http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7803997.stm Who in their right mind thinks this is a good idea? Im all for taking the ****ing idiots off our roads - but personally I would like to see everyone who has a license retested every 10 years, not for the ultimate nanny system to be enforced. They'd never retest everyone because a) the system would collapse and b) they can't easily make the ££££ from it. I absolutely agree about the problem of entering a "zombie mode" and not being in actual control of the car, and also overtaking - you're in the middle of a maneuver and the sat nav decides you've just hit a 40 limit instead of national and you're ****ed. As it is, while I understand the need for stuff like average speed checks, I think they're used too much and make me less aware so why would anyone volunteer for something like this? I know it'll probably never happen - it's sensationalist - but even so it reminds me of the whole suggestion of average speed checking motorways and it enrages me. /rant mode.
I have to agree with you there Bindi - the solution (imo) to curbing speeding is to encourage responsible driving, rather than nannying people into submission. I'm sure average speed cameras across motorway networks sound brilliant, but I'm doubly sure there'll be a lot more accidents too - all most people will do during an average speed camera zone is stare at the speedo and glance at the road. I don't know about anybody else on here, but the only time I look at my speedo is when I'm driving past a speed camera, the rest of the time I'm looking at the road, making sure my speed is appropriate.
The idea that my car would loose power when I'm not in control of it just sounds crazy. There are better ways to increase road safety by educating/training drivers to a higher standards.
I've just started driving, and even I think thats a stupid idea. We just need better driving tests, and harsher penalties for dangerous driving etc. And we also need to stop the goverment wasting our money on stupid reports like this.
Sounds daft to me! Speed limiting cars isnt going to achieve anything. I think better driving tests are needed, I took mine about 6 years ago, and whilst im aware that it has changed since then. I still think its far too easy! Theres loads of idiots around here, Pass test ---> get car (106, corsa, etc..) ---> Drive about like a clown. They simply dont understand how to drive safely.
ABSOLUTELY. While I respect the people working on motorways need balls the size of my fists, I spend more time staring at the speedo than who's around me - everyone is more concerned about money than they are other people's safety. It's a false sense of security too because 50mph is STILL fast enough to kill someone easily. It's about appropriate use of speed, maintaining traffic flow while avoiding potential hazards and respecting the public/situation. You don't do 30, or even 20 past a school or where there are pedestrians, but I'm not sitting at 70 on an open, clear motorway with good visibility. We need tests like the Finnish - skid pans, etc
My wife got caught a few weeks ago, 35 in a 30 area. I don't like the idea of the top speed being automatically adjusted, but if the technology exists let's have a warning buzzer when you drift over the speed limit.
maybe capping top speed in urban areas would be a safe option, like out side schools cap to 30mph and in residential areas, hate the *******s that treat my street like a race track. but not to cap on main roads and motorways, the government should also advertise FREE track days around the country, so people can enjoy fast driving off the public highway. Sounds odd, but ever since my local RAF base started openning it up the public traffic accidents went down.
Capping in urban areas, 30 and 20 zones is fine by me. Most people just dont understand the massively increased risk associated with that extra 5 or 10 mines an hour. However in national speed limit areas I dont think its such a good idea, or at least be capped at a much higher speed (100mph or so). In built up areas people might not need to be nannied but its likely to save lives so great
My dad was caught doing 33 in a 30 zone. He was given the option of paying £70 to do a speed awareness course or three points on his licence. Obviously he chose the awareness course, however while he was there he met people there for doing 40 in a 20 zone. This is pointless of the government and is just another money-spinning scheme that doesn't really help, while the points would serve as more of a severe warning. My dads conclusion was that stats in the highway code for stopping distances were flawed therefore speed limit system is flawed: vehicles, such as a high end sports car, will break/accelerate more quickly that say a lorry. His slightly impractical solution was to have different speed limits for different types of vehicles, so a lorry would have a lower cap that a sports car. Also a lorry doing 20 will do more damage than a car a 20 a) because of the difference in weight, therefore momentum b) also the pedestrian will be forced over the bonnet when their legs are hit, while a lorry has a high, vertical front: resulting in more severs injuries (head/neck). I don't actually drive yet (only in a old banger in our field) but I am aware of the dangers of bad driving, and there are my dad's ideas. Dave
You cant cap vehicles at different speeds because if for instance a lorry gets to the front of a bunch of cars everybody is then capped at 20, someone tries to overtake, accidents ensue. You obviously dont know it but there is some extra limits on big vehicles, see http://www.smartdriving.co.uk/Driving/DefensiveDriving/Speed/UK_Speed_limits.html .
On normal roads my dad does about 30-40 and on residential roads he does about 25 not because he likes to be all "safe" but because visibility is limited and the resedential streets are just congested. And a vast majority of drivers are like this i do not see how it will prevent idiots as they can still crash or tailgate .etc On the motorways my dad drives at a speed relative to the cars in the inner most lane 75-85 the police don't care and I can see why 70mph is an arbitrary limit you will most likely die if you crash at that speed and what matters is your control of the car and consideration for other drivers.
