Drivers to take part in speed limiter study
Discussion
The Government is testing hi-tech speed limiters in cars that detect different restrictions. The research will study 20 cars which use global positioning technology to pick up the speed limit wherever it is driven.
An optional speed limiting device will then prevent the car being driven above this limit unless it is overridden. The trial will examine how 80 motorists behave both with and without the speed limiters on the streets of Leeds, West Yorkshire, from next week.
Road Safety Minister David Jamieson said: "This trial will be useful for assessing how drivers respond when the car they are in actively tells them that they are being kept to the speed limit.
"We will also be looking to see how drivers' behaviour changes over time.
"We're not planning to make the use of speed limiting technology mandatory, but we're keen to see what we can learn from this trial.
"We know that speed kills and I look forward to seeing what findings this brings."
The new Intelligent Speed Adaptation system alerts the driver every time a new limit is encountered by the vehicle.
Once the speed limit is reached the accelerator pedal vibrates. But the driver can override the limiter by either kicking down on the accelerator or pushing buttons on the steering wheel.
The research is being conducted by Leeds University and MIRA, which was formally known as the Motor Industry Research Association.
It follows earlier work which suggested that if vehicles used an intelligent speed limiter, such as the one being used in the trials, fatal accidents could be reduced by 19% and injury accidents by 10%.
An optional speed limiting device will then prevent the car being driven above this limit unless it is overridden. The trial will examine how 80 motorists behave both with and without the speed limiters on the streets of Leeds, West Yorkshire, from next week.
Road Safety Minister David Jamieson said: "This trial will be useful for assessing how drivers respond when the car they are in actively tells them that they are being kept to the speed limit.
"We will also be looking to see how drivers' behaviour changes over time.
"We're not planning to make the use of speed limiting technology mandatory, but we're keen to see what we can learn from this trial.
"We know that speed kills and I look forward to seeing what findings this brings."
The new Intelligent Speed Adaptation system alerts the driver every time a new limit is encountered by the vehicle.
Once the speed limit is reached the accelerator pedal vibrates. But the driver can override the limiter by either kicking down on the accelerator or pushing buttons on the steering wheel.
The research is being conducted by Leeds University and MIRA, which was formally known as the Motor Industry Research Association.
It follows earlier work which suggested that if vehicles used an intelligent speed limiter, such as the one being used in the trials, fatal accidents could be reduced by 19% and injury accidents by 10%.
Take a look at the ABD's website where they totally destroy that '1mph = 5%' bollocks. Slow down from 30 to 10mph and there'd be zero accidents? I don't think so.
IIRC the figure comes from a real hotch-potch of the results of studies done in different countries on different roads in different years. Statistically sound?
IIRC the figure comes from a real hotch-potch of the results of studies done in different countries on different roads in different years. Statistically sound?
well, if your chance of being in an accident at 30mph is assumed to be 1 in 100,000 and increase in speed of 1mph results in a 5% increased chance of an accident, then your chance is 1.05 in 100,000 or 1 in 95,238.
Still very small chance.. but if you increased your speed by 2,000,000mph, you'd have a 1 in 1 chance of having an acident, so look out if you're planning on adding NOS to your space shuttle
Still very small chance.. but if you increased your speed by 2,000,000mph, you'd have a 1 in 1 chance of having an acident, so look out if you're planning on adding NOS to your space shuttle
Alternatively, if in a 70mph zone, as suggested a 1mph increase in speed causes a 5% increase in the chances of accident, then a 20mph increase in speed should casue a 100% increase in the chances of an accident. This means doing 90mph risks a 100% chance of an accident (20mph over 70 mph, thus 20 x 5% = 100%).
To reduce this 100% risk of an accident to 0%, INCREASE the speed limit to 90mph, thus reducing the speed increase beyond the limit to 0mph.
Another thing the bloody BBC morons did while covering this article;
The "speeding bad, you not speed" message was driven home by using footage of a Sierra doing 60 down a road whilst being chased by the police and filmed on VASCAR.
What they failed to mention was the car was stolen.
BBC
Well done boys, another excellent unbiased view of a interesting current affairs issue. Just like the Iraq war
The "speeding bad, you not speed" message was driven home by using footage of a Sierra doing 60 down a road whilst being chased by the police and filmed on VASCAR.
What they failed to mention was the car was stolen.
