Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Intelligent Speed Assistance

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Intelligent Speed Assistance

Old 01-07-24, 10:09 AM
  #201  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 823
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked 332 Times in 258 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan
I agree with your points, and pleasantly surprised by a good discussion of Adaptive Cruise Control (as some of my old employers called it) here on BF! Another diversity factor in the USA is that the US roads have a variety of vehicle ages and equipment. Even if NHTSA uses FMVSS to mandate centralized speed control AND has all the relevant location data, Americans have very durable cars which drive perfectly well even after 12 years on the road - same for the rest of the Americas and Europe. For a centralized speed control system, for example with more tech like centralized computing of required speed limits, broadcasting all that data to key points on the road network, and then broadcasting it to vehicles which are required to respond, the aliens have probably nearly landed. In English, I think the technical capability nearly exists and has been so for at least a decade. But until replacement of the automotive fleet can be directed and accelerated, only a small percentage of the automotive fleet will be able to comply.

So how much good can this possibly do? Can it even make any real improvement if the transition in the automotive fleet is not mandated and enforced?

Even if it is enforced, Americans will still be what we are. There will be many who will not accept it even if it is an enforced law.

My overall opinion about "Intelligent Speed Assistance" is that the social and societal problems are far bigger than the technological problems (the "alien technlogy").

We could ease into it by just increasing the capabilities of systems within cars on an incremental basis, allowing a slow enough transition to "track" the loss of capabiity in aging vehicles. But this is another rant topic altogether.
What if the government mandates that no one can drive a car that is older than 15 years, just as recently done in the largest so-called democracy on the planet!

And all new cars can only be sold with all the necessary tracking and controlling alien technologies already built into them - problem solved.

Observation of the recent few years make me wonder about the motivations of our rule-makers; not everything is logical or in the interest of greater good of public.

Last edited by Alan K; 01-07-24 at 10:13 AM.
Alan K is offline  
Old 01-07-24, 10:26 AM
  #202  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,381
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4388 Post(s)
Liked 4,828 Times in 2,984 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan
For a centralized speed control system, for example with more tech like centralized computing of required speed limits, broadcasting all that data to key points on the road network, and then broadcasting it to vehicles which are required to respond, the aliens have probably nearly landed.
I donít think the system needs to be that complicated. Quality GPS speed mapping and real-time sign recognition are all that is needed, both of which are already in widespread use across Europe.
A modem car like my Tesla could easily and effectively be speed limited today by a simple OTA software update to prevent manual over-ride of the reported speed limit. This could be in the form of a hard or soft limit to provide some degree of flexibility.

Of course all this is very unlikely to happen any time soon for obvious political reasons and it is no solution for legacy cars which donít have the onboard tech. But I think it is getting a little closer to reality on this side of the pond thanks to ever increasing speed enforcement measures ie smart speed cameras and relatively large penalties for excessive speeding. Itís enough to have calmed traffic speeds quite significantly compared to say 30 or 40 years ago (speaking for the UK at least)
PeteHski is offline  
Old 01-07-24, 10:58 AM
  #203  
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 10,244

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Krampus

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked 3,417 Times in 2,526 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan
until replacement of the automotive fleet can be directed and accelerated, only a small percentage of the automotive fleet will be able to comply.

So how much good can this possibly do? Can it even make any real improvement if the transition in the automotive fleet is not mandated and enforced?

We could ease into it by just increasing the capabilities of systems within cars on an incremental basis, allowing a slow enough transition to "track" the loss of capabiity in aging vehicles. But this is another rant topic altogether.
CA (and other states sure to follow, and the UK) are mandating that after a certain date, no new cars can be sold with gas engines. Existing cars can still be bought and sold used. That will be the beginning of a slow transition. Same could be done for speed governing. After a certain date, no new car can be sold that doesn't support speed compliance.

In both cases, there will be a run on gas/"speedable" cars right before the deadline, and a shock to the new car market as some % of customers don't want the mandated cars
RubeRad is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 02:17 PM
  #204  
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,869

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times in 505 Posts
Originally Posted by RubeRad
CA (and other states sure to follow, and the UK) are mandating that after a certain date, no new cars can be sold with gas engines. Existing cars can still be bought and sold used. That will be the beginning of a slow transition. Same could be done for speed governing. After a certain date, no new car can be sold that doesn't support speed compliance.

In both cases, there will be a run on gas/"speedable" cars right before the deadline, and a shock to the new car market as some % of customers don't want the mandated cars
For both technologies (EV and speed-controlled) there will be a considerable transition time. My point was, is that acceptable?
Road Fan is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 02:36 PM
  #205  
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,869

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times in 505 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
I donít think the system needs to be that complicated. Quality GPS speed mapping and real-time sign recognition are all that is needed, both of which are already in widespread use across Europe.
A modem car like my Tesla could easily and effectively be speed limited today by a simple OTA software update to prevent manual over-ride of the reported speed limit. This could be in the form of a hard or soft limit to provide some degree of flexibility.

Of course all this is very unlikely to happen any time soon for obvious political reasons and it is no solution for legacy cars which donít have the onboard tech. But I think it is getting a little closer to reality on this side of the pond thanks to ever increasing speed enforcement measures ie smart speed cameras and relatively large penalties for excessive speeding. Itís enough to have calmed traffic speeds quite significantly compared to say 30 or 40 years ago (speaking for the UK at least)
It's correct that the basic function can be provided with less "formal" adjacent systems, and the function is good when all the adjacent functions are on-target. But some governments, lead by EU, require strong attention to be paid to safety systems not functioning correctly due to faults in electronics. This certainly refers to electronic systems within the consumer vehicle, but adjacent systems not in the vehicle can be viewed as part of the system which my car depends on. While vehicle-only implementations can already be very complex, when an external system is used to add a higher quality (more reliable, more complete or more accurate) function such as dynamic map alterations, its aberrations could be counted as a cause of a failure of my car (for example) to provide road construction data when my car is autonomously driving close to a construction site. System of system failures and their effects on the population of vehicles are active research topics, with experimental platforms being built.

Your point, how much of this complexity is really needed, is one of the topics which are on the table. In the USA, NHTSA needs to know how much to regulate, and what really does not need more rules to be written. Same for Japan, China, South America, Canada, India and EU.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 02:49 PM
  #206  
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,869

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times in 505 Posts
Originally Posted by Alan K
What if the government mandates that no one can drive a car that is older than 15 years, just as recently done in the largest so-called democracy on the planet!

And all new cars can only be sold with all the necessary tracking and controlling alien technologies already built into them - problem solved.

Observation of the recent few years make me wonder about the motivations of our rule-makers; not everything is logical or in the interest of greater good of public.
I agree, safety, logic and reason are not always what we see coming from government. That's where I go for a bike ride.

What if they do? My expectation is that they won't, meaning that significantly safety benefits (lives saved, i.e. reduction of road injuries and fatalities) which some might expect will not be realized for a number of years, until attrition takes non-compliant cars off the road. This enhances the time until we see annual fatalities coming back down to less than 30k per year. Which way do we as a nation want to go.

Sorry to get political, but these big safety systems do have significant consequences. It's not just an engineering problem.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 02:53 PM
  #207  
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 10,244

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Krampus

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked 3,417 Times in 2,526 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan
For both technologies (EV and speed-controlled) there will be a considerable transition time. My point was, is that acceptable?
Well given that the reality on the ground is it's almost certainly not going to happen at all, yes, I would accept a gradual transition.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 04:37 PM
  #208  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,381
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4388 Post(s)
Liked 4,828 Times in 2,984 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan
It's correct that the basic function can be provided with less "formal" adjacent systems, and the function is good when all the adjacent functions are on-target. But some governments, lead by EU, require strong attention to be paid to safety systems not functioning correctly due to faults in electronics. This certainly refers to electronic systems within the consumer vehicle, but adjacent systems not in the vehicle can be viewed as part of the system which my car depends on. While vehicle-only implementations can already be very complex, when an external system is used to add a higher quality (more reliable, more complete or more accurate) function such as dynamic map alterations, its aberrations could be counted as a cause of a failure of my car (for example) to provide road construction data when my car is autonomously driving close to a construction site. System of system failures and their effects on the population of vehicles are active research topics, with experimental platforms being built.

Your point, how much of this complexity is really needed, is one of the topics which are on the table. In the USA, NHTSA needs to know how much to regulate, and what really does not need more rules to be written. Same for Japan, China, South America, Canada, India and EU.
Just to be clear I wasnít referring to autonomous driving here. Only a simple dynamic max speed limiter based on posted limits. I already drive using this system (TACC) most of the time and it very rarely makes a mistake on the speed limit. Iíve driven through central London many times and it hasnít missed a beat through countless changes in the speed limit. But when it does make the occasional mistake it soon recovers when it sees the next speed sign or reverts to GPS mapping. If the driver is still clearly responsible for keeping within the speed limit then there are no legal issues.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 05:01 PM
  #209  
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 10,244

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Krampus

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked 3,417 Times in 2,526 Posts
There are programs where people can receive discounts on their car insurance if they permit a spyware device to wirelessly report on their driving behavior (and they have good driving behavior). That is a type of speed governance by financial incentive.

I would have signed up for that so the insurance companies could help me ensure my teenage boys don't drive like teenage boys, but my wife nixed it because privacy.

What if car owners were given a choice:
  • Your car has a speed governor so it is technologically incapable of driving faster than (whatever it thinks) the speed limit is
  • You have a monitor in your car, and whenever it thinks you are speeding, it sends GPS data to the government (you also get a copy). Cases over a certain threshold for mph over the limit will be human-reviewed and tickets issued.
RubeRad is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 07:24 PM
  #210  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 823
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 472 Post(s)
Liked 332 Times in 258 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan
I agree, safety, logic and reason are not always what we see coming from government. That's where I go for a bike ride.

What if they do? My expectation is that they won't, meaning that significantly safety benefits (lives saved, i.e. reduction of road injuries and fatalities) which some might expect will not be realized for a number of years, until attrition takes non-compliant cars off the road. This enhances the time until we see annual fatalities coming back down to less than 30k per year. Which way do we as a nation want to go.

Sorry to get political, but these big safety systems do have significant consequences. It's not just an engineering problem.
A reduction in deaths by 10,000 is certainly significant. I have not looked into details of numbers, I am assuming you have to make this claim - are 10,000 deaths per year exclusively caused by excess speed over the posted limit?
The factors responsible for the rest of 30,000 deaths, I take it, will remain the same.

I wonder if efforts were also made to help segments of our society that could really use assistance in not only saving their lives but also improving quality of their lives for the rest of their days. About 48,000 people commit suicide per year. I am not seeing any feverish efforts made to help individuals with mental health issues, some of whom end up committing suicide .
Alan K is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 08:31 PM
  #211  
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,869

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times in 505 Posts
10k is a lot. I don't follow the figures and factors so much any more. When I started at Ford annual was about 40000. After another 10 years, i had gone to the Electronics division and it was heading to 30,000! It stayed that low for a number of years. After 2009 layoffs it came down to 30,000, later swinging back up. Slow hanges but big changes.

NHTSA publishes pamphlets called "Traffic Safety Facts," which are about specific topics. About every two years they put out a comprehensive data book. I learned a lot by following those.

Attention to traffic victims versus any other group? I can't say. But expecting a unified, visible value system is way beyond where they are.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 08:39 PM
  #212  
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,869

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1854 Post(s)
Liked 663 Times in 505 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
Just to be clear I wasnít referring to autonomous driving here. Only a simple dynamic max speed limiter based on posted limits. I already drive using this system (TACC) most of the time and it very rarely makes a mistake on the speed limit. Iíve driven through central London many times and it hasnít missed a beat through countless changes in the speed limit. But when it does make the occasional mistake it soon recovers when it sees the next speed sign or reverts to GPS mapping. If the driver is still clearly responsible for keeping within the speed limit then there are no legal issues.
Actually, neither was I! Rather, systems where the vehicle contains s number of independent but very sophisticated driving assistance functions which are not linked in a way whicn could be considred an integrated driving control system.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 09:28 PM
  #213  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,811
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1591 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,017 Times in 571 Posts
Originally Posted by RubeRad
There are programs where people can receive discounts on their car insurance if they permit a spyware device to wirelessly report on their driving behavior (and they have good driving behavior). That is a type of speed governance by financial incentive.

I would have signed up for that so the insurance companies could help me ensure my teenage boys don't drive like teenage boys, but my wife nixed it because privacy.

What if car owners were given a choice:
  • Your car has a speed governor so it is technologically incapable of driving faster than (whatever it thinks) the speed limit is
  • You have a monitor in your car, and whenever it thinks you are speeding, it sends GPS data to the government (you also get a copy). Cases over a certain threshold for mph over the limit will be human-reviewed and tickets issued.
It occurs to me that the first option could potentially result in more collisions as it would make passing on two lane roads much more dangerous. And driver's will take a greater risk if that is their only option.
jon c. is offline  
Old 01-08-24, 11:37 PM
  #214  
Keepin it Wheel
Thread Starter
 
RubeRad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Posts: 10,244

Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Krampus

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked 3,417 Times in 2,526 Posts
That's a good point. In post #8 I said
I'm not sure how it will work with signs obscured by trees, speed limits changed due to temporary construction, or the very rare situation where the safest choice is actually to speed to get out of a risky situation.
But your 2-lane passing example is actually not that rare. I'm not sure but is it actually legal to exceed the speed limit in order to minimize the duration of being in the wrong lane?
RubeRad is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.