Limiters for London
Discussion
Follow the link below to seem the City of London's plans for their roads:
http://motoring.sky.com/news/car-speed-limiter-tri...
Limiters! For taxis and buses now, but how long until their become part of the congestion charge... until they become part of the car manufacture industry... You may laugh, but we're not far removed now. What can we do to stop this? How do you feel about this?
http://motoring.sky.com/news/car-speed-limiter-tri...
Limiters! For taxis and buses now, but how long until their become part of the congestion charge... until they become part of the car manufacture industry... You may laugh, but we're not far removed now. What can we do to stop this? How do you feel about this?
///M3 said:
jmorgan said:
Limiters are sneaking in. Not long now until the EU achieves its dream.
People can only take so much. This is a step too far.This isn't about absolute speed limiters.
This is about the controling the vehicle so that it cannot exceed the speed limit on any given road.
There are two variations:
Voluntary: Where you are just advised as to whether you are within the limit or over it.
Controlling: Where GPS and speeed sensors combine with electronics to take control or the vehicle if you try and exceed the limit.
The AA have already said that this is a step too far.
Over at ACE we published a link to the Dft research document based on the first trials of ISA in the UK and parts of it make disturbing reading.
Ignoring the fact that the equipment is not retro-fittable to vehicles without electronics, and that Dft can see a combination of voluntary takeup and compulsion the description of how the compulsory system would work on a motorcycle is frigthening to say the least.
The report says:
If the ISA motorcycle entered the Intervention phase, when the vehicle had significantly exceeded the speed limit, the following inputs were supplied to the rider:
The rider would see the warning lights mounted on the screen flash quickly
The rider would feel the shaker located in the saddle pulse quickly
The rider would hear a fast beeping audio alert
The rider would feel the twist grip roll closed as the power of the vehicle was reduced by the actuator.
Later in the report the authors talk about activating the actuator as the rider changes gear, so this particularly frightening scenario can occur.
You are riding a motorcycle and start an overtaking manoeuvre as you approach a thirty mph zone that you were unaware of.
Part way through the manoeuvre you see an oncoming vehicle and change down to complete the manoeuvre safely before the vehicle reaches you.
As you open the throttle again your power is reduced by the electronics to ensure that you don't exceed the speed limit for the zone you have now entered and you cannot now accelerate enough to complete the overtake before the vehicle reaches you.
The article, and links to the report are here:
http://www.the-ace.org.uk/intelligent-speed-adapta...
Steve Wallace
The ACE Team
http://www.the-ace.org.uk/
This is about the controling the vehicle so that it cannot exceed the speed limit on any given road.
There are two variations:
Voluntary: Where you are just advised as to whether you are within the limit or over it.
Controlling: Where GPS and speeed sensors combine with electronics to take control or the vehicle if you try and exceed the limit.
The AA have already said that this is a step too far.
Over at ACE we published a link to the Dft research document based on the first trials of ISA in the UK and parts of it make disturbing reading.
Ignoring the fact that the equipment is not retro-fittable to vehicles without electronics, and that Dft can see a combination of voluntary takeup and compulsion the description of how the compulsory system would work on a motorcycle is frigthening to say the least.
The report says:
If the ISA motorcycle entered the Intervention phase, when the vehicle had significantly exceeded the speed limit, the following inputs were supplied to the rider:
The rider would see the warning lights mounted on the screen flash quickly
The rider would feel the shaker located in the saddle pulse quickly
The rider would hear a fast beeping audio alert
The rider would feel the twist grip roll closed as the power of the vehicle was reduced by the actuator.
Later in the report the authors talk about activating the actuator as the rider changes gear, so this particularly frightening scenario can occur.
You are riding a motorcycle and start an overtaking manoeuvre as you approach a thirty mph zone that you were unaware of.
Part way through the manoeuvre you see an oncoming vehicle and change down to complete the manoeuvre safely before the vehicle reaches you.
As you open the throttle again your power is reduced by the electronics to ensure that you don't exceed the speed limit for the zone you have now entered and you cannot now accelerate enough to complete the overtake before the vehicle reaches you.
The article, and links to the report are here:
http://www.the-ace.org.uk/intelligent-speed-adapta...
Steve Wallace
The ACE Team
http://www.the-ace.org.uk/
just a question, not designed to flame....
ok IF the national speed limit is 70.
why can cars go a LOT faster
even taking into account 70 +10% + 3mph = 80.
top speeds in excess of 120-140 are easily possible.
IF no one sped, then givernment would loose so much money from gasto's and the like as well.
So if a car is limited to say (80mph) so 70, with a margin to overtake in an emergency, what the problem ?
again, just playing devils advocate?
ta
ok IF the national speed limit is 70.
why can cars go a LOT faster
even taking into account 70 +10% + 3mph = 80.
top speeds in excess of 120-140 are easily possible.
IF no one sped, then givernment would loose so much money from gasto's and the like as well.
So if a car is limited to say (80mph) so 70, with a margin to overtake in an emergency, what the problem ?
again, just playing devils advocate?
ta
Already fitten on trucks,
already found a way to get them off trucks.
The technolgy is there to do just about anything.
That doesn't mean that it 'should' be done, or it is justified.
We already have one of lowest road death rates in Europe, so I guess this will be about saving a polar bear, or iceberg
already found a way to get them off trucks.
The technolgy is there to do just about anything.
That doesn't mean that it 'should' be done, or it is justified.
We already have one of lowest road death rates in Europe, so I guess this will be about saving a polar bear, or iceberg
My argument against this kind of technology doesn't come from the "I want to drive as fast as i like" position.
It's the practice of taking another piece of responsibility away from the driver that bothers me.
The less you have to concentrate on the more dangerous you are.
I have three cars.
A '58 plate Mondeo Estate
A '78 MG Midget 1500
and A '60 Mk2 Zodiac Gasser with a 289 V8, straight tube axle and all the cornering ability of a cow on rollerskates.
Which ones require me to really concentrate on driving them rather than just running on autopilot because of the PAS,PAB,Traction Control, DSC and all the other 'Driver Aids' that are in there.
That is the problem with ISA.
It's the practice of taking another piece of responsibility away from the driver that bothers me.
The less you have to concentrate on the more dangerous you are.
I have three cars.
A '58 plate Mondeo Estate
A '78 MG Midget 1500
and A '60 Mk2 Zodiac Gasser with a 289 V8, straight tube axle and all the cornering ability of a cow on rollerskates.
Which ones require me to really concentrate on driving them rather than just running on autopilot because of the PAS,PAB,Traction Control, DSC and all the other 'Driver Aids' that are in there.
That is the problem with ISA.
In the short term speed limiters pose an affront to our personal liberty. In the longer term I see them as an enabler to more advanced powertrains.
My hope is that we can trade off our unrealized top speeds for enhanced acceleration at the lower register of the speed range. This will be accomplished by the use of induction motor drives to the wheels rather than the conventional multi-ratio gearbox and clutch combo.
I empathise that driving stick brings much satisfaction to posters here but in North America it is getting harder and harder to find manuals on the new car lot. In fact some models are no longer being qualified by their manufacturers to enter this market with the manual transmission option. They seek to avoid the added expense to do this, even more so in these recessionary times, when they know that the demand for manual transmissions is something like one in eight. People today, particularly young people, see the car as an appliance and they want plug and play, fast food and automatic transmissions for cars. It's as simple as that. What we are beginning to see is the death of the manual transmission.
Automatic transmissions have the disadvantage of allowing the cruise gear to take the vehicle to 140mph or more if you hold your foot down long enough. As long as the driver feels or perceives the necessity to always be able to do that then the more advanced electrical transmissions of the 21st century can never compete costwise with conventional mechanical transmissions. Transaxle design will remain stuck in the early 20th century.
But now there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. The coming of the proposed speed limiters though removing the ability and expectation to achieve highly illegal speeds on the one hand does, on the other, help open the door for a new approach to transaxle design that I wish to propose.
It neeeds be said that it has been possible for many years (c.1967) to use an induction motor limited to a maximum of 13,500rpm say, and with an 8:1 fixed gear ratio to give a roadspeed of around 90mph. If the proposed speed limiters also limit conventional vehicles to 90 mph then they will have in effect levelled the playing field for both electrical and mechanical types of transmissions. And what, you may ask, is the good of that ?
Well, it may not be common knowledge here at PH but an induction motor has the capability, with suitable electronics, to provide a constant power range of four to one. That's another way of saying we could expect such a motor to develop full power at 25mph and hold at that level all the way to 90 mph. A 100Hp electric motor will therefore appear to behave as a 150Hp machine. Of course the perceived performance can be even greater when you factor in a throttle response second to none.
Incidentally I am not advocating a pure electric vehicle as the electrical power will have to come from a high rpm genset NOT a battery pack. I state that given that gasoline is still the best way to provide mobile energy while the alchemist for really lightweight battery storage is not likely to turn up any time soon in my opinion.
The impasse is in the mindset that a vehicle must be at least 100mph capable to be considered fast despite the fact that this is beyond posted speed limits in most countries. Mandatory speed limiters could allow disruptive technology to gain a foothold in future road vehicles. Just sayin'.
My hope is that we can trade off our unrealized top speeds for enhanced acceleration at the lower register of the speed range. This will be accomplished by the use of induction motor drives to the wheels rather than the conventional multi-ratio gearbox and clutch combo.
I empathise that driving stick brings much satisfaction to posters here but in North America it is getting harder and harder to find manuals on the new car lot. In fact some models are no longer being qualified by their manufacturers to enter this market with the manual transmission option. They seek to avoid the added expense to do this, even more so in these recessionary times, when they know that the demand for manual transmissions is something like one in eight. People today, particularly young people, see the car as an appliance and they want plug and play, fast food and automatic transmissions for cars. It's as simple as that. What we are beginning to see is the death of the manual transmission.
Automatic transmissions have the disadvantage of allowing the cruise gear to take the vehicle to 140mph or more if you hold your foot down long enough. As long as the driver feels or perceives the necessity to always be able to do that then the more advanced electrical transmissions of the 21st century can never compete costwise with conventional mechanical transmissions. Transaxle design will remain stuck in the early 20th century.
But now there may be some light at the end of the tunnel. The coming of the proposed speed limiters though removing the ability and expectation to achieve highly illegal speeds on the one hand does, on the other, help open the door for a new approach to transaxle design that I wish to propose.
It neeeds be said that it has been possible for many years (c.1967) to use an induction motor limited to a maximum of 13,500rpm say, and with an 8:1 fixed gear ratio to give a roadspeed of around 90mph. If the proposed speed limiters also limit conventional vehicles to 90 mph then they will have in effect levelled the playing field for both electrical and mechanical types of transmissions. And what, you may ask, is the good of that ?
Well, it may not be common knowledge here at PH but an induction motor has the capability, with suitable electronics, to provide a constant power range of four to one. That's another way of saying we could expect such a motor to develop full power at 25mph and hold at that level all the way to 90 mph. A 100Hp electric motor will therefore appear to behave as a 150Hp machine. Of course the perceived performance can be even greater when you factor in a throttle response second to none.
Incidentally I am not advocating a pure electric vehicle as the electrical power will have to come from a high rpm genset NOT a battery pack. I state that given that gasoline is still the best way to provide mobile energy while the alchemist for really lightweight battery storage is not likely to turn up any time soon in my opinion.
The impasse is in the mindset that a vehicle must be at least 100mph capable to be considered fast despite the fact that this is beyond posted speed limits in most countries. Mandatory speed limiters could allow disruptive technology to gain a foothold in future road vehicles. Just sayin'.
1960Zody said:
A '60 Mk2 Zodiac Gasser with a 289 V8, straight tube axle and all the cornering ability of a cow on rollerskates.
Which ones require me to really concentrate on driving them rather than just running on autopilot because of the PAS,PAB,Traction Control, DSC and all the other 'Driver Aids' that are in there.
I had such a vehicle many years ago, with the same 289ci V8 and C4 autobox. Made a nice noise. Didn't have the handling finesse of yours, and the torque proved too much for the rusty body, which gently crumbled leaving a trail of rust flakes in its wake...Which ones require me to really concentrate on driving them rather than just running on autopilot because of the PAS,PAB,Traction Control, DSC and all the other 'Driver Aids' that are in there.
bite-me said:
just a question, not designed to flame....
ok IF the national speed limit is 70.
why can cars go a LOT faster
even taking into account 70 +10% + 3mph = 80.
top speeds in excess of 120-140 are easily possible.
IF no one sped, then givernment would loose so much money from gasto's and the like as well.
So if a car is limited to say (80mph) so 70, with a margin to overtake in an emergency, what the problem ?
again, just playing devils advocate?
This has nothing to do with safety and everything to ok IF the national speed limit is 70.
why can cars go a LOT faster
even taking into account 70 +10% + 3mph = 80.
top speeds in excess of 120-140 are easily possible.
IF no one sped, then givernment would loose so much money from gasto's and the like as well.
So if a car is limited to say (80mph) so 70, with a margin to overtake in an emergency, what the problem ?
again, just playing devils advocate?
do with politics.
The politicians have to be seen to be doing something.
Setting national speed limits is the easy solution.
Cars can go a lot faster than the UK limit because limits
vary across Europe, from no limits in Germany to Norway 90 kmh.
To quote the legendary LJK Setright
Speed does not kill. Speed saves.
