Next Falcon to get sat-nav speed control? - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars

Mr Sparkle · 03-17-2004, 17:31

I frigging hope not... there are FAR too many issues with this kind of system, both practical and ethical, for them to even be considered. I hope Mr Priddle comes to his senses and realises that active safety does NOT mean that the car is controlled by something other than the driver!

Have your say on this matter people, let's be heard loud and clear... NO INTRUSIVE DEVICES IN OUR NEXT FALCON!

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoAuto

Ford ponders safety direction for new Falcon
OTHER than improving structural aspects of the next generation Falcon, Ford Australia engineers are now discussing where toconcentrate their efforts on safety.

"We can continue to evolve the structure but it�s one of the things we�re scratching our head about now. Just what more can we do?" said Ford Australia�s safety engineering manager Bruce Priddle.

"There are new restraints emerging and we�re looking at those, different airbag technologies and different sensing systems � all those sorts of things are under consideration.

"But the area that I think has the greatest (potential) movingforward is on systems that actively prevent accidents. Things like active speed controls systems, where you might have a satellite map of speed zones and some sort of feedback system (such as accelerator pressure) in your car saying, �Hey, you�re outside the speed limit�."

As for Falcon�s much-vaunted power-adjustable pedals, Mr Priddle said research had not, to his knowledge, been undertaken to see whether customers were in fact using the feature. He agreed that automatic pedal adjustment linked to other personal settings such as seat and steering wheel position was worth investigation.

Thunder Kiss · 03-17-2004, 17:43

I think the BA Falcons already record top speed (both km/h and engine rpm) on their computers. Ford can then plug in diagnostic equipment and tell which cars have been "thrashed". I wonder the warranty implications of this? I wonder how long before police get equipment to plug in to factory computers? With GPS sat-nav one imagines it wouldn't be too hard for police to tell where, when, and at what speed anyone is travelling at if the car's computer is tapped into.

Dellboy999 · 03-17-2004, 17:52

So based on that, you can get fined in the mail for going to fast when there is actually no cops around at all.

sounding like the "fifth element" movie, you get told you have just commited an offence and have had points deducted .......... LOL

XR_Strider_GuY · 03-17-2004, 17:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thunder Kiss

I think the BA Falcons already record top speed (both km/h and engine rpm) on their computers. Ford can then plug in diagnostic equipment and tell which cars have been "thrashed". I wonder the warranty implications of this? I wonder how long before police get equipment to plug in to factory computers? With GPS sat-nav one imagines it wouldn't be too hard for police to tell where, when, and at what speed anyone is travelling at if the car's computer is tapped into.

Yes recording is all well and fine, but i reckons it absolutely bullocks that they can turn around and say oh your car is out of warrenty cause you drive too fast. The redline is there to be used and if a modern car cannot use it's maximum kw's at the highest gear without breaking then the car is not engineered properly.

Phido · 03-17-2004, 17:55

If they think they have reached the limits of safety and the only other frontier is sat speed control then I think they should get a clip over the ears. Theres stacks of stuff they haven't even looked at yet, like pedestrian safety.

Last thing I want is a accelerator pressure changing every 10 metres (which it would with current speed limits), so one second you have to fully extert yourself to slowly accelerate and then suddenly it only takes a twich. Whats next? Steering wheel resistance when the car thinks your not in the middle of the road?

I can tell you where to concentrate, lowering braking distances, improving handling, improving traction control, improving headlights, improving visability, improving steering feel, lowering weight, improving crumple zones, stopping passenger area intrusions, designing safety equipement to work for all human sizes not just dummies, improving dash readability, merc type presafe, etc, etc etc etc etc etc etc.

JEM · 03-17-2004, 17:55

I don't think Mr Priddle is trying to impose what you are saying Mr Sparkles.

I think he is just saying that the system will know what the speed limit is in any given area, and it will inform you (much like todays overspeed warning) when you are exceeding, it doesn't say anywhere that the car will actually adhere to the speed limit, if this was the case then i like you would be very worried about such a system.

davway · 03-17-2004, 18:03

this could also be considered invasion of privacy. /\/\/\/\(thunder kiss' reply)
basically if the cops dont catch you in the act of speeding and they tap into your computer and pull out the highest speed ever travelled at say 200kmh then whos to say that it was actually travelled on a road?
i do however like the idea of memory pedals and steering wheel just like we have memory seats. set to your comfort zone, push a button and next time everythings moved it goes back to how you like it.
as for speed controlling devices built into the car then thats not on. its up to the driver to be responsible.
if the government and thought-police really wanted to get dead serious with speed control then the most basic way of enforcing this (at a high cost but they would justify it) would be to fit each and every speed sign with a speed trip. in short your doing 100km, come into a town go through a 70 sign and bang your car computer has just been limited to a top speed of 70kmh till you leave through the next speed zone then allowing you to do that speed. i know it has its down points and im not saying they should do this but in the interest of safety then it would be very hard to debate them not doing it if they ever got the idea. so you want to overtake?...the law states at the moment that you can only overtake if you DONT break the posted speed limit.
think of 1 geniune and legitimate reason that you need to break the speed limit anywhere. cant do it? so then theres really no reason not to have these speed limiting signs if the government ever thought about it.
of course all emergency vehicles would be exempt.

i know this has veered a little off topic but realistically when someone gets a saftey idea in their head its near impossible to say no to it for this reason or that....its about safety and as like OHS rules most of them are there to make your job harder and alot of them are just stupid, but at the end of the day theyre there so at least you know you get to go home alive and in one peice.

cortinagt · 03-17-2004, 18:34

The whole memory idea is great.

Have memory ECU setting so the misses never knows what its capable of

The Sat/Nav system could be ok if used as an alert as mentioned above and could also be good for tracking down stolen vehicles too.

Phido · 03-17-2004, 18:36

Your overtaking a truck, its a very long semi with 2 or 3 trailers maybe more, this is very common, lots of trucks Australia does most of its transport by truck, they are slow, they are usually quite long. Sometimes its not clear how long a truck is until you overtake it. Now on this road there is now a car comming towards you at around 100Kmph. You may not have seen it because of a subtle dip in the road, or heat haze, or dust, trees, not having its lights on at night or it may have only recently turned onto the road.. Lots of valid reasons.

Now your doing say ~100Kmph, the other car is doing 100Kmph, the truck is doing say 60-70kmph. You are close to the front of the truck, you might just beable to get infront but it will be close

You can:
a) Slam on the brakes, hard, because your going to have to wipe off 60+kmph more like 80kmph, and then try to sneak back in behind the truck. That is of course if there is no one behind the truck. Your not sure, but lets be realistic, yes there are say 5 cars behind the truck.

b) commit to overtaking, accelerate quickly, to say 110 or 120 kmph, quickly and safely overtaking the truck avoiding on comming traffic. You will also be able to put some more distance between you and the truck so others may overtake and there is adiquate braking distance.

c) continue at same speed, hope you can make it, or maybe the other guy will slow down or pull over, or maybe the truck will slow down or turn off. Both unlikely!! Its hard enough for people to do that in shopping centers when traveling slowly or stationary, forget about it when they are doing 100kmph and theres not a lot of space. Thats if they see you and correctly judge your speed and distance.

You can add complications to this as well.

I know in such a case, I would dab the throttle, increase the safety margins and live another day. Sure for maybe 10 seconds I would break the law, I can live with that. I can't live with being indecisive, dangerous and killing a family or two with a head on collision at 100kmph.

Changing throttle resistance at moments like this may not be a good idea, suddenly the driver thinks somethings wrong, hes having problems accelerating, wastes valuable seconds, slams on the brakes, doesn't make it..

cortinagt · 03-17-2004, 18:46

I agree with you mate ^^^^^

I would do the same.

But it is never the less illegal. A cop would say you shouldnt have overtaken int he first place.

Perhaps accelerating over the speed limit for car control is another example. Like straightening up a jack-knifeing trailer.

Dont think it would ever happen but the theories make great reading.