Can't see it work, for various reasons: Where there is a technological restriction, there is a hack. Car "unlocking" service, anyone? Although I don't think it will induce "zombie mode" (cruise control doesn't after all, and there are more compelling reasons why lorry drivers zone out), it will stop people from experiencing, and thus learning, what is a safe speed for the car given its road-holding capabilities and current road conditions. Does a speed limiter know whether there is ice on the road, or obstacles, or what bend looks a little tight? Of course not. Human decicion required... It takes vehicle control away from the driver. This is always very bad. Cruise control comes with at least three different overrides in case it malfunctions. We don't let SATNAV take the wheel either. Technology is dumber than people. If people cannot reliably act correctly in complex traffic situations, why should a speed limiter be able to? Finally, it doesn't teach people responsible driving. It takes away responsibility.
I agree with just about everyone else here - restricting cars to the speed limit is, while good on paper, a very bad idea in practice. I've been in more than one bad situation on the freeway where the best way to escape a crash was to step on the gas and out-run the problem. (E.G.: Semi on my left changing lanes on top of me, lorry beside me on the right, truck behind me with driver on cell phone, oblivious to situation.) There's also a long-term problem with it. If it just restricts speed to the speed limit, people will start using it like cruise control. Just stick the pedal to the metal, and let the computer do the rest, right? This will lead to problems involving blind spots - if the cars are moving at exactly the same speed and they can't speed up, there's very little incentive to slow down and drop out of someone else's blind spot. Accident rates will increase. There's another problem with drivers in cruise-control-mode, too: weather. In the Seattle area, conditions can and do get bad enough that driving the speed limit is utter insanity. People still do. Having a conveniently placed cruise control to go exactly the speed limit will only encourage driving too fast for conditions. So, yeah - very bad idea. It would be better to spend the money on better driver education... (edit: I started writing this before nexxo posted, honest.)
It does sound like a rather flawed idea, having a chip tell me what speed I should be doing is all well and good in theory, but I have had satnav's direct me the wrong way down one way systems and I'm therefore unlikely to trust a system that could apply brakes without any warnings or overrides in cases of malfunctions. However I can see a point in limiting the top speed of vehicles for people who have just passed their tests to 75 for a year or so.
I love that they say this would be on a volunteer basis. Why not just voluntarily slow down of your own accord? Agreeing with everyone who says we need better education for drivers.
Current health and Safety laws in the UK has taken alot of common sense out of manual labours across the country, the type where they would have learn't by having or witnessing a smallish accident. Therefore alot of these people dont seem to respect machinary, a machine will never say sorry for ripping your arm off, it'll keep ripping you arm off until you or someone else turns it off. Now apply this dumbness of the nation to drivers, they think they can get in a vechical and travel at 75mph on the tail of a car, and when the accident occurs, they cant believe it happened? Shock! The powers to be, then look at the nation as a child, ooo best lock the drain cleaner in the cupboard so little timmy dosen't drink it by accident, so poor little timmy never understands why its bad to drink drain cleaner, thus making timmy dumb with little to no common sense. The solution of capping the speed limit via the car is only making the nation dumber, common sense has disappeared almost completley. Teach people better, get rid of one week intensive driving courses, as a cocking 17 year old thinks he knows everything but F**k do they. As a child one day in the car my dad turned around to me and said dose it hurt when you run into a door, i replied 'well yeah, why you ask?' he then reply now look out the window and imagin hitting one of those tree's at this speed! Sounds daft but it made an impact on my developing knowledge, 'dont hit trees when going fast!' lol! One thing were lucky, is the actually chance of the scheme taking off in the UK, what a joke! plus the expense of fitting the device during a huge economic turn down, where fuel prices are only bound to sky rocket again.
I am only going to echo everything that has been said, because it reflects my views perfectly. Furymouse hit the nail on the head for me, if it is voluntary then the people who would be using it are the people who will be going the speed limit. Personally, as much as I trust the electronics in my (japanese) car to work at doing what I want it do to do, I do not trust another piece of electronics to keep the car at the "speed limit". I know several times my satnav doesn't know what road I am on, so why should this chip know any better, the update service would have to be massive as every car in the country would need to be updating for new roads and road layouts that cause speed limit changes at the same time. Idiotic idea...
The only good speed control ever invented is and always will be 'cruise control' it then gives you a chance to shift your legs a little on a long drive. Complete joke i once saw cruise control in a little 3 door cilo, there isn't any room in there to move your legs or relax a little, unless you put your feet under the pedals which is hardly a safe thing to do!
I have been driving for 2 years now and think this is a bit stupid the idea of limiting cars. granted that this may seem good and can work in theory i think that unless done perfectly it wont work and willl just cause too many problems. the only 2 ways of restricting cars the first is the way the new nissian skyline is. which is use a the sat-nav to limit the top speed to a resonable speed. this way you can still able to over take when your need to. Or the german limit all cars to a max speed of 155 through the mechanical linkages e.g. engine. Or use more average speed cameras on our roads to limit people that way. These do work well in my view i think this because i have to drive to and from manchester quite a bit because i am a student there. these cameras are on the roads in the mountains quite abit and as far as i hvae seen it keeps the accident rate lower and makes people slightly more aware. just my 2p
