Taste of remote controlled speed restriction (Karting)
Discussion
Had a fun karting session in Hassocks and in the briefing a "virtual pacecar" was mentioned.
It meant that cars could have their speed limited remotely. eg When yellow flags out.
Also was able to penalise drivers who broke the over take on yellow flags rule which meant the rules were followed well.
Made me think of a future where our daily cars are "disabled" like that.
Just wanted to share that
It meant that cars could have their speed limited remotely. eg When yellow flags out.
Also was able to penalise drivers who broke the over take on yellow flags rule which meant the rules were followed well.
Made me think of a future where our daily cars are "disabled" like that.
Just wanted to share that
I was impressed with it, would have been better if it threw up an LED on the steering wheel as I was always on the throttle so not to miss the race speed reactivation.
Improved the rule obedience, I was overtaken on a yellow and then the culprit's engine power reduced and I whizzed by. Next time the yellow flags were out the same driver followed the rules.
Good way to stop the crazy drivers near the end of the session in a safe manner. Those ignoring even the black flags.
Improved the rule obedience, I was overtaken on a yellow and then the culprit's engine power reduced and I whizzed by. Next time the yellow flags were out the same driver followed the rules.
Good way to stop the crazy drivers near the end of the session in a safe manner. Those ignoring even the black flags.
danfilm007 said:
This sounds similar to Code 60s (which I think is a great idea!) but most of the UK racing clubs hated it when they tried it didn't they?
Biggest issue with code 60 for normal club cars is it's totally down to the driver to control the speed rather than pushing a speed limiting button as in GT's plus there is the issue of variance in speedometers between GPS and traditional let alone the inaccuracies with people fitting bigger wheels etc.Code 60 only really works if the cars are limited electronically with verified speeds IMO.
Kraken said:
Don't seen an issue with it on the public road to enforce speed limits to be honest and it would be a godsend in many race series where people think the yellow flag is an opportunity to make up time.
Because all the speed limits on the road are set using science and the 85th percentile approach, and not by local busybodies and councillors trying to look like they are 'doing something'?RSTurboPaul said:
Because all the speed limits on the road are set using science and the 85th percentile approach, and not by local busybodies and councillors trying to look like they are 'doing something'?
Local busybodies? You mean people who are trying to stop their kids being killed by nutters doing 70 in 30 zones?Kraken said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Because all the speed limits on the road are set using science and the 85th percentile approach, and not by local busybodies and councillors trying to look like they are 'doing something'?
Local busybodies? You mean people who are trying to stop their kids being killed by nutters doing 70 in 30 zones?Or will ignore a 60mph limit but totally see the point of a now-dawdling 40mph limit and stick to it religiously?
RSTurboPaul said:
Are you saying that said nutters will ignore a 30mph limit but will definitely stick to a 20mph limit?
Or will ignore a 60mph limit but totally see the point of a now-dawdling 40mph limit and stick to it religiously?
If the car automatically won't allow them to go over the speed limit then yes they will obey. That's the point of the thread....Or will ignore a 60mph limit but totally see the point of a now-dawdling 40mph limit and stick to it religiously?
No idea what point you're trying to make. You were calling people who are trying to enforce speed limits busybodies. You seem to be implying that because some people won't obey any speed limit there shouldn't be any at all.
Kraken said:
RSTurboPaul said:
Are you saying that said nutters will ignore a 30mph limit but will definitely stick to a 20mph limit?
Or will ignore a 60mph limit but totally see the point of a now-dawdling 40mph limit and stick to it religiously?
If the car automatically won't allow them to go over the speed limit then yes they will obey. That's the point of the thread....Or will ignore a 60mph limit but totally see the point of a now-dawdling 40mph limit and stick to it religiously?
No idea what point you're trying to make. You were calling people who are trying to enforce speed limits busybodies. You seem to be implying that because some people won't obey any speed limit there shouldn't be any at all.
I was tilting at the fact that speed limits are regularly now set arbitrarily and on the whim of local councillors / local residents/busybodies, with little reference to science or the actual traffic speeds, which means that 'speeding' in excess of a new limit ends up being done by virtually everyone, as the new limits are usually incorrectly set for the road and the sensible majority rightly travel at the same speeds they did previously.
'Virtual limiters' to enforce incorrectly-set lowered limits will therefore make travel along such a road tortuous and unnecessarily slow.
If limits were set properly, using 85th percentile science, 'virtual limiters' would not be such an issue because driving speeds would still feel 'natural' rather than painfully slow, and the only people affected by the limiters would be 'the nutters' at the very top end of the speed range recorded in the absence of an enforced limit.
WRT the comments about 'nutters', in the absence of continuous enforcement they will ignore any limits, so lowering an unenforced limit to attempt to reduce their speeds is a pointless exercise and just punishes the majority who drive sensibly. (See: 85th percentile)
Strange that most are positive towards this. One of the karts tracks i used to go to had this implemented. During a half hour session about 10 minutes in i got T-boned by a another driver who had no idea what they were doing from another group. Intentionally i believe as i was in the lead and he was at the back somewhere. Not a big incident and both drivers drove off but the steward brought us both in the pits. When in there i got the "Do you know why i've brought you in here" chat and my mistake was i said "i do, but if you had seen the incident you would have seen he intentionally T-boned me and because of this i have now lost the lead". This steward did not like my attitude apparently (i raised no voices or said anything more or less than the quote). He sent me back out, on half speed for the remainder of the session in his own words "to teach me a lesson about respect".
Upon speaking with my group afterwards they all confirmed the other driver had a swing at them also but they all also agreed i should have just said "yes sir" and got on with it.
I am sorry but i do not want to let others determine my speed who cannot be there judging the road conditions, my cars condition or my familiarity with the road. Just as i did not want the steward to be judge, jury and executioner to an incident he did not see believing he has the power to "punish" because he did not like me. I also do not believe in just letting those in power do what they want as it will be marginally easier at the time.
Upon speaking with my group afterwards they all confirmed the other driver had a swing at them also but they all also agreed i should have just said "yes sir" and got on with it.
I am sorry but i do not want to let others determine my speed who cannot be there judging the road conditions, my cars condition or my familiarity with the road. Just as i did not want the steward to be judge, jury and executioner to an incident he did not see believing he has the power to "punish" because he did not like me. I also do not believe in just letting those in power do what they want as it will be marginally easier at the time.
RSTurboPaul said:
I think you have misinterpreted my post or there are crossed-wires about the subjects under discussion - namely i) (incorrectly set) speed limits, ii) the enforcement of limits, and iii) the effectiveness of limits on 'nutters'.
I was tilting at the fact that speed limits are regularly now set arbitrarily and on the whim of local councillors / local residents/busybodies, with little reference to science or the actual traffic speeds, which means that 'speeding' in excess of a new limit ends up being done by virtually everyone, as the new limits are usually incorrectly set for the road and the sensible majority rightly travel at the same speeds they did previously.
'Virtual limiters' to enforce incorrectly-set lowered limits will therefore make travel along such a road tortuous and unnecessarily slow.
If limits were set properly, using 85th percentile science, 'virtual limiters' would not be such an issue because driving speeds would still feel 'natural' rather than painfully slow, and the only people affected by the limiters would be 'the nutters' at the very top end of the speed range recorded in the absence of an enforced limit.
WRT the comments about 'nutters', in the absence of continuous enforcement they will ignore any limits, so lowering an unenforced limit to attempt to reduce their speeds is a pointless exercise and just punishes the majority who drive sensibly. (See: 85th percentile)
I agree 100%. I think the thing that some forget about speeders is that they don't actually want to die. Almost all just want to get home quickly and safely. If there was a huge cliff that was covered in ice then very few people would want to skate to the edge of it. Same goes for driving, nobody wants to have an accident so people are generally going at the rate they believe to be safe. I would far rather we focus on those driving beyond their ability in vehicles not fit for it than to just blanket penalise everyone, who will then ignore the limits anyway as the limits are stupid. I was tilting at the fact that speed limits are regularly now set arbitrarily and on the whim of local councillors / local residents/busybodies, with little reference to science or the actual traffic speeds, which means that 'speeding' in excess of a new limit ends up being done by virtually everyone, as the new limits are usually incorrectly set for the road and the sensible majority rightly travel at the same speeds they did previously.
'Virtual limiters' to enforce incorrectly-set lowered limits will therefore make travel along such a road tortuous and unnecessarily slow.
If limits were set properly, using 85th percentile science, 'virtual limiters' would not be such an issue because driving speeds would still feel 'natural' rather than painfully slow, and the only people affected by the limiters would be 'the nutters' at the very top end of the speed range recorded in the absence of an enforced limit.
WRT the comments about 'nutters', in the absence of continuous enforcement they will ignore any limits, so lowering an unenforced limit to attempt to reduce their speeds is a pointless exercise and just punishes the majority who drive sensibly. (See: 85th percentile)
V6todayEVmanana said:
Had a fun karting session in Hassocks and in the briefing a "virtual pacecar" was mentioned.
It meant that cars could have their speed limited remotely. eg When yellow flags out.
Also was able to penalise drivers who broke the over take on yellow flags rule which meant the rules were followed well.
Made me think of a future where our daily cars are "disabled" like that.
Just wanted to share that
Here the use it after the end of the session when you are expected to the last lap slowly to get in the box. Some people was still going full speed and accidents happened with the people who was correctly slowing downIt meant that cars could have their speed limited remotely. eg When yellow flags out.
Also was able to penalise drivers who broke the over take on yellow flags rule which meant the rules were followed well.
Made me think of a future where our daily cars are "disabled" like that.
Just wanted to share that
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff