Speed limiters on all new cars from 2022

[hawkfanz]

my mondi allready has a speed limiter,its called cruise control.

[Vince Green]

17 hours ago, poontang said:

 

I'm pretty sure new car sales will take a nosedive when this is forced upon consumers as people buy secondhand, or keep faith with what they already drive. I really can't see the big German, French and Italian car manufacturers being too enthralled by this. 

What does everyone else think?

New car sales are already falling through the floor, one reason is because older cars are still working perfectly even when they are ten, even fifteen years old. Next time you are on a long journey start looking at the ages of the cars around you.

Also new cars seem to have gone up in price faster than inflation these past ten years or so, putting people off buying new

[Raja Clavata]

1 hour ago, B B said:

Its all right deleting such restrictions but now its simple to plug in a bluetooth adapter to the obd 2 port and a phone add you can view live data wipe codes and police or vosa will be able to check if such things have been tampered with just off their phones not even a need for a laptop or vag com /lexia tec 2 any dedicated software.

 If its deleted nullities your insurance its a big risk for what you gain and breaking the law as the potential to put your bank balance in jeopardy or perhaps your gun licences.   when restrictors come  in best to just accept them  .

Vosa pulled in a mate who inocently purchased a AUDI a6 it had been de DPFed and holow cat visualy just a cat but borred out and lined in steel so it even felt sounded good when tapped, but vosa found it and he was lucky to get away with a warning cost hin around a thousand pounds to replace everything to standard again . they are shutting the door on the tempering and modifying with newer cars, and as more and more new technology becomes available i think it will get more difficult to bypass things.

Indeed, there are plans to introduce a cyber security MOT in the future and this will involve a comprehensive audit of the entire software inventory of the vehicle.

Given the direction the market is going with higher levels of driver assistance features and automated driving it's pretty obvious why this is needed. 

[B B]

A friends son is doing MOT training updates , and he said the lecturer told them MOT testers could wear head cams wile doing MOTs, now i can not see this happening myself but it goes to show they are thinking looking into every avenue they can dream up.

 

[Dibble]

14 hours ago, lancer425 said:

Good i can see lots of good things about driver less cars.

Yes motorbikes will be able to bully them! just cut in front and they will have to brake and let you in, bikers do it to me now.

We could also replace all those pesky shooters with thesehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY6nm-6eCzM

 

[lancer425]

3 minutes ago, Dibble said:

Yes motorbikes will be able to bully them! just cut in front and they will have to brake and let you in, bikers do it to me now.

We could also replace all those pesky shooters with thesehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY6nm-6eCzM

 

Thats very dramatic.

 I see good things coming from driver less cars the technology has been there for some years now, No more clodhopper boots using too much fuel so economy emissions safety all go up, accidents will be reduced no more operator error. There will be some failures in the technology  just like on aircraft but this is getting full proof and some planes simply are unable to fly with just pilot input they need the computers to keep them up there.

Imagine the benefits when wild fowling set off with the dog gun and gear for the northern firths 10pm on the road get your head down wake up at inverness 8 hours latter fresh as a daisy. That to me is a dream come true a lot better than driving through the night grabbing half hour on the grass verge when you get there any going out on a freezing marsh  tired from a 8 hour thrash up the country wish it was in 20 years ago that’s all i can say i would buy one tomorrow.  .

 

[Raja Clavata]

4 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Thats very dramatic.

 I see good things coming from driver less cars the technology has been there for some years now, No more clodhopper boots using too much fuel so economy emissions safety all go up, accidents will be reduced no more operator error. There will be some failures in the technology  just like on aircraft but this is getting full proof and some planes simply are unable to fly with just pilot input they need the computers to keep them up there.

Imagine the benefits when wild fowling set off with the dog gun and gear for the northern firths 10pm on the road get your head down wake up at inverness 8 hours latter fresh as a daisy. That to me is a dream come true a lot better than driving through the night grabbing half hour on the grass verge when you get there any going out on a freezing marsh  tired from a 8 hour thrash up the country wish it was in 20 years ago that’s all i can say i would buy one tomorrow.  .

 

Afraid you'll need to be patient, at least another 15 years is the latest estimate, until recently it was 2025 now saying 2035 which is much more realistic...

[Farmboy91]

Can't think of anything worse, other than driverless cars maybe. 

Don't get me wrong I don't drive like a nutter, and there's plenty of people out there who do need slowing down but my work trip is all B roads, in the morning at 5.00/5.30 no problem, on the way home at 5.30 every **** and he's mate wants to sit at 35 mph. 

Going to work I can have my diesel golf doing high 60's to low 70's to the gallon easy, because I have the roads to myself, driving to the speed limit. 

On the way home I'm lucking to get the high 40's. Plenty of people need a kick up the backside too. 

Edited March 29, 2019 by Farmboy91

[steve_b_wales]

My wife is my 'speed limiter'

[Vince Green]

The black boxes fitted to new drivers cars by their insurance companies is effectively speed limiting technology. If you speed the insurance company bumps up your premium. They don't have to change the cars, just roll out the black boxes to all cars.

[Dibble]

30 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

The black boxes fitted to new drivers cars by their insurance companies is effectively speed limiting technology. If you speed the insurance company bumps up your premium. They don't have to change the cars, just roll out the black boxes to all cars.

Do you think they will reduce the premium for those who have them or increase it for those who don't?

[TIGHTCHOKE]

56 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

The black boxes fitted to new drivers cars by their insurance companies is effectively speed limiting technology. If you speed the insurance company bumps up your premium. They don't have to change the cars, just roll out the black boxes to all cars.

A friends son has one, he had reached the gold standard by careful driving and not driving in the dark hours.

His Dad's car went in to the garage and he borrowed the sons little Peugot, gold standard lost and down to bronze.

Son does not let his Dad borrow the car anymore!

[Farmboy91]

38 minutes ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

A friends son has one, he had reached the gold standard by careful driving and not driving in the dark hours.

His Dad's car went in to the garage and he borrowed the sons little Peugot, gold standard lost and down to bronze.

Son does not let his Dad borrow the car anymore!

I don't think I'd be able to afford to go to work in winter. 

Surely driving at night, and at peak times makes for a more experienced and hopefully safer driver, 🤔

I know that's what I'd want of my boy when he's old enough to drive. 

 

[Scully]

When my son passed his test, he had a black box fitted to the car to lessen the premium. It could detect what time he was driving, how hard he accelerated and how hard he braked as well as his speed. I had to be very attentive when I drove it. 

[buze]

Driverless car is a pipe dream. It won't happen in our lifetime. The "AI" bits you keep hearing is just fad. It's just neural networks, and neural networks have deep flaws, once of them is that they are so opaque that learning /anything/ new can completely change the profile of behaviour in completely unknown ways, without having a single way of knowing how, why, and when it might go bonkers.

It's not a new issue, I was working a lot in neural network in the 90's before it was 'rediscovered' as "AI". "safe" neural network would need so much oversight scalar code to catch any runaway behaviour that you might as well program the whole damn thing in scalar mode anyway.

As far as speed limiting goes, I think it will be interesting to see a million car in the middle lane on the motorway, with lorries using the right lane to overtake! :-)

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, buze said:

Driverless car is a pipe dream. It won't happen in our lifetime. The "AI" bits you keep hearing is just fad. It's just neural networks, and neural networks have deep flaws, once of them is that they are so opaque that learning /anything/ new can completely change the profile of behaviour in completely unknown ways, without having a single way of knowing how, why, and when it might go bonkers.

It's not a new issue, I was working a lot in neural network in the 90's before it was 'rediscovered' as "AI". "safe" neural network would need so much oversight scalar code to catch any runaway behaviour that you might as well program the whole damn thing in scalar mode anyway.

As far as speed limiting goes, I think it will be interesting to see a million car in the middle lane on the motorway, with lorries using the right lane to overtake! 🙂

When a ten year old volvo  brakes all by itself slows you from getting too close to that lorry that it thinks did not give you quite enough room,  it starts to make you think.  I think technology as got better than us some time ago, ok its not all implemented yet and probably some years away, but braking volvos in the early 90s were probably viewed as pipe dreams but were here before 2010 . What will the next 15 or 20 years bring. Things are changing and the industry is set for implementing these changes and given  the new electric cars they might incorporate some of this technology  in main stream cars what they have been experimenting with in concept cars and projects.

[buze]

The difference between self braking and fully driverless with no input form the driver, on normal road is immense. Self braking is pretty straightforward, just needs one set of sensor, and the input for sensors that are good enough to integrate quickly and calculate your differential speed in real time. Even then, I bet it's very confused if it rains, or if a bike overtakes you and goes in front of your car, or tons of little corner cases you need to take into account to prevent the system sending the driver into the windscreen.

Now multiply by 10000 or more the complexity of a system that drives on our road without driver input. Have you seen Tesla accidents lately? And the backpedaling they do to say to everyone that what they called "autopilot" truely isn't, and shouldn't be trusted as you need to keep your hands on the wheel. And that's for large, straightish, american highways.

There must be a reason why several very very large companies have spent billions on the subject in the previous few years and all that got out was tesla's attempt. 

[Newbie to this]

My take on ot is this.

If driver less cars are perfected, then there will be no need for the private owner to have insurance. 

If any of these cars are involved in a collision it will not be the fault of the owner but that of the equipment failing.

For this reason alone I can't see them ever coming into fruition. Too much money at stake.

Edited March 30, 2019 by Newbie to this

[lancer425]

1 hour ago, Newbie to this said:

My take on ot is this.

If driver less cars are perfected, then there will be no need for the private owner to have insurance. 

If any of these cars are involved in a collision it will not be the fault of the owner but that of the equipment failing.

For this reason alone I can't see them ever coming into fruition. Too much money at stake.

Aircraft manufacturers stand by their products and when they fail many lives are at risk, why not cars.? Fail-safe limp modes they are a way of life these days to protect components and engines on cars, such limp or safety modes lock outs could be used on the technology surrounding driver less cars, what driver less cars can not do is prevent animals humans or natural events from interfering with the clean passage of driver less cars, so some accidents are still going to happen . But reaction times on driver less cars out perform us already in how many pieces of information they can compute in a second, this fact is why pilots of some aircraft can not fly the plane without computers no matter how well trained they simply do not have the mental and  physical capacity to cope.  The luxury of us deciding how quick we want to go in any given situation how far we press the throttle is a luxury we could soon lose, limiters are the start, i can imagine next to go will be our input on us deciding to accelerate more than is environmentally acceptable from emissions or energy usage point of view. the volvo self braking is here and i can see steering input being on the cards eventually. Reaction times faster than us they dont get distracted by kids arguing in the back or worrying what to cook them for tea.   As a layman i can see how parking sensors surrounding the car  rather than bleeping to tell you your near the wall could tell the bbrakes steering whatever to react, and i think thats got to be way better tham me glancing in my mirror checking if i can see something coming up when changing lanes.   I can see it coming i just can, . 

[Newbie to this]

12 minutes ago, lancer425 said:

Aircraft manufacturers stand by their products and when they fail many lives are at risk, why not cars.? Fail-safe limp modes they are a way of life these days to protect components and engines on cars, such limp or safety modes lock outs could be used on the technology surrounding driver less cars, what driver less cars can not do is prevent animals humans or natural events from interfering with the clean passage of driver less cars, so some accidents are still going to happen . But reaction times on driver less cars out perform us already in how many pieces of information they can compute in a second, this fact is why pilots of some aircraft can not fly the plane without computers no matter how well trained they simply do not have the mental and  physical capacity to cope.  The luxury of us deciding how quick we want to go in any given situation how far we press the throttle is a luxury we could soon lose, limiters are the start, i can imagine next to go will be our input on us deciding to accelerate more than is environmentally acceptable from emissions or energy usage point of view. the volvo self braking is here and i can see steering input being on the cards eventually. Reaction times faster than us they dont get distracted by kids arguing in the back or worrying what to cook them for tea.   As a layman i can see how parking sensors surrounding the car  rather than bleeping to tell you your near the wall could tell the bbrakes steering whatever to react, and i think thats got to be way better tham me glancing in my mirror checking if i can see something coming up when changing lanes.   I can see it coming i just can, . 

I completely agree on driver assistance devices, but if the car does all the driving, then there is no need for insurance. Hence my thinking of they will never be allowed to come into fruition, too much money is at stake with insurance companies for it to be allowed.

With things like assistance braking, the liability is still with the driver, but if there is no driver then the liability can't be with the driver. That would be like holding passengers of a bus liable in a collision.

[lancer425]

18 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

I completely agree on driver assistance devices, but if the car does all the driving, then there is no need for insurance. Hence my thinking of they will never be allowed to come into fruition, too much money is at stake with insurance companies for it to be allowed.

With things like assistance braking, the liability is still with the driver, but if there is no driver then the liability can't be with the driver. That would be like holding passengers of a bus liable in a collision.

There is a need for insurance even with driver less cars and there will still be crashes, but not as many. Cars can only control themselves they can not remove other cars so they will collide, a deer or child running out into the road causes a car to swerve it hits another car both cars will still need insurance and the deer wont have any.

 Driverless cars wont stop deaths on the roads but can imagine they  will reduce deaths on the roads with the  fallible human element removed.

[McSpredder]

1 hour ago, lancer425 said:

Aircraft manufacturers stand by their products.....

That can be interpreted in two ways:

(A) We stand by our product, and accept full responsibility for the consequences of any design faults, OR

(B) We stand by our product, we deny that it was faulty, and consider the crash was caused by pilot error.

[lancer425]

59 minutes ago, McSpredder said:

That can be interpreted in two ways:

(A) We stand by our product, and accept full responsibility for the consequences of any design faults, OR

(B) We stand by our product, we deny that it was faulty, and consider the crash was caused by pilot error.

In the case of some planes the latter is not applicable its impossible to fly them with just a pilot.   Taking the weak link .. US.. out of the chain will move the liability and the underwriters will have a field day with this and the manufacturers insurance premiums will reflect this but will be swallowed up in the price of their products and the product upkeep upgrading. Who is to say it wont be like microsoft windows as updates and is sported for so long many more important tasks everyday in many walks of life are carried out by computers why are cars such a biggie. ?

Driving a car is routine to us all but probably the most dangerous thing most of us will  do in our lives most life threatening potentially life changing, more and more emphasis is being laid at the drivers door and this is reflected in insurance costs, the litigation thing is a real threat and the time is ripe for change  and restricting new cars is one more step up the road to a safer road network.  Roads are for transport we can not allow them to be playgrounds or places where anybody can vent their desire to use their cars power for whatever reason.  If we can not be responsible or considerate of others with our toys then they need taking away its how society as developed. we have grown way too fond of the car these changes will hurt us oldies but in the end it will be good well i think it could be.

[Scully]

I enjoy driving. It would be handy to have a computer to take over in a city or heavy congestion, but on the whole I enjoy the process of driving. 

[Raja Clavata]

On 30/03/2019 at 09:37, buze said:

The difference between self braking and fully driverless with no input form the driver, on normal road is immense. Self braking is pretty straightforward, just needs one set of sensor, and the input for sensors that are good enough to integrate quickly and calculate your differential speed in real time. Even then, I bet it's very confused if it rains, or if a bike overtakes you and goes in front of your car, or tons of little corner cases you need to take into account to prevent the system sending the driver into the windscreen.

Now multiply by 10000 or more the complexity of a system that drives on our road without driver input. Have you seen Tesla accidents lately? And the backpedaling they do to say to everyone that what they called "autopilot" truely isn't, and shouldn't be trusted as you need to keep your hands on the wheel. And that's for large, straightish, american highways.

There must be a reason why several very very large companies have spent billions on the subject in the previous few years and all that got out was tesla's attempt. 

Tesla beta test their features through production release, nobody else does that.

Despite all the warnings on the autopilot there are people fitting defeat devices to get around the need to touch the steering wheel periodically.

Nearly everyone is working on autopilot but it's for a very constrained set of use cases and environments with the intention that the driver is always able to take over when the system gets stuck and needs to hand back control to the driver.

On 30/03/2019 at 09:56, Newbie to this said:

My take on ot is this.

If driver less cars are perfected, then there will be no need for the private owner to have insurance. 

If any of these cars are involved in a collision it will not be the fault of the owner but that of the equipment failing.

For this reason alone I can't see them ever coming into fruition. Too much money at stake.

The insurance companies are already looking at the new models to continue if not grow their revenue.