London To Get Smart-Arse Sat-Navs May 18, 2008

Read more Cars , Gadgets , Gizmodo UK , Motoring , Technology

sat-nav speeding.jpg
Driving in London is already a pain in the behind but it could become even more so as new sat-nav technology is being tested that will tell drivers to slow down if they are going too fast.

Transport For London (TfL) has developed an intelligent map of London that sat-navs tap into and then proceed to tell you when you are driving too fast. Even worse, they are about to trial a more restrictive version of the Intelligent Speed Adaption (ISA) system that actually takes the decision out of your hands by reducing acceleration if it detects you going to fast in a particular area. Ten TfL vans and cars have been fitted with this version for testing.

ISA is a Europe-wide initiative to get drivers to drive more carefully and has been tested in other countries. There are three versions of the system:

1. The open ISA warns the driver (visibly and/or audibly) that the speed limit is being exceeded. The driver him/herself decides whether or not to slow down. This is an informative or advisory system.

2. The half-open ISA increases the pressure on the accelerator pedal when the speed limit is exceeded (the 'active accelerator'). Maintaining the same speed is possible, but less comfortable because of the counter pressure.

3. The closed ISA limits the speed automatically if the speed limit is exceeded. It is possible to make this system mandatory or voluntary. In the latter case, drivers may choose to switch the system on or off.

Tom-Tom users will be the first, er, lucky folk to be told to slow down by the posh voice on the dashboard but others are in talks with TfL too. Great, just great.-Martin Lynch

[Daily Mail]

car

Comments

120 in London, that I'd like to see !

Surely taking the control out of the drivers hands would be very dangerous. Sometimes its necassary to speed up to avoid accidents. I can see it causing all kinds of problems.

posted-by Andy N | May 19, 2008 8:12 AM

I think that these should be fitted by law on 'white van' vehicles and on mini cab and black cab drivers.


Oh and Mini drivers, as they are generally the worst drivers on the road.

posted-by AdolfLivingston | May 19, 2008 9:59 AM

"Sometimes its necassary to speed up to avoid accidents"

It's not though really is it. Sure, speeding up might help you avoid an accident, but it's never the only solution, slowing down would also have done the trick. Unless you want to describe a scenario?

posted-by Andy Jones | May 19, 2008 10:41 AM

Sorry, but it is. You'd like a scenario - you're nearly passed some blind idiot (and you can pretend to be all high and mighty and only speeders cause accidents but this has happened to me many times by all different kinds of drivers when I've been doing the speed limit in the right-hand lane) decides to move into your lane without looking (even sideways, not even necessarily with you in their blind spot). If I were to brake when said idiot does this he'd definitely hit me. If I accelerate I can be out of the space he is moving into.

And I'd like to add all beard-wearing architect types in Audis to the list who should have the system as mandatory (they are the most like to drive up your chuff and also the most likely to assume they can change lanes regardless of other traffic already in those lanes)

posted-by Mack | May 19, 2008 12:12 PM

My friend Alex came up with the perfect solution to traffic accidents ages ago:

Remove all side impact bars and airbags, and have all vehicles fitted with a Big Metal Spike (tm) sticking out of the steering wheel. That way, if you crash, you're guarunteed to die.
Nobody would drive carelessly then!

A recent episode of Doctor Who where all the smart sat navs go wild and take over every car comes to mind..

There are two ways of looking at it

1) Say good bye to speeding tickes especially in london when the its hard avoiding idiots on the road aswell as keeping an eye on the speed and the speed limits and then looking for the police man with a radar gun hiding in a bus stop and you dont see him till its too late.

2) I doubt the uk governmenmt would enforce the closed system on a consumer basis as they would lose £Bn's in fines "come on how many of you out there have swiched on to auto pilot and done 35 in a 30 and oops there you go instant £60 and 3 points it happened to me". But the uk government would enforce the open system so if you go through a speed camera and got cought then you would have no excuse and futher more eventually the stralthy government would make this system an in car speed camera "Brillant business stragity the government wouldnt need to spend £Bn's on new speed detection systems as we the public would be forced to pay to have our car out fitted with this system so they can sit there and watch the money roll in" WELCOME TO THE UK HOME OF BIG BROTHER.

posted-by Luke Parker | May 19, 2008 10:20 PM

I'd be tolerant of the second one as long as the audible warning was restrained a little, I don't want it nagging me because I drifted up a little faster accidentally. Maybe 3 when the speeds become persistently excessive. I know a guy who routinely drives 45 in 30 zones and he actually says that if all drivers were as good as him they wouldn't need speed limits. He's one of the worst drivers I know, zig-zags down the motorway.

posted-by Andrew | May 20, 2008 1:08 PM

Post a new comment


You can use simple HTML tags for style
Top Samsung’s OLED Laptop Is Geek Porn