TFL trial device to enforce speed limits

Stone Glider

Over the years I have had, (IMO) too many head-on collisions, most at quite low speeds, at the point of impact. I have a strong preference for every possible device to reduce the speed at the point of impact, 'cos it hurts!

The idea that human skill is a worthwhile substitute for an automatic safety device is mistaken. Zanes describes themselves as an "average" driver but removes himself from at least the majority, if not the average of drivers by describing an ambition to improve. I would suggest that the majority of drivers feel no such need to improve, many surveys have found the large majority of drivers consider themselves "above average".

This is not to say that a skilled driver could not beat the braking devices fitted to cars, the problem comes from the "above aversge" driver sliding towards them witheverything loccked up and no control.

BTW the DfT is pretending to consider 50mph limits for rural roads, pigs on the runway :!:

gtvlusso

I believe they tested a speed limiter on motorbikes (as motorcyclists really are speeding evil demons - according toe the government).

Anyhoo - A Police motorcyclist tried it on an airfield, came around a corner at speed, the limiter kicked in because it registered a 30 zone and he fell off and was injured I believe(?). The bike was lent over, as it would be at speed and became unbalanced when the speed suddenly was cut....

So, in essence, it is fecking dangerous! Stick with an old car or motorbike as they won't seek to enforce these stupid measures/equipment on them ( as the public would have to pay - i.e. we would do nothing abou it, well I would not fit a limiter!) - only on new vehicles I suspect......

Still, it is all a bit scaremongery bollox....Nothing ever happens with these things, it is just safety groups getting some airtime and making it look like they do something useful.

Roastie

Eau Rouge wrote:

Go race a tin-top car for a season, that seriously slows down your driving.
It's counter-intuitive, but you quickly see just how hard you can really push a car, and just how fast they can be made to go.
Back on the real roads, when you know the car can be made go so much faster if you drove it like you raced, you just lose interest in going too fast. All that risk and no reward.

+1

There really is so little fun to be had driving a car on the road, but (I think) sadly the romantic image of the car makes most people expect that freedom and speed are (or should be) a given part of the experience. So they simply become frustrated, consequently angry, and consequently drive stupidly.

Roastie

RE: ABS

From my motorsport experience (production cars at a national level), ABS is better, period.

As a privateer, I ran an ex-works "last year's car" - so a generation older than the factory boys - our braking systems were identical apart from ABS. They could *consistently* brake harder and deeper. If their ABS ECU's were tweaked to up the ABS trigger threshold, I'm not sure (I was assured it was not, but I learned to take what I was told with a good dose of salt and pepper) - I know that other factory teams modified their ECUs - but bottom line - ABS is faster.

As for road cars - when you need to brake the hardest (and an accident is immiment), you are generally taken by surprise. If not, you are simply an idiot. In this situation, you are likely to not going to be able to threshold brake (sorry, but locking up IS worse than threshold braking), and the ability to maintain control/change direction is likely to be very useful. In this case, ABS is always better.