General Chat

Having been a heavy footed van driver in the past, for more years than I care to admit, I can now appreciate how fortunate I was not to have caused any devastation and I can't say I am not against it.

I'm not against it but just questioned the safety issue as already stated. The only "problem" being the more safety features you add the less people think they need to actually drive.

quite so, Joy, but most likely those accidents were Not the result of SPEEDING......


can you imagine the switchback ride you might have when the car decides what actions to take?

One was, one wasn't.

No, I can't imagine that its installation would result in a switchback ride, Bobtanian, as I think it will gradually reduce one's speed rather than a slamming on of brakes, jolting the driver out of his/her complacency. That would be dangerous to cars close behind, especially if they were too close or speeding.

I can't imagine any vehicle manufacturer being willing to install the limiter if it introduced a different kind of hazard.

Might be a bugger if it goes wrong!

Yet nobody seems to have contemplated all the other associated implications.

Perhaps the one of most concern is the fact that your precise location, whereabouts etc will be known at all times.

Also, a friend who works in insurance recently highlighted the massive downsides to the black boxes that many young drivers have fitted in the mistaken belief that it will lower their premiums.

On a regular basis he speaks to customers who have had their premiums upped and/or claims refused because of these black boxes - very often through no actual fault of the driver but because the claims assessors choose to interpret data a certain way. I would, of course, be accused of being paranoid if I suggested that this was yet another money-making ploy by the insurance companies but he said that they regularly use it as an "excuse" to up premiums when they should actually be reduced.

Apparently, the data, when matched up to other (freely available) information such as social networking, browsing habits etc can and IS used for individual social profiling.

And people are bothered about the introduction of ID cards?

My son can't have one of those boxes on his car as he often has to drive his car early in the morning (5 or 6) and if he's doing that on a weekend they'd think he was out drinking etc late. His insurance broker told him not to bother getting one.

Precisely Caroline.
That's what I meant - interpretation of some of the data is not objective. Driving over the speed limit is fact but surmising that the reason one is driving early in the morning is because that person has been out drinking is pure conjecture.

After doing a quarter of a million miles on motorbikes on rural roads and in London and having been knocked off several times, none of which involved inappropriate speed, I would contend that lack of observation is the main cause of accidents (as with a certain Prince).

BrianW I totally agree - concentration, observation and awareness.

It has a lot to do with "Control"

most things we are allowed to do are with the governments consent,

most laws prohibit something or other...

if we MUST have rules....Lets have sensible ones!

If the Satnav can't tell I've decided to stay on the motorway rather than using the parallel slip road how is the new Limiter going to do?

(Note: the slip road would eventually take me to another motorway heading in the same direction M4 to M3)

Current civilian SatNav is good for 1m and military/Galileo 10cm si it will know where you are. As the EU system will utilise Galileo there could be problems with implementation in the UK.

The complexities of implementing such a project are massive. The European Parliament is fond of this sort of thing but it rarely comes to much. There are far simpler ways to enforce speed limits using GPS than physical speed control of the vehicle.

Cars, trucks etc have become a lucrative and potent target for digital hackers. The putative scheme would be a bonanza for them.