Safe Speed Forums

Yes please! And with root cause analysis.

And with the opportunity to investigate near misses via an 'expert system' near miss helpline.

I learned recently that the American aviation safety industry has been running a large scale near miss helpline on exactly the basis I have long been suggesting for road users.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Green ink? What does it mean?

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Wonderful , in theory.

Now how can it become a reality ?

Would it be worthwhile trying to get access to insurance claim records, minus the personal details ?
All the relevant information is being collected using that system. There would be some small bias in reporting, where blame is concerned, but in most cases you will have access to the views of at least two people for each incident and for many of those cases they will be opposing views, from that you would be able to establish what was the likley human fault I think.

The question is, do we really need to go that far ?
Can we begin to guess what the causes are already ? We already know don't we, that inattention is a major cause. Do we need to investigate it further, is there more to be gained form finding the causes of the inattention ? Perhaps so, perhaps not ?

I didn't realise that the discussion had progressed to the final cost already. I must have missed that.
The idea I suggested was to intially use that hardware which is already fitted to a large number of new cars.

The idea I had is constructed from a three part system
It requires an accelerometer, a means to control engine output and a mode switch.

Many new cars are already being fitted with a suitable accelerometer as part of the safety and crash monitoring system, it is being used to trigger various airbags and seatbelt pre-tensioners. In addition to this, traction control and body stability control systems use the accelerometer, so they have become very widespread. Perhaps their chep cost has helped there. In high volume numbers they are no more than a couple of dollars each.

The part which controls engine output is already fitted to , as far as I can tell, every car. The engine management system is the system which would be used to limit the engines output to keep the vehicle's accelreation within the predetermined limits. This is already fitted to cars so there is no additional cost.

The mode switch can take the form of the key. Most keys are electronic now and work in accordance with the security system. Each key is readily identifiable. This would add no extra cost either, and it would mean that every actuation of each key could be recorded, adn if required ata later date the data could be downloaded and analysed if required, or examined by the police in a roadside check if they suspect that a driver should be driving a limited acceleration vehicle.

Overall system cost for the above is probably about 5 hours of a programmers time and maybe a couple of extra wires, one memory chip, and probably one handheld memory interrogation unit for every 5000 cars sold.

As far as implementing new functions go , such a system could hardly be cheaper, and trying to use the cost argument to gain leverage is pointless, there would be very little extra cost for such a system. Hundreds of such systems could be made for the difference in cost between metallic paint and standard paint on just one car.

I was still fully dressed actually


I wanted your understanding of what constitutes dangerous speed, hence my question.


Why do you assume that I have a water bottle? Should I be settling down with my Horlicks as well?

I'm not going to quote the rest of your post for brevity. The situation that you have described is actually dangerous because of 2 main points.

The driver is not taking care and consideration for the road conditions and I notice that you conveniently have him exceeding the speed limit. Changing the speed limit to 30mph would still have the same effect with the child stepping out in front of the car with the same results. The child is behaving irresponsibly as it is crossing the road between two parked cars.

Your situation could be prevented by education on two fronts. Firstly, the child should be taught the Green Cross Code and expect cars to be on the road when crossing. Secondly, by teaching the advanced driving tests to new drivers they should be more aware at hazard awarness and get the experience required to drive responsibly; not to just be able to operate a car which seems to be the current case.

With those educational methods both road users become more aware of their own responsibilities towards their safety and all without any controls and restrictions placed on manufacturers.

You still have yet to convince me that acceleration limiters, which you then go on to describe as power limiters, have any benefit on preventing dangerous or reckless driving.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

Please highlight where I described an acceleration limier as a power limiter.

If your car has 400HP then the power will definately be getting reduced under some periods of acceleration, but if you put the car on a rolling road you will be able to see that you get all of your 400HP coming out still.

Therefore power, the ammount of horsepower, is not being limited.

You are confusing the term reduction with the term limit.

The limit is being forced on acceleration.To make the limit possible, a power, actually torque, reduction is produced. The momentary reduction is on the power, the continuous limit is on acceleration. At no time is the device aiming to reduce the maximum possible power to below that of a similar car without an acceleration limit.

No, absolutely not! Guesses and gut-shots will do nothing to improve road safety, and have already done it damage!

No, I gave an overview of my opinion. You didn't miss anything - except the rest of my post.


Back in the real world:

Parts cost bears almost no relation to cost passed onto the customer. Take the ECU for example: those don't cost more than a few pounds in component parts, yet a working module will set one back hundreds. Such a feature may well be technically simple to realise, but there's so much testing which must be done (to automotive stresses no less), then there is approvals testing (big $); who wants to run the additional risk of the throttle being stuck open? Then there's the mark up for the functionality.

This sure as heck won't be made mandatory, there's no need while there’s no data to support it. Perhaps you’ll find a niche market for those who don't know better.


Why should it be 'lost'? It was an overview, a lead into further discussion.

I really would like to open the debate regarding human error. To do so will require a significant effort on my part; unfortunately, I believe I would be wasting my time discussing it with you as you've clearly proven yourself to be utterly disingenuous, as well as supremely arrogant. I can accept robust discussion, but you go further by deliberately misrepresenting posts time after time, as well as diverting with trivial and irrelevant minutia. In fact, I've found myself wondering about your bias towards your idea......(before you say it – again: I’ve held my full UK licence for 10 years so I have no reason to be prejudiced against it).

By all means please misrepresent this by claiming I have no argument and that you have won. I'm done!

Nothing more true has been said on this thread thus far.

Let's take the two most supported objections to my idea so far and analyse them properly.
When I first saw them , despite seeing they could well be wrong I wasn't in a position to take the time to see just how far wrong they are.

The situations I am talking about are the ones suggested by Paul Smith and RobinXe.
Both of these situations are concerned with the ability of a vehicle to accelrate whilst already travelling at speed. RobinXe's example was little Timmy trying to overtake a slower vehicle but running out of room. Paul Smith's argument was that it would be more dangerous to use a limiter when you are trying to join the main carriageway of a motorway or similar.

I believe that these are the sorts of posts which only encourage the myth that speed will be limited, or that safety will be comrpomised, but now that I have done the maths it seems not only are those comments unfounded, they are grossly innacurate

I originally did these calculations with mid and low-range cars and got some interesting results. I thought that if I were to use figures for what might be called 'semi-performance' cars then things would look different. They do look better, but still the posters who made those comments are will be able to see for themselves that they really were only guessing, and demonstrating a severe lack of understanding of dynamics in the process.

I should say that nobody has complained about the possible use of acceleration limiters in the lower speed motoring situations, say, 0-30mph. We don't have to go far till we see a poor driver trying to screw the last ounce of performance out of their car in that speed range, just to feel the thrill of the maximum acceleration possible. As all drivers know, that is just a pointless activity most of the time. You use more fuel, the engine has to work it's hardest, the drivetrain is at it's most stressed, and so on.

Acceleration drops off naturally as you progress down the gearbox to the lowest ratio. Not only is the torque at the wheels reduced but also the wind resistance increases significantly with speed. It is obvious it is impossible for a car to maintain a constant rate of acceleration as the velocity increases.

I have been unwilling to put a figure on a suitable acceleration limit because I think it is something which requires a discussion. However, nobody seems to want to discuss it , preferring to believe that joining motorways and overtaking slower cars will just naturally be more dangerous.

I feel confident in saying that if we use the acceleration required when joining a motorway as the baseline I would be quite happy. We would only have to decide on our baseline car and we would know our limit. So if Paul Smith or RobinXe would like to say what they expect when joining a motorway, or overtaking a slower vehicle on the open road I would be glad to hear from them.

Taking the performance figures for semi-performance cars the following facts can be derived.

Car Accel 0-30 Accel 30-70
Alfa 156 2.4JTD 4.2 2.5
Audi A8 4.2 5.6 3.0
Honda Accord V-tec 2.0 4.5 2.4

Where speeds are in miles per hour and acceleration is in m/s^2

For the speed range under examination, the 30-70mph range, even 'fast' cars accelerate far slower than they do in the 0-30mph range

It is obvious to see that even if we limit the 0-30 acceleration there is little, if any, affect on the higher speed ranges. Any argument to the contrary is rot.

I'll take as much acceleration as I can afford. It's always a safety asset.

You're pretending that it might not be, but you have offered no evidence.

It's extremely boring.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

No evidence ? You made a claim about an acceleration limiter being dangerous with no evidence. Lol. I can see why you might now think that evidence is important all of a sudden !

I note also that you have not yet commented on what you will be doing in 5 years time in terms of campaign plans. When the UK is ruled from Brussels then, and our transport policies have been unified with the continental ones are you confident that you will be able to keep alive the hope that one day we will see speed cameras removed for good ?

You might be, I'd be bloody furious about it. If you're going to chop out half (or more) of the sub-30 acceleration performance of a car, you're condemning a lot of people to spend a lot more time waiting for an even larger gap to open up before they can pull out of side roads from a standing start. And the more frustrated people get, the more likely they are to do something stupid, like pulling out into a gap that isn't big enough, or jumping on the first gap that is big enough without paying as much attention as they ought to be to checking for the presence of a biker heading in their direction...

And what happens when the limiter decides to get a bit uppity (as will happen eventually if they're fitted in sufficient quantities and used over a sufficient length of time) and kills your acceleration completely just at the point when you absolutely need it?

_________________
Chris

Hi Chris

But Lewis was introduced to Karting at an early age. His father recognised the talent there and made sure he did all he could to develop this talent.

It;s like recognising Jayne Torvill and Christopher Dean had the talent to win Gold in Ice Dancing competitions . They got a grant to help ease their finances for that training as I recall. We take an interest as the Swiss are heavily into Alpine /winter sports. My wife enjoyed speed skating whilst her sister was into downhill slalom events. Actually Krissi did get a bronze in some event before she went to Uni and another made it to the Olympic team but won nothing in Ski jumping. Same year as Eddie the Eagle whom I think was the bravest in that event anyway Epitome of British gentlemanly endeavours

But your kid shows a talent in something. You foster that and encourage by getting him or her the training to enhance. It's like me recognising my kids have the ability to go to Uni and helping finance them here. You do your level best for your kids within the means at your disposal and whatever our incomes.. we all end up scrimping and saving to do this for our kids as we want them to achieve their best potential in their lives. I think it's part of our genetic programming. We want our seed to survive us after all... that's our real life continuing in our here-after after all.



Yes .. a Mini today is a lot faster than the 1960s Mini in the family's collection of "classics"

But insurance premiums are punitive to the young. Mine eldest have Pass Plus and now all three have IAM passes too. William also has a RosPA Gold as well and the twins have pledged themselves to match him. Fascinating to see sibling rivalry played out in front of me here

But even with all this .. I am still helping them fund insurance for the vehicles I financed - but registered and insured in their own names for them so that they build up NCB records in their own rights here. As under 25s . they are classed as "risk" even though they have skills which are perhaps better than those who have been driving for years here.

I also note that William in St Andrews is a low risk as is Steffi in Durham - - whilst Nick incurs a loading down in Bristol Post Codes and Risk based on Stats would appear to play a significant part in the danger element then.



The classification does beggar belief.

I have not modified the Moggies or the Stag I own. Mine is a last edition Stag. I look after a more valuable first edition Stag for the eldest Swiss lad .... along with his Moggie Estate and a really nasty Trabant in a lurid shade of pink - purely because I have the garage space and his cars are rather nice to show off on occasions too


But the insurance "industry" proves itself as daft when we insure these beauties all the same



It does really beggar belief in reality. Insurers do not have much sense though. I found that out long time ago when we had the mega fight over their crass stupidity over Wildy's experience



They get sold a pup on "30" does not kill anyone... when it depends very much on health, point of impact.


Crumple zones are designed to crumple on impact. They may not kill the pedestrian but the occupants of the car can be seriously hurt by crumpling wings pressing into them/exploding air bags and so on.

Level of education overall? Chris .. I am a proud Papa and I pay for my brood to attend an independent which does have an entrance exam. I cannot do this for the fosters as the powers that be dictate as to education. But we still help and encourage them to learn.

But for all this.. I cannot say from the junior docs/medical students and what I do see from my own kids schooling that standards of education are challenging or demanding. Everything is being dumbed down to some extent/



The "Me" factor. The policy of "not making one fail lest it hurts their feelings"

That .. along with a failure to teach manners is the problem here



As said the Continent do limit all new drivers of all ages as to what kind of car they can drive and insure. They also do not insure new drivers to drive at the high speeds on the A/bahn in Germany until they have gained so many kilometre/three years (if 17/18 years) experience on the roads there.

I think I would like to see this incorporated into our laws here as German standards are high. The eldest Swiss guy? His daughter trained in Germany and one week after her German test .. set a standard which William and even Andreas's kids could not match in that she got a RoSPA Gold without any further training one week after passing her German test.

She just said the test which is acclaimed as "cream" here is not more demanding than the basic German L/test. She did not need to train further to pass this. I think this says much about standards here to be honest.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

There are many issues to be looked at there, not least of all is the mindset a learner driver will adopt if they know that once they pass their test they are not going to be able to drive any car, there is a period of limited power, and speed, as you say, which I think educates in it's own right.

What I'm wondering about now though, is that where you and I agree that some sort of limit is a good idea, the safespeed administration are saying there is no evidence of it being beneficial. I suppose somebody in Germany decided it was worth a go, and that is a country which, if what you say is true about their higher basic level of test, obviosuly have some concerns over the well being of new drivers. I don't know myself that they are being overcautious . I suspect not.

Like I said before, there are jobs you should only trust to crafstmen with the best tools. New drivers should be made to accept the inevitability that they can have freedom and limits and still be happy, the lesson they need to learn first is patience. You don't get to be a better driver until, among other things, you become a a patient driver

Chris

I have nohing to win. I've lost everything remember. The administrator in charge deemed the idea as stupid, and then later called it crap. I lost that argument ages ago, I thought that much was clear. After that I just wondered what your ideas were but you couldn't get the courage up to share them and be open with your mind. And, notably, you still don't, seeking to excuse yourself in the worst possible way.

I Lost, well done you !



> > > > > > >

One of them was nuts. but can you guess correctly which one http://tinyurl.com/2fvx8y

One doesn't need evidence to support the status quo.

You need evidence to justify a change. You're proposing a change without any evidence at all. That's both stupid and irresponsible.

It's equivalent to foisting an untested drug on healthy people.



I shall continue to hold the makers of bad policy responsible wherever they work.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Since 1976. Germany introduced in 1976 after a girl who had just passed driving test cause 5 car pile-up on A/bahn. They made a motorway drive or drive on a similar road compulsory as they recognised a big learning gap. The accident happen in July. The element became part of the learner driver test by December 1976.

In 1982 an American cause Germany's worst ever accident EVER EVER! This was a 30 car or so carnage on the A/bahn around the Dusseldorf/Essen network. The busiest stretches.

Germany asked itself some very hard questions about destricted A/bahn on a motorway loop which has tight entry/exit und makle spaghetti junction look noodles by comparison.

They introduce limit on this busy stretch of 80 mph 8 months later und gradually introduced over the year over all the very busy A/bahn - some of which are limited at peak times und derestrictss rest of the time


But new drivers are limited to 80 mph for probationary period und to drive at the the derestrict speeds - you take out surcharge on insurance there. If you don't und have crunch.. you not then insured.


But basically - we have one basic difference in culture. Generally German/French/Swiss/Austrians have perhaps the self discipline here Or perhaps they do not place their kids on pedestals - believing they can do no wrong at all.


But all new drivers have this probationary period - even new ADULT UK ones in that in UK there a probationary period of 2 years as far as penalty points allowed are concerned In EU .. this ist now THREE years


But after our three passsed their tests - we did not let them drive for a day so as to get over excitement. Then a drive with us .. followed by their "solo drive" with us following at a discreet distance




They are perhaps being prudent as they introduce to resolve a problem they identified after the 1976 disaster. But then there are those derestricted roads und they train to cope with them.





Ach.. we back full circle again to where we start when this discussed on this board's opening threads back in 2004.

Manners. How do we get back to manners./courtesy und the idea that nothing in life ist or should be "immediate" - that thing take time to perfect. Even Rooney, Beckham, Hamilton have to train as constant to enhance skills. Skills have to be worked on.

But then .. we have the talentless believing they have talent on TV rammed down throats as constant. Fear of telling our kids that they are not A students at everything has led to watered down qualifications und a lot of complacency as a result.

In reality - you have to spell it out as ist. Life ain't a bowl of cherries or gas und gaiters all the time.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

I hope you get a forum withdecisions them, but with the signing of the next treaty it we lose the right to veto some of our most sacred constitutional beliefs, adn when the final one is signed after that it becomes illegal to publish anything negative about the EU. That will be difficult to negate

I hope you get a forum you deserve, but with the signing of the next treaty it we lose the right to veto some of our most sacred constitutional beliefs, adn when the final one is signed after that it becomes illegal to publish anything negative about the EU. That will be difficult to negate

Which is my point. I think we need to get back to what we want our drivers to do to pass a test which will enable them to make the correct choices. Obviously we have a model from which we may borrow ideas, hell even the police have advanced and basic drivers surely we can borrow theirs.

Instead of having adverts of kids lying in the road saying "If you hit me at 40mph ..." we have adverts saying "Hey kids, if you don't pay attention when crossing the road and get hit by a car at 40mph ..." then we will have changed the emphasis on responsibilities.

Once we have exhausted those areas, which I believe will improve road safety in the long term, then we may need to look at whether we need to restrict new drivers more than we already do.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged