New Cars Approved From 2022 To Have Speed Limiters Fitted

[Annie Bynnol 611]

2 hours ago, Resident said:

Black boxes only measure parameters. They don't give any context and that's the issue. 

When I first introduced 'black box' into the thread I did not mean a limited device but something that brings together all the technologies currently used.

PSV, HGV, company, hire, taxis, delivery vehicles, dogs cats, prisoners, computer, laptop, valuable items, mobile phone users etc already make use of devices that track and are capable measuring  many things  they  do.

 

We have the ability to control parking without wardens.

We have the ability to control speeding offenders without radar or cameras.

We have the ability to reduce theft and apprehend criminals.

We have the ability to prevent the untaxed, untested, unlicensed and uninsured from being on the roads.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bargepole23 337]

3 hours ago, Resident said:

Black boxes only measure parameters. They don't give any context and that's the issue. 

But if that black box measured speeds and locations to sufficient accuracy,, which Google Maps technology appears to be able to do, then it would be possible to determine average speeds along stretches of road. If that is over the legal limit, then there is no need of context, it's a clear breach of the speed limit.

 

It would also provide a system which can be adapted for use in any country, as required.

Edited January 28, 2021 by Bargepole23

[Resident 1,181]

10 hours ago, Bargepole23 said:

But if that black box measured speeds and locations to sufficient accuracy,, which Google Maps technology appears to be able to do, then it would be possible to determine average speeds along stretches of road. If that is over the legal limit, then there is no need of context, it's a clear breach of the speed limit.

 

It would also provide a system which can be adapted for use in any country, as required.

"sufficient accuracy" - Therein lies the issue. 

A family member of mine opted for a black box in her car after passing her test. Her route to work took her down a 70mph dual carriageway. 10 metres to the side of the left lane was a parallel residential street, designated 30mph.

On several occasions her little bundle reported to her insurance company that she had done 70mph in said 30, triggering communications to be sent to her advising of the intent to cancel her policy, thankfully by the fourth time they noted her policy to ignore the reading as false.

 

10 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

When I first introduced 'black box' into the thread I did not mean a limited device but something that brings together all the technologies currently used.

PSV, HGV, company, hire, taxis, delivery vehicles, dogs cats, prisoners, computer, laptop, valuable items, mobile phone users etc already make use of devices that track and are capable measuring  many things  they  do.

 

We have the ability to control parking without wardens.

We have the ability to control speeding offenders without radar or cameras.

We have the ability to reduce theft and apprehend criminals.

We have the ability to prevent the untaxed, untested, unlicensed and uninsured from being on the roads.

But again, none of any of those devices monitor context for the reading. 

Let's put it into an easy scenario, one I've been in (sans black box).

You're driving down a road, it's dark and the road is lit but not very well (typical estate type lighting). From an alleyway you're just a few feet from, out of the darkness comes a hooded figure at speed on a bicycle, straight into your path. You brake harshly and steer to the nearside to avoid him. Your reaction to a hazardous situation averted a nasty collision. Well done. 

HOWEVER, the little black box does NOT see the errant cyclist, it does NOT see your actions prevented injury and damage to all involved.  What it does see it a hard braking and hard steering event, both of which count AGAINST you in the scoring system the insurance company uses. You are penalised for someone else's bad road craft. 
 

[DT Ralge 10]

On 27/01/2021 at 11:06, Padders said:

Not before time Rudds.

I've always wondered why car manufacture's are allowed to produce cars that do 100 mph+

The national speed limit is 70,  speed kills..

It would also help the police by reducing the high speed car chases there often involved in.

The breathalyser is a great technical advancement and would save many many lives.

As I understand it the car won't start if it detects alcohol. Is that correct?

NSL is not 70, actually.  It varies for the vehicle and for the type of road but I’m sure you know that ...

[DT Ralge 10]

On 27/01/2021 at 12:31, Resident said:

What's the speed limit at Donnington Park, Silverstone or Knockhill, how about the German autobahn?  

Oh and out comes the falocy that speed kills. Do you die everytime you get on a flight abroad, you're travelling FAR in excess of 100mph before you've even left the tarmac? 

The truth is that speed, as the DIRECT cause of road fatalities is one of the lowest at < 3% whereas other causes such as loss of control (whether under, over or at the speed limit), is the highest at 35% or due care and attention (failing to observe) at 26%.

Speed, indeed, does not kill.  Impact speed does, though, and every single mph over any given speed makes a massive and disproportionate  difference to the force of any resultant coming-together. 
When you quote percentages, be wary of inferring irrefutable fact.  The more complex truth is that the Police Stats19 report (from where KSI stats are derived) allows them to select from a wide range (78?) of contributory factors.  Their summary on page4 allows them to rank up to 6 of their selected contributory factors.  Your reporting simple percentages above is misleading, only tells part of the story and is plain simplistic and wrong. 
German Autobahns are not an advert for good outcomes from high speed on their unlimited sections.   Check here (https://www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Verkehrsunfaelle/_inhalt.html)

[DT Ralge 10]

On 27/01/2021 at 14:03, RollingJ said:

And most deaths/serious injuries occur on 'local' roads. Although speed can have an effect on that in that situation, it is only a consideration, the behaviour of drivers AND pedestrians is a much greater factor.

Most (70% in round figures) injury collisions occur in urban areas. 
Most road deaths (60%-ish) occur on rural roads so, therefore, not that “local”.

