Engine Mgnt System GPS to limit speeds

Sandwich

GPS units to be fitted to all vehicle's Engine Management Systems to impose road specific speed limits according to a database maintained by the HSA.

Would enable the removal of all the speed cameras delighting the vocal lobby against them. Only very sporadic speed checking by Gardai would be required saving much Garda time and tax payers cash. Those caught with a disabled or modified system would be automatically be suspended from driving for 2 years and have the car confiscated.

All the technology exists. I leave it to someone else to make their fortune from the implementation, sharing only the satisfaction of contributing to road safety.

colm_mcm

I presume you'll be first in the queue for one if/when they become available?

pyramuid man

Is this an idea that you have or something that will happen?

preilly79

along with the obvious benefits to road safety there is the very obvious invasion of privacy inherent in such an implementation. one not-so-baby-step closer towards a big-brother state where every movement and communication is tracked, stored, analysed and shared. no thanks.

SOL

I have been wondering for some time why there has been nothing like this introduced, it would be extremely useful, because it would also mean that speed limits could be actively managed thus potentially increasing many speed limits at different times or more suitable conditions, so it might actually be able to let people travel much faster.

It could also be used for optimum road filling during peak hours, since faster cars don't necessarily mean more cars through the same stretch of road in a limited time.

I say WOOHOO!!!


Also to this big brother state nonsense, it doesn't have to generate back data, ie you can recieve the signal depending on which road you drive without anyone registering that you recieve it. Thus this whole big brother arguement that the motor lobby love to use to allow speeding is kaput...

Robbo

SOL wrote: »

Also to this big brother state nonsense, it doesn't have to generate back data, ie you can recieve the signal depending on which road you drive without anyone registering that you recieve it. Thus this whole big brother arguement that the motor lobby love to use to allow speeding is kaput...

Entirely possible. Until a utilitarian argument is advanced that perhaps storing the data could be used for storing the data. Perhaps to aid in insurance claims or for evidence in a criminal trial.

preilly79

SOL wrote: »

Also to this big brother state nonsense, it doesn't have to generate back data, ie you can recieve the signal depending on which road you drive without anyone registering that you recieve it. Thus this whole big brother arguement that the motor lobby love to use to allow speeding is kaput...

and with no record of your vehicle having received it you've just introduced plausible deniability; "sorry officer, you have no record of my car receiving the message to only go 80kmh, hence me speeding". that won't fly.

Cionád

Keep dreamin' Sandwich

SOL

but you could impelement the technology in such a way that it would be impossible to get such data, or no easier than posting CCTV at every junction and having plate readers.... since to add in a transmitter in the car to reply to the "GPS" which of course you can't reply to since it is an american sattelite system, but if it were a terrestrial radio based system, to add a transmitter would be a clear extra which would be unrequired in a non BB implementation so there is a very clear line there...

dr.bollocko

You could use GPRS data to complete a daily upload of engine data to the evil big brother database.
I mean I wont be doing it.
Ever.
Just so I can enjoy the giddy thrills of 110kmph in a 100 zone when nobody with more than one aerial is around.

Also trucks already have this hardware in place.
<sarcasm>And it sure helps those guys tow the line.</sarcasm>

Tipsy Mac

This guy here had the same idea but was unable to bring it to the public when he attempted...:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiIsIE8iT28

SV

No thanks.
Though there would be a nice business in it for someone to replace the system in it for those that aren't anal about speeding.

Cionád

Tipsy Mac wrote: »

This guy here had the same idea but was unable to bring it to the public when he attempted...:D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiIsIE8iT28

haha, he later got 2 years for crashing his Micra into RTE studios.

ninty9er

The only reason many of our higher quality primary roads and dual carriageways have speed limits at all is because Irish people in general don't see learning to drive as a necessity, they just learn how to use the basic controls of a vehicle.

If everyone learned how to drive properly (including those with full licences) then we would see obvious benefits for road safety. And if the imbeciles passing every Tom, Dick and Mary that doesn't kill or permanently maim someone on their driving test route were given a kick up the hole and blame laid at their door (the correct place really) they wouldn't be long failing the hoardes of people that have passed without merit in recent months. This applies particularly, but not exclusively to SGS centres.

peasant

Leaving aside the whole speeding discussion ...a system like that would simply be too bloody dangerous.

Neither the speed limit sign nor the GPS/engine management system can read the road/the current traffic situation nor can they account for driver error.

There are plenty of possible scenarios where it would be necessary for a driver to actually speed up (and contravene the speed limit) to avoid an accident.

Removing that possibility from the driver is ridiculous.

You would have to go the whole hog and control all traffic movements externally ...not just one.

Alun

.. not to mention the less than complete state of the available mapping for GPS systems here, and the almost complete absence of speed limit information in them, or the willingness, or even capability of the Local Authorities to keep them up to date in that regard.

[sarcasm] Yes I can see how that would work really reliably :rolleyes:[/sarcasm]

Pete4779

Sandwich wrote: »

GPS units to be fitted to all vehicle's Engine Management Systems to impose road specific speed limits according to a database maintained by the HSA.

Would enable the removal of all the speed cameras delighting the vocal lobby against them. Only very sporadic speed checking by Gardai would be required saving much Garda time and tax payers cash. Those caught with a disabled or modified system would be automatically be suspended from driving for 2 years and have the car confiscated.

All the technology exists. I leave it to someone else to make their fortune from the implementation, sharing only the satisfaction of contributing to road safety.

Great idea. Lets start off on ministerial cars and any government issued non-emergency vehicles and see how it goes.

hugoline

The Nissan GT-R, recently tested on TopGear has a speedrestriction based on location, mind you not to the speed limit of the road but to 180 km/h.
This is lifted when on a known (pre-programed) racetrack.

I would have no problem if this is implemented on all cars, to say 130 or 140 km/h.

peasant wrote: »

There are plenty of possible scenarios where it would be necessary for a driver to actually speed up (and contravene the speed limit) to avoid an accident.

Could you actually list a few examples (where accelerating would avert disaster) which can't be avoided by driving with care?

(I have been thinking a while about this, and an out of controll trailer is the only scenario I could come up where accelerating would safe the day)

ianobrien

I've got one small problem with that. I've got three cars here at home, and only one has an engine management of any sort.

So, what are they going to do about my two carb fuelled motors? None of them has an ECU of any description. One of them is near concours, and there's no bloody way anything not 1977 factory fitted Ford parts (or not removable for a show) is going into it.

Another situation. You are heading down the main road at 95kph and you come up behind a car doing 80 to 85kph. You want to overtake. I was always told when overtaking, minimise your time on the wrong side of the road (in other words, floor it!) and by doing so, you break the speed limit. Now then, this GPS job flashes, buzzes or whatever, distracts you while you're overtaking. Is that safe?

I could see more accidents because of this, because if people were overtaking and decided to stay under 100kph (assuming main road here), they would spend more time than was safe on the wrong side of the road.

DubDani

AFAIK every car that is regsistered in Japan has to be limited by the Manufacturer to 111 mph.

hugoline wrote: »

The Nissan GT-R, recently tested on TopGear has a speedrestriction based on location, mind you not to the speed limit of the road but to 180 km/h.
This is lifted when on a known (pre-programed) racetrack.

I would have no problem if this is implemented on all cars, to say 130 or 140 km/h.



Could you actually list a few examples (where accelerating would avert disaster) which can't be avoided by driving with care?

(I have been thinking a while about this, and an out of controll trailer is the only scenario I could come up where accelerating would safe the day)

ninty9er

hugoline wrote: »

Could you actually list a few examples (where accelerating would avert disaster) which can't be avoided by driving with care?

(I have been thinking a while about this, and an out of controll trailer is the only scenario I could come up where accelerating would safe the day)

Let's see, well braking certianly doesn't help on gravel. accelerating out of a skid, because it's nigh on impossible to brake out of one, accelerating when there's an ambulance behind you with flashing lights and sirens going and there's no place to pull in or for it to overtake.

Away from a gun wielding maniac/car jacking (Top Gear did a special on this years ago with Quentin Wilson and Tiff Needle)

ianobrien

hugoline wrote: »

Could you actually list a few examples (where accelerating would avert disaster) which can't be avoided by driving with care?

(I have been thinking a while about this, and an out of controll trailer is the only scenario I could come up where accelerating would safe the day)

Drive a late '80's French Hot Hatch (Peugeot 205 GTi or Citroen AX GT especially) and then you'll learn of how handy the accelerator is (lift-off oversteer central!!!!!!!)

After that, drive one of them hard on a wet, greasy road or gravel, and then you'll know how useful the accelerator is for keeping the car straight.

peasant

ninty9er wrote: »

Let's see, well braking certianly doesn't help on gravel. accelerating out of a skid, because it's nigh on impossible to brake out of one, accelerating when there's an ambulance behind you with flashing lights and sirens going and there's no place to pull in or for it to overtake.

Away from a gun wielding maniac/car jacking (Top Gear did a special on this years ago with Quentin Wilson and Tiff Needle)

...feeding onto a motorway when other drivers make a mistake, finishing an overtaking maneuvre that has gone sour, speeding up to allow an overtaker in trouble to get in behind you safely, speed up again because the car behind you didn't notice you slowing down in time and is about to crash into you ...the list goes on ...

hugoline

peasant wrote: »

...feeding onto a motorway when other drivers make a mistake, finishing an overtaking maneuvre that has gone sour, speeding up to allow an overtaker in trouble to get in behind you safely, speed up again because the car behind you didn't notice you slowing down in time and is about to crash into you ...the list goes on ...

Sorry, didn't want to derrail thread!!

some further points to add to my list, thanks

(I should have added to my previous post, that the implementation is on NEW cars ONLY)

cyclopath2001

ianobrien wrote: »

Another situation. You are heading down the main road at 95kph and you come up behind a car doing 80 to 85kph. You want to overtake. I was always told when overtaking, minimise your time on the wrong side of the road (in other words, floor it!) .....and by doing so, you break the speed limit.

We all have to drive within some kind of limitation, be it the speed limit or the capability of your vehicle, whichever is less. If you can't over take without breaking the law, you must not.

Even though allowing a margin above the maximum speed limit would open up the concession to abuse, it might help defuse the opposition to the speed limiting features, when it might occasionally be necessary (as permitted by law) to exceed the posted limit. In any case, logging of driver behaviour could be called on to provide reliable facts if something bad happens and there's a court case later. It could also help get lower insurance premia. Some privacy protection legislation might be needed though.

The monitoring features would also appease those who argue against hidden speed traps and and who have been demanding constant visible policing. It doesn't get more visible than sitting right beside you.

Let's face it voluntary speed limit compliance (i.e. self-regulation) is not working and the inventiveness of the pro-speeding lobby means there's never any shortage of excuses to break the law.

Darragh29

peasant wrote: »

Leaving aside the whole speeding discussion ...a system like that would simply be too bloody dangerous.

Neither the speed limit sign nor the GPS/engine management system can read the road/the current traffic situation nor can they account for driver error.

There are plenty of possible scenarios where it would be necessary for a driver to actually speed up (and contravene the speed limit) to avoid an accident.

Removing that possibility from the driver is ridiculous.

You would have to go the whole hog and control all traffic movements externally ...not just one.

I don't think the system suggested is designed to limit your speed, as in act as a governing system on the vehicle, but more record and report when you break the speed limit. I agree with the idea and also with Peasant to a degree, insofar as there are occasions when you need to rise above the speed limit momentarily for safety reasons. I think a system that does not report each and every technical transgression of a speed limit but instead gives you a soft warning that stays insde the vehicle, when you breach a speed limit and then warns you that based on this observation, you are going to be automatically reported for speeding should another instance of driver error be recorded within a certain timeframe, would work well...

peasant

ianobrien wrote: »

Another situation. You are heading down the main road at 95kph and you come up behind a car doing 80 to 85kph. You want to overtake. I was always told when overtaking, minimise your time on the wrong side of the road (in other words, floor it!) and by doing so, you break the speed limit.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

We all have to drive within some kind of limitation, be it the speed limit or the capability of your vehicle, whichever is less. If you can't over take without breaking the law, you must not.

Aaah ..so we all drive at 80-85 then, even though "the law" would let us drive at 100?

Well, in that case I'd suggest that we rig this device that it only lets you drive at the exact speed limit. No faster, but no slower either. That way we would all be perfectly safe, compliant with the law and we'd actually get to where we wanted to go *







*may contain traces of nut

ninty9er

peasant wrote: »

Aaah ..so we all drive at 80-85 then, even though "the law" would let us drive at 100?