BBC
Well done boys, another excellent unbiased view of a interesting current affairs issue. Just like the Iraq war
The lunchtime news on BBC1 ran the story along the lines of "most fatal accidents involve speeding". They then said, later in the bulletin, that "1000 fatalities were attributed to speeding"
I seem to recall that the statistics were, in recent years, a TOTAL of 3600 fatalities annually, or thereabouts. Since when has 1000 been "most" of 3600?
They need some mathemeticians in the newsroom, methinks.
I seem to recall that the statistics were, in recent years, a TOTAL of 3600 fatalities annually, or thereabouts. Since when has 1000 been "most" of 3600?
They need some mathemeticians in the newsroom, methinks.
madjock said The lunchtime news on BBC1 ran the story along the lines of "most fatal accidents involve speeding". They then said, later in the bulletin, that "1000 fatalities were attributed to speeding"
I seem to recall that the statistics were, in recent years, a TOTAL of 3600 fatalities annually, or thereabouts. Since when has 1000 been "most" of 3600?
They need some mathemeticians in the newsroom, methinks.
No, it's not. It's also not 33%, it's in the range 4 to 8% as a primary cause. Transport research Lab reported it, then denied it by saying speed is a contributory factor in one third of cases.
Maybe, but, if the primary cause ain't there, the crash doesn't happen.
Stats from other police forces confirm 7% - ish.
Doomed to fail.....
Most 'accidents' are not accidents but are caused by a failure of the driver to control the vehicle because of the following factors:-
a) Insufficient concentration (drinking / eating / cellphone use / stereo too loud)
b) Insufficient experience (drives over their ability level)
c) Cannot anticipate potential movement of others around them (pedestrians / other vehicles)
d) Mechanical failure of the vehicle (blow out mid corner)
e) catastrophic loss of adhesion (hit patch of diesel on wet roundabout)
To pass the RoSPA test you need to demonstrate you're at least capable of doing this.
Use of speed limiters may result in excessive risk taking to make progress and boredom, violating at the minimum a) and b) above.
BTW speed does not kill. If it did Richard Noble would be dead. It's forces on the body causing catastrophic system failure that kill. It is yet again the triumph of spin over fact.
Most 'accidents' are not accidents but are caused by a failure of the driver to control the vehicle because of the following factors:-
a) Insufficient concentration (drinking / eating / cellphone use / stereo too loud)
b) Insufficient experience (drives over their ability level)
c) Cannot anticipate potential movement of others around them (pedestrians / other vehicles)
d) Mechanical failure of the vehicle (blow out mid corner)
e) catastrophic loss of adhesion (hit patch of diesel on wet roundabout)
To pass the RoSPA test you need to demonstrate you're at least capable of doing this.
Use of speed limiters may result in excessive risk taking to make progress and boredom, violating at the minimum a) and b) above.
BTW speed does not kill. If it did Richard Noble would be dead. It's forces on the body causing catastrophic system failure that kill. It is yet again the triumph of spin over fact.
ITV News at 6.30pm last night, most accidents involve speeding etc etc. Sensationalistic newscasts as usual. Got my goat completely, wanted to punch the bloke on the tele. Trouble is, the people in charge are pushing this info, the media supporting it cos its "news". We are stuffed big time. Big Brother will win eventually and I don't mean that stupid C4 programme. Still won't buy a Skoda with a limiter...
In fact I won't buy a VAG car ever now cos of this crap.
In fact I won't buy a VAG car ever now cos of this crap.
Can I just point out that this isn't technically 'news'..
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=26857&f=10&h=0
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=34902&f=10&h=0
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=26857&f=10&h=0
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=34902&f=10&h=0
CarZee said:no - if half those in the trial had been involved in major accidents while using the limiters, that would be improved news
mrs fish said: It was new or improved news as of yesterday
Mmmm so how do you enrol to test out this device then. Are there any personality tests needed before you can be selected.
andytk said:
"We know that speed kills and.... "
Yeah, this is about all they know.
Morons.
Andy
We also know that white, heterosexual males, who have the temerity to work and expect equality in the eyes of the law and even-handed treatment generally, along with other, 'less fortunate' stratas of society and in the eyes of the socio-economic edifice of UK Governance, kill small babies and fornicate as beasts in church.
As long as pieces of sh1t like this are allowed to make such preposterous comments, unchallenged and seemingly unchecked by an all-too willing army of vapid nodders in the media, we are pretty much fcuked.
Such sentiments are beneath contempt.
In Oliver Stone's fabulous epic, JFK, anti-Camelotians plotted Jack's demise and wished for "a Texan in the White House."
I currently wish for a similar thing at No.10.
Absolute bastards.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff