Should vehicles be fitted with speed limiters?

[anthony263]

just read on the bbc new website about a DFT idea to make all vehicles be fiited with speed limiters.

i am sure taht trains are fitted with limiters and i know for sure that the busses i drive are limited to 60mph.

so the question is should, speed limiters be fitted to vehciles and can they really improve safety?

i have thought of another idea that will help improve safety and that would be that drivers should continue having training even after that have passed their drivers test. This dea has been brought in for all PCV & HGV drivers this year which means that i have to have 35 hours training on drivers saftey etc every 5 years although there isnt any test involved.

so do anyone think these ideas are good for safety?

 

[90019]

Personally, im not sure about this, partially because i find the 'speed kills' argument a little unconvincing. If speed on it's own is so dangerous, why are only around 3% of accidents on the motorways, when they make up about 15% of the road network? And why are there so many accidents in urban areas with much lower speed limits? It's because speed is sometimes only 1 of a number of factors.
No, personally i dont think it would help much, if at all. Because cars would have to be limited to 70mph for motorways, they could still achieve these speeds on other roads which are more dangerous. And it's unlikely to affect the amount of accidents on the motorways, because a lot of these will be down to a combination of factors, such as not paying enough attention, or driving whilst tired, in which case, even if the car is limited to 70mph, would almost certainly still cause an accident.

Or, simply, no, because it would have little effect, if any on the number of crashes.


With the idea of driver training every 5 years or so, yes, i would agree with this idea, it's preventative rather than prohibitive, it's better to teach people to do something in a safe way than to limit what they can do.

 

[Daniel]

90019, just to say that the proposal is for an automated reduction in car speed to match the speed limit of the car's location - not just a limit of the national speed. If you watch the video, when entering a 30 zone, the car's speed is reduced automatically.

To be honest I don't think it is a good idea, simply as it removes alot of the concentration of the driver. If a driver isn't concentrating as much because of this device they could make an error involving steering causing an accident.

 

[90019]

90019, just to say that the proposal is for an automated reduction in car speed to match the speed limit of the car's location - not just a limit of the national speed. If you watch the video, when entering a 30 zone, the car's speed is reduced automatically.

Ah, i didnt know about that.
However, i still think this is a bad idea. As you mention, it is likely to cause drivers to concetrate less.
Although, i can see the government not wanting it, as it'll make their precious gatsos obsolete.

"A suprising number would enjoy not having to think about it"? That's also not good, because then you'd just get more people at the speed limits on every road no matter what the conditions, which would be even more dangerous. you need to think about the speed you're doing taking into account both the road and the conditions. If you get people just sitting constantly at the speed limit when the conditions mean you should be going slower, this is likely to increase accidents.

This idea also stinks of the road pricing ideas; puting a GPS speed limiter in cars that knows where you are? That sounds remarkably similar to the GPS box they wanted for road pricing, doesnt it?

 

[Bayum]

Maybe in rural and built up areas it should be used... So, when you enter a village for instance where people maybe be walking around, trying to cross roads etc.

 

[P156KWJ]

not a good idea. Spend the money on improving the roads. Maybe they now realise speed cameras actually don't work

 

[90019]

Maybe they now realise speed cameras actually don't work

They don't work because they're not where accidents happen

 

[Mojo]

I think it's a good idea, although in a lot of cases I can judge what speed I'm going, I always like to keep looking at the speedometer so I don't go over which I find a bit of a pain.

 

[Coxster]

With regards to the speed limiters, they would still allow people to do anything up to 70mph, which would have little or no effect in most places bar dual-carriageways and motorways.

 

[Mojo]

With regards to the speed limiters, they would still allow people to do anything up to 70mph, which would have little or no effect in most places bar dual-carriageways and motorways.

Nope. If you look at the video, as mentioned above, it slows the vehicle down for the speed limit, as appropriate (it's based on GPS). http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7804137.stm

 

[Donny Dave]

Several questions ....

1. When a speed limit is changed on a stretch of road (for example, down to 30mph from 40mph), who will pay to have the software altered to reflect the change? Bet the government won't

2. In the video, he said he didn't lift his foot from the accelerator when entering the 40 zone. How the hell is that safer?

 

[Lesjordans]

Sounds a bit dangerous! I wouldnt wanna find myself suddenly slowing down thats for sure! Bit unrealistic for motorways and the likes as well, some people might wanna do a bit faster on the M6 in the middle of the night...

 

[Mojo]

Sounds a bit dangerous! I wouldnt wanna find myself suddenly slowing down thats for sure! Bit unrealistic for motorways and the likes as well, some people might wanna do a bit faster on the M6 in the middle of the night...

It'd be optional and you could turn it off.

 

[Tom B]

It'd be optional and you could turn it off.

Something tells me that it would not be long before insurance contracts included a clause to the effect that the cover was void if the limiter was switched out.

 

[Guinness]

No. Big Brother scenario, remember the Pay as you Drive black boxes that can measure speed?

I don't speed, except with Traffic Flow as it's far more safer when most of the cars on a Motorway are going 80mph etc. But I'd rather be in control of my actions behind a wheel than a computer. Imagine when you get caught speeding you can just use the excuse of "Oh, my Speed Limiter must of broke I've become so over reliant on it"..

 

[Tom B]

Surely, though, it ought to be the drivers responsibility still, with the system used as a 'backup'?

 

[Coxster]

I don't speed

Who are you trying to kid? You're a teenager with a (probably rediculous) Saxo and a username that is just one letter away from the word 'Chav'

 

[Guinness]

Who are you trying to kid? You're a teenager with a (probably rediculous) Saxo and a username that is just one letter away from the word 'Chav'

Once you own and drive a car then you'll realise what I mean.

Your 2 letters away from the word "Cockster" with that SuperHairdryer of yours.

 

[Coxster]

Once you own and drive a car

What - when I'm old and too infirm to enjoy life anymore?

Your 2 letters away from the word "Cockster"

Touché, Charles

 

[Mintona]

No, I can't see it being safe. Say you need to speed out the way of an accident (which I had to do on Saturday), you can't. No good.

 

[Craig]

Surely, though, it ought to be the drivers responsibility still, with the system used as a 'backup'?

Unless the limiter is going to react to the road conditions then it may make people think that it's safe to drive at the speed limit when it's not. There are some occasions when speeding is more acceptable than others - e.g. Chaz's motorway example above. On the other hand there are also occasions when you'd be a fool to be doing anywhere near the permitted speed limit. It should be up to the driver to decide on a suitable speed depending on the conditions.

 

[90019]

No. Big Brother scenario, remember the Pay as you Drive black boxes that can measure speed?

Exactly, as I said, this stinks of the road pricing scheme; a GPS box in your car, so they could track where you are and what speed you're doing - sounds remarkably similar, imo.

And yes, it could actually cause accidents by not permitting you to get out of the way quick enough, or equally, people will just become reliant on it, not taking into account the conditions of the road they're driving on.

 

[P156KWJ]

what if the GPS didn't work for some reason or wasn't updated when a new road was built? Then you'd ahve a piece of bad news. Like SatNavs, on a friend of ours' car, he uses a junction on the A46 which was moved and is a lot bigger now, and according to his satnav he is driving through a field

 

[GB]

Who are you trying to kid? You're a teenager with a (probably rediculous) Saxo and a username that is just one letter away from the word 'Chav'

Hate that site, bunch or morons with nothing better to do than critize other people.

 

[Guinness]

What - when I'm old and too infirm to enjoy life anymore?

More like when your lying in a Hospital bed after over revving the Hairdryer after it blew your bollocks off and then you ended up rear ending a Stagecoach Double Decker with 12 people on after a pick up outside the Nursing Home.

It's a common biking accident you know..

 

[FusionRail]

no it shouldnt be done

 

[37401]

well ive been down to tamworth and they run over the limit there, you can tell its amazing how fast they go

 

[Golden Gripper]

I'm in favour of it, and it should be compulsory.

The argument about being able to speed out of the way of an accident reminds me of when they introduced compulsory seat belts. I was talking with a mate in the pub about this and he said he was against seat belts. "After all", he said "if you drive into a river or canal the belt could stop you getting free and you would drown". Not a trace of irony.

Speed isn't the only thing that causes accidents, which can be caused by a whole combination of factors, but it is a major cause of road deaths. Taking up the point of about motorway accidents, motorways are a safer environment to drive in, which is part of the reason the speed limit is higher. But when there is an accident the chances of death are greater because speeds are higher. The faster we drive the more likely an accident is going to cause death.

I don't see this concentration point at all. To my mind there are so many things to pay attention to on the road, not having to keep checking the speedometer will enable me to drive better. Or are you saying that train drivers are more likely to have accidents as their concentration can relax because they don't have to steer the train?

What is this thread doing on a Rail Forum?

 

[90019]

I don't see this concentration point at all. To my mind there are so many things to pay attention to on the road, not having to keep checking the speedometer will enable me to drive better.

So you always stick to the speed limit regardless of the conditions on the road?

 

[Mojo]

So you always stick to the speed limit regardless of the conditions on the road?

I know you didn't ask me, I do, yes. I'd rather do without the fine, the points on my license and risk of having to retake my test.

Obviously there are some times when it'd be crazy to go up as high as the speed limit so I use my judgment then.