Life is safer with a car that doesn't let you break the speed limit
By Ben Webster
Motorists take a shine to system that puts on the brake


Click to enlarge

DRIVERS prevented from breaking speed limits by a device that automatically applies their brakes have a fifth fewer crashes, a government-funded study has found.
Most of the motorists who took part were keen to keep the device at the end of the trial, despite it removing much of the thrill from driving.

The Department for Transport is creating a digital speed map that will allow intelligent speed adaptation, known as ISA, to operate on all roads. ISA will also be incorporated into the European star-rating system for car safety, with only those fitted with the device qualifying for the top score of five stars.

The study, conducted in Leeds, found that motorists who had the device fitted to their cars were 19 per cent less likely to injure themselves or someone else. ISA works by combining a satellite positioning system with a computer that controls the throttle and brakes. The system checks the vehicle’s speed with the local limit and, if the driver is breaking the limit, either blocks acceleration or applies the brakes.



If the driver crosses from a 40mph area to a 30mph area without slowing, the brake pedal lowers automatically and the speed drops to the limit within a few seconds.

The driver can override the system either by using a switch on the steering wheel or by pressing down hard on the accelerator. The computer measures how frequently the driver overrides the system.

The department is funding the £1.9 million study by the University of Leeds, involving 20 Skoda Fabias, because motor manufacturers are reluctant to carry out their own trials. Results from the first of four six-month trials, each involving twenty drivers, show that average speeds declined significantly.

The study team calculated the fall in injuries by comparing their results with previous research showing the risks of speeding. A pedestrian is twice as likely to be killed if hit at 35mph than at 30mph. The overall risk of having a crash falls by 5 per cent for every 1mph reduction in speed.

The trial found that young males were more likely to override the system than women and older drivers. The volunteers included equal numbers of people who said that they usually obeyed the speed limit and those who said that they frequently broke it.

Oliver Carsten, Professor of Transport Safety at Leeds university, said: “The system didn’t eliminate speeding, but there was a very substantial reduction in excessive speed.”

He dismissed concerns that drivers would object to having a device that kept a record of their speed and movements.

“It has been described as like having Big Brother on board, but that’s unfair because drivers can switch it off.”

The trial has prompted Transport for London to order a feasibility study with a view to making ISA compulsory on buses and taxis. There are no plans to make ISA compulsory in all cars, but drivers who persistently break the limit may be ordered to fit it as a condition of keeping their licences. Commercial versions, costing about £500, are being developed.

Where is the evidence that these cars were safer?

 

This (section) of this study finished ages ago.

So how come it has taken so long for the "results" to be published?

 

Drivers prevented from breaking speed limits by a device that automatically applies their brakes have a fifth fewer crashes, a government-funded study has found.

And the evidence?

Wouldn't be this, would it:

The study, conducted in Leeds, found that motorists who had the device fitted to their cars were 19 per cent less likely to injure themselves or someone else.

Oops, no:

That's just the above claim rewritten!

Try again:

Results from the first of four six-month trials, each involving twenty drivers, show that average speeds declined significantly.

The study team calculated the fall in injuries by comparing their results with previous research showing the risks of speeding. A pedestrian is twice as likely to be killed if hit at 35mph than at 30mph. The overall risk of having a crash falls by 5 per cent for every 1mph reduction in speed.

In other words, they have proved that their system saved lives because speed kills and the system killed speed.

 

Only trouble is that the "research" the compared it to is a load of b*ll*cks.

 

 

As for:

The department is funding the £1.9 million study by the University of Leeds, involving 20 Skoda Fabias, because motor manufacturers are reluctant to carry out their own trials.

The reason they were reluctant was probably because Carsten's original commercial partners backed out because the found that the system was never going to produce results.

 

Life is safer with a car that doesn't let you break the speed limit

 

See:

Speed Limiter Trial Trips Up