Separate names with a comma.
Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.
Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by CamKawa, May 8, 2010.
What a nightmare.
Certainly clever.. don't want it here though
What an awesome idea.
In other news, faraday just called.
Oh crap. It's been developed. There's a major difference between that system and how it would be interfaced in Australia. In Australia the vehical would flat out be limited to the speed limit based on location. That's if the road safety do gooders get their way.
However with the government depending on the revenue stream from speeding offences I can't see this happening any time soon.
You're kidding, right?
No. Considering the heavy road safety stance in this country there has been talks of fitting cars with speed limiters. This would be the next logical step would it not ?
pfft falcons and holdens already have a speed limiter.(That is outside of driver skill and traction control)
no. where would they get all the money from? Speed limiters are just talk. for now at least.
Thera isnt the standard factory set speed limiter in excess of 250 km/h?
Yeah now what if the speed limiter is directly controlled by a GPS tracked network that simply says. You're on a highway the speed limit is 100km/h. You are now limited to 102km/h. You have entered a residential area. The speed limit is 40km/h. You are now limited to 41km/h.
Now imagine that. It's not impossible. "Speeding" would be a thing of the past. I bet it wouldn't do a damn for the road toll though.
I'm repeating myself here but using some different words.
The government would not allow such a system to enforce hard speed limits and restrictions because the current revenue model now depends on the revenue achieved from speeding offences. If such a system was to be enforced on the public the government would be forced to supplement that lost revenue stream from other avenues. Higher rego perhaps ? Per KM road usage tax ?
That's a sad thought.
Win win for the government. The win votes for saving lives. Then perhaps later on phase in per KM road usage tax based on congestion zones. say 2c per km for low congestion zones, 40c km in high congestion areas such as city CBD's. Scary thought isn't it. Everything would be easily automated with minimal man power required to enforce the law and tax the people.
It's the way of the future.
Everything here should be treated as a hypothetical possibility.
And please if you want to argue and call me an idiot at least give a good reason.
The OP's link is exactly the model that Australian governments would want to adopt. They don't want to stop you speeding, they just want to charge you for it. They know full well that it is virtually impossible for most road users to conform exactly to their myriad limit changes.
GPS-controlled speed limiting was trialed in the UK - for motorcycles only- and abandoned immediately because it was found to be lethally dangerous.
But the whole premise is flawed from the start as it is based on all deaths being caused by speeding, and when people continue to die despite being tracked and charged, the whole lie will be exposed. Too late.
when did I call you an idiot?
Denmark implemented this before we did, so underestimating their "road safety" agenda would be a mistake. If they wanted to limit the speed a vehicle could go they may have even been able to. But they didnt. Logic suggests the same would apply to us.
Anyhow, is there any law that would prevent someone from completely wrapping their vehicle in wire mesh?
Given that GPS units can and do give regular spurious speed readings, it would be impractical to use them to track "speeding".
The video claims that it reduced speeding from "29% to just 2%", but where there any less crashes/fatalities?
nooooooooooooooooo please no
This is a Research Project: not something that is currently in use.
GPS data can only give a speed averaged between two points, never a spot speed. It is thus fatally flawed as an enforceable indication of an actual speed, since it is not an instantaneous speedometer. The error parameters inherent in the GNSS are never going to be better than 3 metres on current system standards, and can be degraded to 30 metres or more by the system owners, the US Military without ever telling anyone.
Good luck ever getting a GPS speed to stand up in court
that depends on how frequently it updates your location. more frequently = more accurate first principles of calculus really. It's usually pretty damn accurate, a budget gps will only be a second or less behind a sharp acceleration.
As much as they'd like to, it's unlikely that any Australian state govt will be able to implement this system due to the fact it would involve a great deal of financial outlay before hand. Otherwise, they'd jump on the idea to attach an instant speeding fine to every motorist and monitor your every move.
With a declared error of 3 metres, and a possible error of more than 30 metres, there is no way that GPS speed would get past first post in any court. How would you go if the unit was +3 metres out on a reading, and the next reading was -3 metres? Your speed would be so far off a real speed as to be ludicrous, yet you would maintain that as acceptable for the Feds to use against you?
WAAS or Differential GPS gives greater certainty and accuracy, but is unlikely to be used in a vehicle application. For GNSS approaches, I have to check RAIM outages prior to commencing an approach, and must commence an overshoot if I have a RAIM warning. What sort of protection would be in place to protect you as a road user when the satellite coverage drops below optimum and gives error readings?
None, I would suggest [-X
I don't really know about the measured accuracy to well, calculations I can't be bothered doing, though I did hear that gps has been used to exonerate a person from a speeding infringement.