> In a message dated Sun, 28 Jan 2001 12:10:38 EST
> GBurch1@aol.com worried -
> > Ugh - I read this with dread. As someone who has always gotten pleasure
> > out of high-performance cars (and other machines) (see:
> > http://users.aol.com/gburch3/cars.html), I sincerely hope this kind of
> > technology WILL be used to improve the safety and reliability of autos and
> > other transportation technology, but that it won't tempt the nannies to
> > castrate high-performance cars.
> > What I wouldn't at all mind seeing and something I've thought about before
> > is employing technology to allow multiple classes of driver's licenses and
> > to regulate speed in proportion to a machine's capabilities and the road
> > conditions it encounters. I would gladly pay more for, take a test to get
> > and tolerate some slight intrusion into my road-going privacy to be able
> > to legally drive faster than current law allows.
> The speed limiting technology is mainly concerned about pedestrian deaths
> and injuries in built-up areas. A pedestrian hit at 40 mph will almost
> certainly die - at 30 mph half will survive. That is why enforcing 30 mph in
> towns is considered to be important. Drivers have an incidental benefit as
> they and their cars will also suffer less injury in low-speed shunts.
But how many pedestrians do you see on the interstate?
> There is no theoretical barrier to having unlimited speed areas on freeways
> at certain times. But you would never get the laws passed to permit it as
> there would always be a mix of capabilities of cars and drivers at all
> times. Here in UK the freeways are busy at all times of the day and night -
> it's a crowded little country! :-)
What if you made all cars follow automatic guidance installed in the
roadways and freed the former drivers to surf the net or whatever? This
would insure all vehicles acted uniformly and to plan. There has been
work done showing that the traffic flow could go a consistent 85 miles
and hour or more in most major commute corriders with greatly improved
saftey under such a system. I would vote for it in a heartbeat as long
as it was at least as safe as my own reflexes and coordination can be in
the current scenario. I could use the commute time quite productively.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:26 MDT