 

Driver behaviour is, indeed, a huge factor.   Behaviour is derived from stuff like attitude, beliefs, knowledge, emotions, values, external and internal pressures and drivers ...
 

[DT Ralge 10]

On 27/01/2021 at 14:31, Bargepole23 said:

You chose to list racetracks or German motorways. Neither has any relevance to the average UK driver.

 

The "speed kills" was clearly in the context of driving, not flying, as you well know.

 

If you are arguing that driving at 80 is no more dangerous than driving at 70, that would seem contrary to common sense. If I need to make a decision and react to a danger on the road, I have less time at 80 than I do at 70, and therefore I might be able to avoid at 70, but not at 80. In the same car and conditions, stopping distance increases from 96m to 124m. Kinetic energy increases by 30%, for a 1500kg vehicle.

 

 

Quite right.  
But our focus on speed alone misses the point in my view and the authorities are at long last realising it. 
“At long last” because the Germans have been doing this for a very long time - over here, they are only now trialling speed/space technology I.e. to fine drivers who they perceive to be tailgating.  

This is good in my view because speed on its own doesn’t kill.  Running out of space is a lot worse. 
One negative about their approach, though, from my standpoint is that they are using the word “tailgating”.  Most drivers would not think of themselves as “tailgating”.  Many/most drivers in my book are guilty of driving too close.

[DT Ralge 10]

On 28/01/2021 at 00:34, Resident said:

Distance figures arrived at using a 1953 Ford Anglia with cable operated drum-brakes, figures that are 60 years old and haven't been updated, despite massive advances in braking technology & despite many calls and campaigns by motoring groups such as the RAC. 

For the rest, @ECCOnoob pretty much covered it. 

I have never liked the use of the HC stopping distance table.   It may or may not be out of date as you suggest.  
In training sessions, I lay out an argument that at the 20, 30 and 40mph end of the table, the advances in braking systems and the resultant shortening of braking distances are most likely wholly lost in the longer reaction speeds suggested by my own observations, recent research by Direct Line and a very powerful first-hand account of a fatal crash inquest.   (The HC allows for just 0.66 seconds reaction time.)

20,30 and 40 zones are precisely the road (speed) contexts where  the bulk of vulnerables die that represent more than half of the total death toll. 

Edited February 1, 2021 by DT Ralge

[RollingJ 1,986]

7 hours ago, DT Ralge said:

Most (70% in round figures) injury collisions occur in urban areas. 
Most road deaths (60%-ish) occur on rural roads so, therefore, not that “local”.

 

Driver behaviour is, indeed, a huge factor.   Behaviour is derived from stuff like attitude, beliefs, knowledge, emotions, values, external and internal pressures and drivers ...
 

OK. I hadn't done an investigation of figures before I posted, as I really don't have that much time for this forum, it seems overly aggressive and intolerant of alternative viewpoints (not you particularly), although I respect your responses as they are obviously from a professional angle.

 

The injury/death correlation is a bit obvious - urban areas obviously segregate pedestrians/drivers better, and from my experience once drivers move from heavily congested urban roads to relatively lower traffic density areas, they seem to think they can increase their speed and lower their concentration - a fatal combination.

[DT Ralge 10]

23 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

OK. I hadn't done an investigation of figures before I posted, as I really don't have that much time for this forum, it seems overly aggressive and intolerant of alternative viewpoints (not you particularly), although I respect your responses as they are obviously from a professional angle.

 

The injury/death correlation is a bit obvious - urban areas obviously segregate pedestrians/drivers better, and from my experience once drivers move from heavily congested urban roads to relatively lower traffic density areas, they seem to think they can increase their speed and lower their concentration - a fatal combination.

I’m not sure that we are agreeing or not. 
Driver attention levels clearly vary, sometimes by road type.

But there isn’t, unfortunately, an easy, clear split between “heavily congested” and “open road” when it comes to driver attention levels.

Motorways are thought of as boring and monotonous and allow a lower level of focus to be “normal”, let's say but not exactly healthy.  Fatigue and low-level focus have obvious potential for being contributory factors in crashes but they are hard to pin down because drivers on report are coy with the truth.

Drivers are equally prone to lower level of focus on all-too-familiar roads close to home and work - many crashes happen with 5 miles of home and/or work. 
They are equally slow or  unable to spot the danger on rural trunk roads, at junctions; they take chances that don’t always work out for them.

[RollingJ 1,986]

@DT Ralge - I think we are broadly agreeing, albeit from slightly different angles. 😉

[DT Ralge 10]

On 27/01/2021 at 08:19, rudds1 said:

Been reported from 2022 any new approved cars will have to have speed limiters fitted amongest other things like pre wiring for breathalyser equipment and Volvo are to restrict their cars to 117 mph.     Will people just find a way of over riding these systems etc 

To answer your opening question, yes, they will.  
we seem hell-bent on technological solutions having given up on solving the real issue (the driver).

My take on technology: give me 10 bits of kit and technological wizardry and 10 drivers and I’ll give you 100 ways they’ll still **** it up.  And this is broadly true because, at the drop of a hat, drivers become over-reliant on technology without researching or truly understanding the limitations of the technology.

For example:

- ABS

- on-board tyre pressure monitoring

- tyre tread

- parking sensors

- reversing cameras

- cruise control

- ...

Edited February 1, 2021 by DT Ralge