It saves life by saving time, which amounts
to the same thing.
Alas, there can be no law abiding driver
today under age 55 who can have any idea
what it was like to drive at over 70 mph on
British roads.
It was practical, sensible and pleasant.
If you can forget Big Brother watching you,
it still is.
It's a trial... and there have been plenty of these in the UK and across Europe - and a few in the US too, IIRC.
I've worked on an ISA project (over a decade ago) and there are still some fundamental issues that need to be resolved - in other words, it ain't gonna happen any time soon, so don't bother getting too excited about it just yet...
I've worked on an ISA project (over a decade ago) and there are still some fundamental issues that need to be resolved - in other words, it ain't gonna happen any time soon, so don't bother getting too excited about it just yet...
Lets get some clarity here.
We're not talking about top speed limiters.
We're talkingabout electronics that take control of a vital function of the car.
In doing so they remove yet another piece of RESPONSIBILITY from the driver.
Combine ISA with an enhanced lane departure system and radar cruise control and all the driver has to do is get in, type the destination into the Sat Nav and go to sleep.
Many drivers are asleep already, cocooned in their protecteive boxes, kinosing that shold the hit anything they have safety cells and airbags to protect them.
The driver has a responsibility to control the vehicle when they are driving and should not abrogate that responsibility to electronics or machines.
Aircraft have autopilots but when things fail it is the pilot who lands the thing on a frozen river not the computers.
We're not talking about top speed limiters.
We're talkingabout electronics that take control of a vital function of the car.
In doing so they remove yet another piece of RESPONSIBILITY from the driver.
Combine ISA with an enhanced lane departure system and radar cruise control and all the driver has to do is get in, type the destination into the Sat Nav and go to sleep.
Many drivers are asleep already, cocooned in their protecteive boxes, kinosing that shold the hit anything they have safety cells and airbags to protect them.
The driver has a responsibility to control the vehicle when they are driving and should not abrogate that responsibility to electronics or machines.
Aircraft have autopilots but when things fail it is the pilot who lands the thing on a frozen river not the computers.
1960Zody said:
Lets get some clarity here.
For clarity. It's a trial.Why is it a trial? Because legislation to allow such limiters in a vehicle do not exist.
As stated afore, I worked on an ISA project over a decade ago. The law has still not been changed to allow such systems to run, and they still have other fundamental technical issues to resolve.
ISA on a production basis is still a long way off.
I hate this kind of thing because it masks the real problems so much.
I want fewer people to die on the roads, I really do.
Therefore I want better driver education and more driver responsibility with more police catching people doing actual dangerous things in cars. But no attention is paid to these things, because 'road safety' appears to consist of:
1 Speed
2 Drink driving
3 Using a mobile
And that's it. But the general public don't appear to care becasue no one is talking about improving driver skill or removing licenses from those without it. This type of issue will REALLY save lives, but implimenting controls on driver skill is apparently 'too difficult' for the Police and Lawmakers, so they seem not to bother.
Really. Dissapointing.
I want fewer people to die on the roads, I really do.
Therefore I want better driver education and more driver responsibility with more police catching people doing actual dangerous things in cars. But no attention is paid to these things, because 'road safety' appears to consist of:
1 Speed
2 Drink driving
3 Using a mobile
And that's it. But the general public don't appear to care becasue no one is talking about improving driver skill or removing licenses from those without it. This type of issue will REALLY save lives, but implimenting controls on driver skill is apparently 'too difficult' for the Police and Lawmakers, so they seem not to bother.
Really. Dissapointing.
Podie said:
1960Zody said:
Lets get some clarity here.
For clarity. It's a trial.Why is it a trial? Because legislation to allow such limiters in a vehicle do not exist.
As stated afore, I worked on an ISA project over a decade ago. The law has still not been changed to allow such systems to run, and they still have other fundamental technical issues to resolve.
ISA on a production basis is still a long way off.
The TA regs that are bringing you mandatory Lane Departure Warning systems, Electronic Stability Control and seatbelt warning systems amongst other fun stuff.
The technology exists and has already been proven to the acceptance of the EU in widescale tests in Holland, Sweeden and the UK (As a sidebar I'd be interested in your experience as part of a test) and is currently under review in the US and Australia.
The technology used by by the tests conducted by Leeds university used a GPS system, an ECU and a TPS with some electronics to run the system.
All interested parties are saying that the only way the predictions for the efficacy of the system can be met is by mandatory fitting, legislated through TA.
Edited by 1960Zody on Monday 18th May 16:09
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff