New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous • Hacker News Board

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#51

Post by seanmcdirmid » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:23 PM UTC

taeric wrote: post #35

VeninVidiaVicii wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly disagree. When you’re passing someone on a two-lane highway you should always speed way up to get the hell out of the lane of oncoming traffic.

In general, you shouldn't be passing in a scenario that requires you jumping over ~10mph over the limit. And if you can see oncoming traffic, pretty much at all, you should probably not pass.

If you are in a place with very flat/straight roads, you can pass while seeing oncoming traffic. I don’t know how it is in Australia (who are known to have some of the flattest straightest roads on earth) but in Nebraska this is definitely feasible.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#52

Post by taeric » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:24 PM UTC

falcolas wrote: post #42

VeninVidiaVicii wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly disagree. When you’re passing someone on a two-lane highway you should always speed way up to get the hell out of the lane of oncoming traffic.

Yes. And if you're pulled over for speeding way up, I have never heard of a traffic cop who will ticket you. Some online study aids for passing start with "increase your speed so you may finish the pass quickly" and end with "maintain a safe passing speed until you have created sufficient distance to resume a safe cruising speed." Others recommend a full 10mph speed difference to keep the passing time short.

I've known people to get a ticket in this exact scenario. Speeding is not allowed just to pass and will often times get you hit with a reckless driving charge, as well. Especially so if you go 10+ over the limit.

Now, if you mean someone that went less than 5 over the limit, I'm back in agreement with you. But, that is within the realm of speed that probably won't get you pulled over even when not passing?

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#53

Post by taeric » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:26 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #51

taeric wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, you shouldn't be passing in a scenario that requires you jumping over ~10mph over the limit. And if you can see oncoming traffic, pretty much at all, you should probably not pass.

If you are in a place with very flat/straight roads, you can pass while seeing oncoming traffic. I don’t know how it is in Australia (who are known to have some of the flattest straightest roads on earth) but in Nebraska this is definitely feasible.

Fair that I can't say you should never do so. I'd stand by it as a general safe rule, though? If the road is that long and straight, I'd imagine it also has a rather high base speed limit already.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#54

Post by imoverclocked » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:27 PM UTC

kazinator wrote: post #33

imoverclocked wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is poorly specified but also pretty common with the obvious variations. Eg: the person you are trying to pass, passive-aggressively speeds up.

There is nothing passive aggressive about speeding up when being passed. The previous behavior of going too slow is what was passive aggressive; but once that driver accelerates, they have disrobed themselves of all pretence of passivity.

That might be true but only if we know their motives, which we usually don’t. One could argue that any driver isn’t passive aggressive because they are actively driving their vehicle. However part of the passive aggressive definition includes intentionally making mistakes in response to others demands. All of that being said, the difference is subtle and probably not worth arguing in this context.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#55

Post by dividefuel » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:30 PM UTC

taeric wrote: post #35

VeninVidiaVicii wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly disagree. When you’re passing someone on a two-lane highway you should always speed way up to get the hell out of the lane of oncoming traffic.

In general, you shouldn't be passing in a scenario that requires you jumping over ~10mph over the limit. And if you can see oncoming traffic, pretty much at all, you should probably not pass.

If you've passed a car before, it feels pretty clear that minimizing your time spent in the same lane as oncoming traffic is a much bigger priority than minimizing how much you go over the speed limit.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#56

Post by taeric » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:34 PM UTC

dividefuel wrote: post #55

taeric wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, you shouldn't be passing in a scenario that requires you jumping over ~10mph over the limit. And if you can see oncoming traffic, pretty much at all, you should probably not pass.

If you've passed a car before, it feels pretty clear that minimizing your time spent in the same lane as oncoming traffic is a much bigger priority than minimizing how much you go over the speed limit.

I've passed plenty of cars. Usually, in this scenario, I can exceed their speed by 15+ without even crossing the speed limit. If I had to go 10+ over the overall speed limit to pass them, I almost certainly just setup a situation where I'm either speeding in general to stay ahead of them, or I moved a single car's distance in the line that I was in. Which... seems silly to argue for.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#57

Post by stoneman24 » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:35 PM UTC

toast0 wrote: post #26

dangus wrote: post #3

From the article: "To put it simply, the system is dangerous." And then it proceeds to spend zero time at all describing exactly what is dangerous about it. Seriously, the article doesn't even hypothesize about what makes this dangerous, it just says that it's bad. The car I drove about 10 years ago had trouble exceeding the speed limit at times because it was a diesel! It was never dangerous. Trucks including rental…

I think there's a fundamental issue here that the posted speed limit is often not the same thing as a reasonable maximum speed that's appropriate for conditions. Speed limits are set for all sorts of reasons that don't often match up with safety, and even then, they're usually set for normal conditions; when you have great visibility, dry pavement, and low traffic, it's often not unsafe to exceed the posted limit; ju…

There is also many places where there are extremely few posted speed signs. The A9 in Scotland from Perth to Inverness is a notoriously dangerous road (it has large sections of single carriageway [60mph] with occasional dual carriage [70mph]). It has many junctions where cars can cross lanes to leave on minor roads. So bad, it has a large system of average speed cameras to hopefully control the traffic.

Driving slowly (40-50) on this long road will cause cars, buses and trucks to try and overtake even on the single carriageway sections which is risky for everybody.

But very few actual speed signs, so you end confused and wondering exactly what is the correct value for that section and anxious about the next average speed camera. And that’s for experienced uk drivers, I hate to think how stressed the tourists are ?

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#58

Post by bigfatkitten » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:37 PM UTC

So I've got a new Ford does this, and it can operate in one of three modes selectable by the driver:

1. An advisory mode, where it dings at you if you bust the speed limit.

2. Speed limiting mode, where it won't accelerate past the limit unless you override the limiter by flooring the accelerator.

3. Adaptive cruise control, where the cruise control will speed up and slow down to suit what it thinks the speed limit is

The system uses a combination of speed sign recognition and and its satnav database. The speed sign recognition could be best described as "ok".

What it really struggles with is construction and other temporary speed limits such as school zones, particularly on side roads.

There is a spot near me on a 100km/h arterial road where if I'm using adaptive cruise, the car will detect the 40km/h construction limit on a side road and then brake hard to slow from 100 to 40 for no proper reason. This is very dangerous, tantamount to brake checking, which is a traffic offence that I otherwise could properly be fined for.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#59

Post by stoneman24 » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:39 PM UTC

taneq wrote: post #23

shermozle wrote: post #5

Drove a rented Kia in Central Australia recently that had this. It was fine: just stick below the speed limit. "Dangerous" to someone who continuously rides the speed limit perhaps.

The speed limit is the speed you should be driving in most circumstances, and is set far below the maximum safe speed for the road. Driving significantly below the pasted speed is as dangerous driving significantly above it.

Driving significantly below the pasted speed Without good reason will get you failed in the UK driving test for not making adequate progress. As my office colleague found out recently.

Re: New anti-speeding system coming to Australia is dangerous

#60

Post by dividefuel » Wed, Aug 21, 2024, 11:47 PM UTC

In my experience driving (in the US), I don't think I've ever seen an attentive driver going consistently 5-10% above the speed limit as a prime safety issue.

Far more often the issues I see are (1) distracted drivers (e.g. on their phone) or (2) aloof/aggressive drivers (e.g. abrupt lane changes, tailing cars, switching lanes without checking blind spots, blatant speeding, driving significantly slower than surrounding traffic, etc).

I do think a warning system for exceeding the speed limit can make sense, but it needs to have the right threshold and mitigations to avoid being ignored, a distraction, or (worse yet) putting the driver in a more dangerous situation. The right threshold is clearly not at 1km/h above the speed limit. I think a more reasonable one would be 10mph/15km/h over the posted limit.

EDIT: I'll add that I think a looser threshold would still hit the low hanging fruit of egregious speeders, but without burning public goodwill towards car safety features. Let the features demonstrate value first, then discuss whether the thresholds should be tighter.