[theabstractmind]

Originally Posted by tilt

As I have probably mentioned earlier in this thread, I have a different definition of over-speeding from many other folks.

I define over-speeding as driving beyond current conditions of the environment and the vehicle, while most others define it purely as driving higher than posted limits.

I have no objection to limits being posted; and shall happily follow them; as long as said limits have not been determined by pulling "lucky numbers" out of a hat.

I do; however; draw the line at ECU-based top-speed limitation because like some others have said, there are times (albeit rare) that one needs to exceed posted limits in the interests of public safety. I do concede that such instances are usually born out of my driving beyond current conditions though and as such could be avoided.

I am all for ECU-based speed notifications or warnings like what Google Maps displays though.



I am afraid I do not catch your drift. Would you maybe elaborate? Or have I addressed this in my response above?

Thanks and cheers

Please ignore. I had actually put in a request to delete my post as I didn't want to take forward the conversation.

[YK85]

Originally Posted by theabstractmind

I'm not being humble. You are again trying to argue or highlight a technicality of a word or a statement and ignoring the essence of a statement.

My opinion also not backed by data says again the same thing, if I can prevent one idiot from driving at 150kmph jumping into another lane or losing control and taking the life of an innocent oncoming vehicle's occupants or a pedestrian, the measure would have done it's job. The likelihood of it based on past known instances is at least one.

I don't have any data to quote but a crash at even 80 - 90 kmph will have similar impact to a crash at 120 kmph. With just a minor difference in magnitude differentiating the two, what is the point even going for a 120 speed limit? Why not go for a 50 kmph limit?
(our governments have already ensured this effective speed limit with poor infrastructure anyway )

There may be fatalities at even at 50 kmph and sure enough, someone will come up with a solution to limit speed to 30 kmph, so where do we stop?
I'll say it again, band aid solutions will not solve anything.

[theabstractmind]

Originally Posted by YK85

I don't have any data to quote but a crash at even 80 - 90 kmph will have similar impact to a crash at 120 kmph. With just a minor difference in magnitude differentiating the two, what is the point even going for a 120 speed limit? Why not go for a 50 kmph limit?
(our governments have already ensured this effective speed limit with poor infrastructure anyway )

There may be fatalities at even at 50 kmph and sure enough, someone will come up with a solution to limit speed to 30 kmph, so where do we stop?
I'll say it again, band aid solutions will not solve anything.

https://youtu.be/tZChyjaqNBI

You may never be convinced so as with many others.

[abhinav007_007]

There are two ways i see this..

First, India (& Indians) has to stop looking at West and how we can play catching game. Germans created Autobahn and they aren't necessarily better drivers! India should have its own AutoWay, with no speed limits.
It'll enable faster modes of transport and will lead to economic growth (similar to what happened in Germany but at a bigger scale). Our roads, for ex. many expressways are better than sections of Autobahn. Yes, I have driven on both and hence commenting..

Second, the "responsible" & "welfare" argument of State for me ends at Tobacco. No one can deny its harmful effects on humans and still the economic benefits prevent any intervention for its ban.
If we are okay to live with such harmful elements then why even think of discussing a segment which directly leads to economic growth of country.

Now people will educate me on how Tobacco harms the person consuming it, whereas Speeding vehicle can harm others. I beg to differ, Tobacco has destroyed families, kids, adults alike..

Technology supremacy has evil effects (like all advancements) but a leading economy needs to live with it..

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by abhinav007_007

There are two ways i see this..

First, India (& Indians) has to stop looking at West and how we can play catching game. Germans created Autobahn and they aren't necessarily better drivers! India should have its own AutoWay, with no speed limitS..

Having lived and worked in both Germany and India, I can definitely say Germans are considerably better drivers than Indians. They are probably one of the most disciplined nations in the world, where most people will abide rules and regulations all the time.

Also, the have very strict requirements on obtaining a drivers license.

I have encountered cows, dogs, pedestrians, cyclist on Indian highways, cars and busses driving on the wrong side of the road! On a daily basis in India. Never seen anything like that, even remotely, in Germany! Or for that matter in Western Europeans countries.

The Germans have superior infrastructure and people who adhere to rules and regulations. Although I love India the words superior infrastructure and adhering to rules and regulations is not something I would attribute to India.

Just my opinion of course, no offence

Jeroen

[venkyhere]

Originally Posted by YK85

I don't have any data to quote but a crash at even 80 - 90 kmph will have similar impact to a crash at 120 kmph. With just a minor difference in magnitude differentiating the two, what is the point even going for a 120 speed limit? Why not go for a 50 kmph limit?
(our governments have already ensured this effective speed limit with poor infrastructure anyway )

There may be fatalities at even at 50 kmph and sure enough, someone will come up with a solution to limit speed to 30 kmph, so where do we stop?
I'll say it again, band aid solutions will not solve anything.

I'm against ECU imposed speed limits. That said, we don't need "data" to predict the impact energy of one speed vis-a-vis another speed. It's v^2 scaling. The same vehicle against a stationary object at 80kph will have an impact energy (2/3)^2 times the impact energy at 120kph. That is 44%. By reducing speed 33%, impact energy has reduced 66%. The two impacts are NO-WAY similar.
So the argument that reduced speeds lead to less severe accidents is of course correct. However, I don't believe that is reason enough to ask teh ECU to impost a hard-limit on the car's speed. It should be left to the discretion of the human.

[Akshay1234]

Originally Posted by abhinav007_007

Our roads, for ex. many expressways are better than sections of Autobahn. Yes, I have driven on both and hence commenting..

Where are these expressways? I am yet to see them, but would like to visit and possibly drive on them.

[abhinav007_007]

Where are these expressways? I am yet to see them, but would like to visit and possibly drive on them.

The new ones getting built. For ex: The 300+ KM stretch from Agra to Lucknow (It goes beyond, but I only drove on this stretch).. You can easily do it under 2 hours.

It is access controlled, no animals etc.. brilliant tar road and people do follow traffic rules (overtaking lane, not a single vehicle against traffic etc.).

Mind you, this is in UP which is considered most dense state but drive on this stretch and you'll feel why India can (& will) leap into future with faster transport modes..

In comparison, Yamuna expressway feels dated, even Mumbai-Pune expressway feels dated! (Have driven on all these in last 6 months)

[GwD]

Originally Posted by venkyhere

So the argument that reduced speeds lead to less severe accidents is of course correct. However, I don't believe that is reason enough to ask teh ECU to impost a hard-limit on the car's speed. It should be left to the discretion of the human.

By the Govt.'s logic we should go back to bullock carts. It's the safest, no fatalities, and possibly no severe collisions. In WB, all I see are barricades every few hundred meters which makes economical cruising impossible. Not only that, the barricades are put up on the main highway and I guess that the intention is to appease the local people. The logical approach should have been to put up barricades on the small local roads so that vehicles entering the highway would perforce have to stop, look and come on the highway only when there is a safe gap in the traffic. However, our authorities think that it is better to create obstacles for the highway traffic, make them practice a slalom run but allow the local traffic unhindered access onto the highway.

The starting axiom is illogical, so now we have all these ideas of ECU settings are coming up in the fertile brains of some people.

[audioholic]

Originally Posted by Akshay1234

Where are these expressways? I am yet to see them, but would like to visit and possibly drive on them.

In my experience - Chittoor to Tirupati in AP, Bangalore Mysore Eway(to be completed), Chitradurga to Hospet(KA) are superior to the average German autobahn when it comes to the lanes available and the absence of entry exits as well as any chances of intrusion and I have driven thousands of kms on the Autobahn. These are roads where 120kmph is SLOW. I bet in the north there are more. The nature of these roads are they are very straight and you always have a high range of view like more than 2kms which will make you confident of doing higher speeds due to the ability to gauge your trajectory well in advance.

[theabstractmind]

As a closing argument, I am in full support of a dynamic speed limit enforced by the ECU with a few buffer zones allowed on highways. The reason being that the dynamic limits work on more pragmatic or scientific way than an arbitrary cap. Certain sections of tollways can be earmarked as no limit zones or a higher limit. Additional technologies can be brought in to reduce the accidents.

Three incidents to support a dynamic speed limit:

1. The VW crash in Hyderabad from a flyover onto a bystander below. I certainly don't want an innocent life being taken away.

2. Another incident from Hyderabad is etched in my mind where a drunk and speeding car within city limits jumped over a divider and crashed into a Santro - killing a man and a ten year old. The thought of losing a budding life makes my heart wrench. No parent should pay the price for someone's thrills or follies.

3. A speeding truck mowed down a child actress in Bangalore a few months ago, or about a year ago. If science and technology can stop such crashes, I am all in for giving up my driving liberties. My driving liberties cannot be more important than the life of an innocent.

There are many more incidents I'm sure where speed and other factors were involved. But the above three remain etched in my mind because they took out innocent lives.

[abhinav007_007]

Originally Posted by Akshay1234

Where are these expressways? I am yet to see them, but would like to visit and possibly drive on them.

I usually don't quote politicians, but this shud highlight the vision at least:

https://youtu.be/BHQgSX6kiXc

The execution (for a change) is at par with planning when it comes to NHAI in recent times.. (witnessed in/around Delhi)

[pjbiju]

In my driving experience in the US (have not driven in any other foreign country), I hardly saw anyone trying to drive faster than everybody else on the road, particularly the highways. Almost everyone followed a similar speed. The variation in speed was very little between cars, trucks, buses etc. So if most of the people drive in a disciplined way (it is a developed culture), there need to be less policing to do. Most of these countries have developed this culture because of high financial and other penalties, if and when someone was caught over-speeding (or other traffic violations).

The same thing would happen in India if stricter penalties and if the chance of one getting caught was higher when violating traffic rules. A good example is the Mumbai - Pune expressway. The number of cars over-speeding have drastically reduced because of the fixed speed cameras and the penalty of Rs. 2000 per instance of over-speeding.

So is ECU limited speed limits one of the solutions to accidents? It could be. But rules can also be implemented using other methods. It may be safe to drive faster than speed limits on certain roads under certain circumstances. But that would be violating the law and punishable if caught. Just like you could actually run a red light at a signal and get across the junction without causing an accident. But should we allow people who feel that they can do that because they have the special skillset to do that or because it gives them some thrill in doing so? Theoretically a person could be at a junction with a red traffic light for that person. But the person may see that there are no other vehicles coming from any of the other directions and may decide to jump the red light. The risk? May be nil in that situation. However another driver in a similar situation may see a couple of vehicles crossing the junction (because they had the green signal) and may still decide to jump the signal, assuming he can navigate around the oncoming/crossing vehicles. There is certainly risk involved here. So what speed is a safe speed depends on the vehicle capability, driver capability, and most importantly, the situation (road condition, other vehicles, pedestrians etc.)

The risk of causing injury to self and others is very high when we break traffic rules be it running a red light or going beyond the specified speed limits. Increasing the speed limit to 120 kmph on a highway cannot make it safer to drive at that speed simply because of the road design and more so because of the other slower occupants of the road. It will only make it legal for someone to be driving rashly at 120 kmph posing a danger for all the others on the road.