No more speed offences
-
The government of Britain is working on a GPS-based device that would limit a vehicleÂ’s speed based on its geographical location. The GPS-based device will actually step on the brakes if you exceed the speed limit. The satellite-based system monitors the speed limit at your current location and will either activate the brakes or cut the accelerator to prevent you from speeding.
Read more: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1678707,00.html -
That is Traffic Talebanism! What if someone is in an emergency and you've got an old gock loafing away slowly in front of you? -
what is the ambulannce forOriginally posted by Kr0n: That is Traffic Talebanism! What if someone is in an emergency and you've got an old gock loafing away slowly in front of you? -
I hope this device will activate the brake if it spots the driver tailgating woooahahahahahahaOriginally posted by oxford mushroom:The government of Britain is working on a GPS-based device that would limit a vehicleÂ’s speed based on its geographical location. The GPS-based device will actually step on the brakes if you exceed the speed limit. The satellite-based system monitors the speed limit at your current location and will either activate the brakes or cut the accelerator to prevent you from speeding.
Read more: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1678707,00.html -
And what if you are rushing to another place because of an emergency? For example, if your wife had an accident or something? You're not going to hail an ambulance to take you there are you? Please use your head (no not that little stub, I'm talking about the one that is sitting on your shoulders) before posting such replies.
-
while road hoggers have their gas pedal flooredOriginally posted by No_10_Tomas_Rosicky:I hope this device will activate the brake if it spots the driver tailgating woooahahahahahaha -
now that is very unnecessary.. like what kr0n said.. if lets say u call ambulance.. the ambulance has to rush from the hospital to your house.. and then rush back to the hospital to have proper treatment..
-
Well, they could have a emergency button that would remove the speed limiter. However, it will then send a signal to the cops and you will be fined unless you can show that it was a reasonable thing for you to do.
-
For the record, i do not like the idea. I also think it is highly unlikely that the scheme will ever be implemented in the near future.
-
The initial trial in Leeds was very successful and there are plans to extend it to London. They expect more than 1000 lives to be saved each year with this device.
It is possible to temporarily override the signal in an emergency (that is emergency on the road..nothing to do with your wife or pet dog needing to go to the hospital). However, the signal comes back on again if you try to speed...so it gets so frustrating speeding up and slowing down again that you accept it and drive below the speed limit.
LTA may worry about the loss in revenue from speeding tickets. But that is not a problem. Each time you exceed the speed limit, your details can be recorded electronically as a signal is sent to slow you down. It is more efficient than speed cameras and LTA will have a windfall in fines.
With this device, everyone will drive below the speed limit and your ferrari will never go any faster than my subaru. -
If the is a way to install it, there is a way to hack and remove it.
-
HaHa, there's going to be bad news for speedsters.
Anyway, i don't think this idea will appeal to the general road users, if mod don't like this topic, he wil close it, beware -
wbucket: Very true. Look at the speed limiters everywhere in the world. They don't work either. 180km/h? Heh yes, sure. I won't be surprised if some cars have been re-chipped to provide those nannying hogs with false data.
If you were to buy a Ferrari, and it were limited to whatever nonsense speed, how on earth are you going to track it?? There've been much complaints and negative feedback on the traffic policies in England, I'm sure Heng can enlighten us further, being stuck there (no puns intended) himself.
I think one of the biggest factors in road safety is the driver's awareness. The pedestrians are also at fault if they do not cross the roads safely, and more money ought to be spent on driver improvement programs. Teach them how to drive safe, not slow. They'll only get more frustrated by the day with those ridiculous limiters and that might even result in higher rates of road rage haha. -
No harm doing a pilot trial in Singapore for a year and compare the accident statistics,
if traffic collisions can be effectively minimized, then implement it, why not -
thats y now cars have to be designed to be pedestrian friendly....so if they walk into yr car they can simply dust themselves off and continue staggering themselves back home...Originally posted by Kr0n:wbucket: Very true. Look at the speed limiters everywhere in the world. They don't work either. 180km/h? Heh yes, sure. I won't be surprised if some cars have been re-chipped to provide those nannying hogs with false data.
If you were to buy a Ferrari, and it were limited to whatever nonsense speed, how on earth are you going to track it?? There've been much complaints and negative feedback on the traffic policies in England, I'm sure Heng can enlighten us further, being stuck there (no puns intended) himself.
I think one of the biggest factors in road safety is the driver's awareness. The pedestrians are also at fault if they do not cross the roads safely, and more money ought to be spent on driver improvement programs. Teach them how to drive safe, not slow. They'll only get more frustrated by the day with those ridiculous limiters and that might even result in higher rates of road rage haha.
the pedestrians are at fault yes if they jaywalk etc but IT IS the DRIVERS DUTY to safeguard pedestrians at all times....so even if u knock down a jaywalking pedestrian u are in the wrong as u didnt take the necessary precautions....all these things are already taught in driving schs liao....whether the driver throws it away or uses them to his advantage is his own problem -
because in britain the drivers really speed and get away. in US high speed kills so many. so is malaysia and so on.
in singapore also same but already have so many speed traps. -
singapore no need.Originally posted by No_10_Tomas_Rosicky:No harm doing a pilot trial in Singapore for a year and compare the accident statistics,
if traffic collisions can be effectively minimized, then implement it, why not
too many speed traps, traffic lights and i think most sport cars owners take to malaysia for high speed fun. -
Figures from the UK:Originally posted by No_10_Tomas_Rosicky:No harm doing a pilot trial in Singapore for a year and compare the accident statistics,
if traffic collisions can be effectively minimized, then implement it, why not
For every 1% reduction in mean traffic speed, fatalities reduce by about 7%
Lowering impact speed also reduces the severity of the injury. When a vehicle travelling at 40 mph collides with a pedestrian, nine out of ten are killed. Travelling at 30 mph, five out of ten pedestrians are killed. At 20 mph one pedestrian is killed, but nine survive
For example Havant Borough Council which has imposed a 20mph speed limit on 20 miles of road has seen traffic accident casualties drop by 40%
Reference: http://www.cfit.gov.uk/factsheets/03/#fn -
"thats y now cars have to be designed to be pedestrian friendly....so if they walk into yr car they can simply dust themselves off and continue staggering themselves back home... " <--- from Top Gear's Peugeot Review?
It is logical, of course, that driving at slower speeds can help to reduce the seriousness of accident injuries. But let us remember, that we drivers have the roads to use, and the main reason many of us have gotten ourselves have gotten personal transport is simply because it gets us quicker from A to B. Now, if that factor is removed from motorists, then there isn't much of a point to own a private vehicle is there? Followed by, there wouldn't be much of a right use of the roads, right? Pedestrians do have their responsibilities to cross carefully as well. My stand is that if you are too lazy to use the traffic light or overhead bridge, then don't cross the roads at the motorist's inconvenience. And I don't think that that is unreasonable at all.
If you guys have driven through Orchard on a weekend or through Serangoon Road, I'm sure you will understand what I mean when I say pedestrians have their responsibilities to cross safely as well. Some people know you are coming, but have that "aiyah he won't dare to bang me one lah" attitude. Well I probably won't, but I sure hope you will get knocked down, given your nonchalant attitude. If the pedestrian can't care less about their own safety, then it is unreasonable to say that the onus will then be entirely on the motorist to keep the jaywalker safe.
And still, Tomas: My question about de-limiting the top end speed has not been answered. Since you seem quite adamant about such an imposition, would you like to also share with us how that problem might be solved? Thanks.
Cheers! -
does it make the speed go faster if u travel below the minimum speed???
-
i think we let the government decide whether to implement such device.
i understand losers who kenna demerit points before who harbour grudges against TP are against such ideas, wanting to challenge the law despite knowing they are no match for it -
Yes but that's leeds isn't it. Hardly anyone owns a decent car there.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The initial trial in Leeds was very successful and there are plans to extend it to London. They expect more than 1000 lives to be saved each year with this device.
It is possible to temporarily override the signal in an emergency (that is emergency on the road..nothing to do with your wife or pet dog needing to go to the hospital). However, the signal comes back on again if you try to speed...so it gets so frustrating speeding up and slowing down again that you accept it and drive below the speed limit.
LTA may worry about the loss in revenue from speeding tickets. But that is not a problem. Each time you exceed the speed limit, your details can be recorded electronically as a signal is sent to slow you down. It is more efficient than speed cameras and LTA will have a windfall in fines.
With this device, everyone will drive below the speed limit and your ferrari will never go any faster than my subaru. -
yup....Originally posted by Kr0n:"thats y now cars have to be designed to be pedestrian friendly....so if they walk into yr car they can simply dust themselves off and continue staggering themselves back home... " <--- from Top Gear's Peugeot Review? -
double
-
u think implement dun need money one ah?Originally posted by No_10_Tomas_Rosicky:No harm doing a pilot trial in Singapore for a year and compare the accident statistics,
if traffic collisions can be effectively minimized, then implement it, why not
den wat if;
a) it doesn't reduce accident stats or
b) kena public outcry or
c) reduce gov taxes when ppl stop buying cars or stop paying offences or
c) all the idacs close down coz of lesser accidents and hundreds of thousands of workshops and insurance company employees get fired.
and then wat? sell the whole system 2 gurung guni? i think its creating one solution that results in a whole list of more probs.
think about it. y is vice so rampant in thailand? surely the police and military can do something about it. but juz think of the number of robberies/thefts/smuggling/drug trafficking would result when these sex workers have nowhere to turn to to make their living anymore?
its obvious y u are not a politician tomas. ur IQ goes as far as 2 enable u 2 criticize tailgators only