Well, in that case I'd suggest that we rig this device that it only lets you drive at the exact speed limit. No faster, but no slower either. That way we would all be perfectly safe, compliant with the law and we'd actually get to where we wanted to go *







*may contain traces of nut

ROFLSSL :D:D

+1 on the exactly on the limit argument if we were going to have this device. that'd learn the people to learn how to drive the car as opposed to seeing it as operating a device with the most basic knowledge.

It's a car not a damn mobile phone.

bushy...

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

......... In any case, logging of driver behaviour could be called on to provide reliable facts if something bad happens and there's a court case later. It could also help get lower insurance premia. Some privacy protection legislation might be needed though....

Would be scary easy to implement :

http://www.racepak.com/G2X.php

with video ( could be argued that cars near an accident could provide valuable info too ) :
http://www.pashnit.com/forum/showthread.php?p=219017

http://www.nsc.ie/SERVICES/RSA_Services/Digital_Tachograph.html

Some crossbreed of the Drivers Card tech in the digital tacho and the GPS logger would end the " it was my cousin etc driving."

Sandwich

Just to clarify,I was thinking of it simply as a speeding impeding system rather thana surveilance/logging one.

bushy...

Sandwich wrote: »

Just to clarify,I was thinking of it simply as a speeding impeding system rather thana surveilance/logging one.

Unless its something simple like the Japanese ~180kph limiter , it'd be way too dodgy for all the reasons given above and you'd never get anyone to sell you liability for it. The monitoring stuff is already in trucks for years.

preilly79

Sandwich wrote: »

Just to clarify,I was thinking of it simply as a speeding impeding system rather thana surveilance/logging one.

ideally, that's what you would like it to be, but the reality is otherwise. in order for something like this to work it has to have the support of government to create legislature, as well as co-operation between all the car manufacturers so there's a standard interface or protocol. the investment is huge, and a government will be more likely to (a cynic would say only) support the effort if it can monetize (sp?) it. so, you do that by issuing fines or selling the data collected.

to do either, the data must be collected and stored. i'm not saying it's not impossible - each vehicle could for example maintain a database of roads and their limits, and each would be responsible for implementing restrictions. in that scenario only the vehicle needs to know where it is.

i still would not support it though. driver education, stiffer penalties, greater accountability and better infrastructure would save lives more effectively, IMHO.

Sandwich

Clearly its not an off the shelf system,but its well within the capability of todays technology if we wanted it. Nor is financial cost an issue: road deaths cost 1.4bn /yr, other non fatal accidents even more. Legislation only requires the will to do the right thing.

preilly79

Sandwich wrote: »

Legislation only requires the will to do the right thing.

Amen. Who shall we vote in next time to do it?

daveharnett

Sandwich wrote: »

GPS units to be fitted to all vehicle's Engine Management Systems to impose road specific speed limits according to a database maintained by the HSA.

I can certainly see such a system working on a voluntary basis. I dare say that insurance companies would be able to offer significant discounts to young drivers using such speed nanny devices.

I also think that cameras front and rear (or all sides if you like) on cars could be popular. No BB implications, data would only be stored locally, and discarded after a day/week/month. It would be very useful for resolving claims. Imagine having evidence of that f***er who scraped your car at the supermarket and drove away Given the price/size of webcams and flash memory, I'd say it could be done for a retail of €150-€200 (excluding installation).

ninty9er

daveharnett wrote: »

I can certainly see such a system working on a voluntary basis. I dare say that insurance companies would be able to offer significant discounts to young drivers using such speed nanny devices.

I also think that cameras front and rear (or all sides if you like) on cars could be popular. No BB implications, data would only be stored locally, and discarded after a day/week/month. It would be very useful for resolving claims. Imagine having evidence of that f***er who scraped your car at the supermarket and drove away Given the price/size of webcams and flash memory, I'd say it could be done for a retail of €150-€200 (excluding installation).

As well as for mitigating blame where some idiot pulls out in front of you not leaving enough time to avoid, as happened a colleague last week, who is on first insurance and now has a written off car.

daveharnett

ninty9er wrote: »

As well as for mitigating blame where some idiot pulls out in front of you not leaving enough time to avoid, as happened a colleague last week, who is on first insurance and now has a written off car.

Exactly.

Actually....

Patent pending!

Marcus.Aurelius

Ahmmm,

What happens if you try to overtake someone at 100 kph and they're at 95 kph, you're stuck accross the lines for an awful long time.

Imagine the lawsuits, boneheaded idea imo.

daveharnett

daveharnett wrote: »

Exactly.

Actually....

Patent pending!

Damn.
http://www.edmunds.com/advice/youngdrivers/articles/121027/article.html

Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »

Ahmmm,

What happens if you try to overtake someone at 100 kph and they're at 95 kph, you're stuck accross the lines for an awful long time.

Imagine the lawsuits, boneheaded idea imo.

True. Of course, if your car was restricted to 100kph, there really wouldn't be any benefit in overtaking a car doing 95kph?

Cionád

Marcus.Aurelius wrote: »

Ahmmm,

What happens if you try to overtake someone at 100 kph and they're at 95 kph, you're stuck accross the lines for an awful long time.

Indeed, whats worse is what if those idiots you are overtaking decide to do the speed up while being overtaken strategy.:eek:

RobAMerc

This is an idiotic idea dreamed up by idiots with no idea what they are on about.

Just because you are not breaking the posted speed limit on a road does not mean you are not speeding or being dangerous.

The real issue is bad driving not speeding.

If you think this is a good idea you clearly think that to eliminate speeding will eliminate road deaths - this is the sort of idiotic simplistic approach taken an rammed down the throats of the public and unfortunately regurgitated here on a sickeningly regular basis by people who have no idea or interest in motoring other than to post sh*te.

maidhc

RobAMerc wrote: »

This is an idiotic idea dreamed up by idiots with no idea what they are on about.

Just because you are not breaking the posted speed limit on a road does not mean you are not speeding or being dangerous.

The real issue is bad driving not speeding.

If you think this is a good idea you clearly think that to eliminate speeding will eliminate road deaths - this is the sort of idiotic simplistic approach taken an rammed down the throats of the public and unfortunately regurgitated here on a sickeningly regular basis by people who have no idea or interest in motoring other than to post sh*te.

+1

eringobragh

First of another stupid idea from the holier than thou brigade.

Technology has already been defeated !!!

Run one of these GPS/GSM Jammers and the GPS is rendered useless



As for insurance concerns i was forced to fit a camera system in the car after a couple of dodgy incidents involving the other party THAT could gone against me if no witness was present:mad:

Check my Youtube, I intend on uploading all the **** driving and CYCLING i encounter
http://www.youtube.com/eiredriving

ianobrien

RobAMerc wrote: »

This is an idiotic idea dreamed up by idiots with no idea what they are on about.

Just because you are not breaking the posted speed limit on a road does not mean you are not speeding or being dangerous.

The real issue is bad driving not speeding.

If you think this is a good idea you clearly think that to eliminate speeding will eliminate road deaths - this is the sort of idiotic simplistic approach taken an rammed down the throats of the public and unfortunately regurgitated here on a sickeningly regular basis by people who have no idea or interest in motoring other than to post sh*te.

+1 on that.

I've got a solution for all them. Cart them off to Finland and leave them drive there. Over there, EVERYBODY drives at the speed limit, corners and all. That way, they will learn how to drive, not just how to manage the controls of the car.

Also, over there you are fined by the Police if you drive too slow. It's 20kph under the speed limit, I think, but I'm open to correction on that figure.

Ciaran500

ianobrien wrote: »

Also, over there you are fined by the Police if you drive too slow. It's 20kph under the speed limit, I think, but I'm open to correction on that figure.

Its the same here

ianobrien

Ciaran500 wrote: »

Its the same here

But is it enforced?

It is over there, as friends of mine were done for it, driving at 69kph on a 100kph section of road. The defence was that they were looking for a road off the main road, and the answer was, are you paying by cash, or credit card?

E92

MODEDIT:

"don't feed the troll" image removed ...waay too big

and also ...please let the moderators decide who is and isn't a troll, mkay*


*thou shalt not backseat mod, in other words

cyclopath2001

E92 wrote:

Sweden, possibly the world's safest country to travel in has decided to raise their Motorway speed limit by 10 km/h

Sweden, possibly the world's safest country has effective penalties.