

I saw one of those semi bug splatters yesterday evening.  The splatee was a Ford Expedition and it felt the wrath of Mr. Kenworth.

[Tom]

When technology starts to control us rather than us controlling it, there is a problem.

IMO, there has been something of a "movement" to isolate the driver from the driving experience.  It seems that while driving people want to do everything except drive.

Dude, I completely agree with you, and I think this isolation of people from actual driving is much more dangerous than most speeding.

I've noticed that people who drive cars with manual transmissions are generally better drivers than those who cannot.  This, in my opinion, is because manual transmissions force you to be more engaged with driving than manual transmissions do.

The more cars do for drivers, the less engaged they are with driving, and their attention wanders to other things, like eating, shaving, putting on makeup, or reading.

I'd rather be on the road with a guy who's driving fast but paying close attention, than a slow driver who is distracted.

It's not just the manual transmission thing.  Auto tranny is just fine as is.  My biggest problem is simply disconnecting the driver from the road.  I'm not talking about bone jarring suspension but some suspensions, you can't feel the road, it's like your riding on  clouds, couple with mind numbing steering, it feels like you're playing the arcade, not driving.   The steering wheel gives little to no feedback, the suspension absorbs every single bump and then some, how are you suppose to know if anything goes wrong?  No wonder I found that Toyotas on the road are typically dangerously driven with rampant lane camping since the drivers are so disconnected from the road.

The way you wrote that makes it seem like you can't be a good driver unless you're driving a Miata.  I disagree completly.  It's all about paying attention and being aware.  A way people tend to isolate themselves, however, is taking away an important sense: hearing.  It could be by closing all windows or blasting the stereo for example.

[Mr. Breeze]

According to the article, drivers with the device were MORE attentive than those without it.

I tell you what. When I'm speeding I tend to be extra attentive, you know, with avoiding road hazards and cops.  I don't know about you guys.  

[ragnacor1234]

Let's not turn this into a political fight about whether speed limiters are constitutional or not.  There's enough of that at the C/D message boards.  

My concern about the limiters is that it would make passing other cars and avoiding accidents very difficult.  Overall I think we would all benefit from limiters that don't let us go more than 10 mph above the speed limit.  It probably would reduce car accidents to a degree and make the roads a bit safer overall.  We would virtually eliminate car chases if a carjacker or a crimminal can't go about 75 mph and the police still can.  Insurance rates would be lower since there would be less accidents.

Even with all of these benefits I would never approve of such a thing in my car.  I like to drive as fast as I want when I want!!!      

[NomisR]

Let's not turn this into a political fight about whether speed limiters are constitutional or not.  There's enough of that at the C/D message boards.  

My concern about the limiters is that it would make passing other cars and avoiding accidents very difficult.  Overall I think we would all benefit from limiters that don't let us go more than 10 mph above the speed limit.  It probably would reduce car accidents to a degree and make the roads a bit safer overall.  We would virtually eliminate car chases if a carjacker or a crimminal can't go about 75 mph and the police still can.  Insurance rates would be lower since there would be less accidents.

Even with all of these benefits I would never approve of such a thing in my car.  I like to drive as fast as I want when I want!!!      

How would this benefit anyone?  Speed limits are already artificially low and unrealistic.  The only thing that's limiting traffic speed is people lane camping and randomly stomping on brakes because they think they can't make the turn on the freeway going 65mph.  Reducing or limiting speed limit will not help anything but create frustration.  People who can't drive still won't be able to, people who can't and won't yield still won't, they'll still create traffic and cause accidents.  

Another thing, car chases are typically "slow".  The ones I typically see on the televisions are rarely if ever over 85mph.  Most I've seen is the news anchors saying "OMG THE SUSPECT IS DRIVING AT A DANGEROUSLY HIGH SPEED OF 85MPH!!!"    

Plus this weekend, I saw one car (or should I say truck) chase with a semi going about maybe 20mph or even less.  And that went on for a while and I gave up watching.  Either way, limiting speed does not help with accidents, like our artificially low 55 and now 65 mph, all it does is allow the driver to not pay attention to the road and actually lead to accidents.  Having speed limit within a true and reasonable limit is what will help our traffic situaion.