|
Post by silverdragon on Oct 12, 2016 9:19:52 GMT
So here it is, and please participate, Safe driving concerns all of us, I need input from all if this is to go anywhere. And who knows, maybe it might... (I am part of a few road safety campaigns?...)
So...
Should all vehicles be fitted with a "remote kill switch". I am starting to think, Yes. I am starting to believe that as some vehicles have this "on-star" system, that is secure, or should be, so if it isnt, "make it so", it could be expanded in some way, to an independent ALL vehicle security system that is totally regulated by authorities and police to ensure it cant be "hacked", and by that I mean throw resources at it to test its ability to be hacked, whereby all vehicles can be "Shut down" if the police wish, to ensure no one can flee the police. Cars, Trucks, all road vehicles, as many of them as possible, and as soon as possible.
The argument(s) I would like to be under discussion...
1] Can anyone here think of any situation whereby a blue flashing light and a "Pull over" signal by police should be ignored. [1-b] If you are declaring an emergency and need to get to a medical person, you have the ability to push the button yourself and contact the "authorities" who would send paramedics to help you, so that should squash the ignoring police "In emergency", they already know you need help.
2] Do you believe that they can make a "hack proof" system that required identification to use that cannot be abused. Given enough time and resources. Would the drop in serious crime from NOT having police chases be able to fund this extra help.
3] Retrofit to older vehicles. Sod the idea that if it wasnt fitted when built it cant be fitted NOW, this may be something more important than the seat-belt, in that it will dissuade theft, and halt police chases... this is something we should all have.
4] Dissuade use of older "**Its a classic**" vehicles where it cant be fitted by limiting them, mechanically, to 30mph [or something like that] and/or limiting them to certain places like show grounds.
5] Mechanically limit all new vehicles to 100mph, anyone caught over that speed, in ANY country, on any public road, including the autobahn, to be banned from driving automatically. ...If ya wanna race, take it to the track.
6] A Funded "experience" day for all who show interest in speed at most race tracks, a "run what you brung", with mandatory training for all those who attend, to educate people in the dangers of speed. 6-b] Hell make that part of the licence, show people what can happen when you push the limits and loose control?..
7] older ***Its a classic*** vehicles should be identified and tested. Do they fit in the modern road safety world?. I am not sure of how far this goes, but "certain" vehicles "Of age" are sort of exempt from certain MOT basic safety test regulations... Is this fair?. If the car is deemed "Unsafe at any speed" and there is good proof that it is, should it even be allowed on the road?. I do not suggest all vehicles should be seized and scrapped immediately... There are collectors of F1 and older race cars that keep them in good order, those type of vehicles are not allowed on public roads, how about we look at all these older classics in the same way, unless its an organised regulated event on private ground or closed roads, should these vehicles be allowed anywhere near a public road with other traffic?.
The roads HAVE changed. I have held a race licence. I have now started to practise what I preach, I will not ever ride in any vehicle that doesnt have a safety harness or seat belt. Not even on private grounds, unless I am driving it, and doing so very slowly...
I think we need a "Mandate" that says the roads have changed in such a way that we need to address the situation now and look hard at what is modern road safety.
On that, and bringing in number 5 above, as there is no place on earth where its legal to do 200 mph on a public road, why do we need to build vehicles that CAN go that fast?. Bugatti, I am looking at you?. Why are we pushing the boundaries of speed when in fair conversation we may all agree that road speeds are dropping... especially in populated areas. It is no longer "OK" to be a boy racer and hoonigan about at twice the speed limit. So I know that most european car makers have put a "Voluntary" limit of about 150mph on their vehicles, I think that should be spread, and start to indicate to all car makers, that this is going to be regulated "sooner or later".
If you wanna race, take it to the track. There is NO PLACE to race on Public roads, so separate road cars from race cars. Make as many race cars as you want, just dont allow them on public roads.
Your thoughts please?.
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Oct 12, 2016 10:08:17 GMT
It's been proven time and time again that the term "unhackable" might as well be erased from the dictionary. If there are ones and zeros going through a cable or flying through the air, it's just a matter of time, effort and enough computing power before someone with an interest in breaking in will succeed. Even if there's no way to do it via cable or wireless, if the motivation is great enough, someone will just physically alter part of the system to override it.
A system that shuts down a car remotely WILL be abused or disabled at some point. Just think of how easy it would be to carjack/kidnap someone if you could stop them any time you want without putting yourself in harms way. At the very least, people who have good reason to feel at risk of such attacks would throw stacks of money at disabling that system to make sure it's never used against them and where there's money to be made on making such modifications, there are people to be found who are more than willing to name their price.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Oct 12, 2016 12:59:59 GMT
Many new cars come with built-in NAV systems. My add-on GPS knows the posted speed limit on most major roads. Should a built-in system limit a car speed to the posted speed on that road?
And what about self driving cars? As Oz points out, there is no such thing as an unhackable system. Could a self driving car be turned into a remote controlled weapon of mass destruction?
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 12, 2016 13:55:06 GMT
regarding question 1: if someone has stolen the police car and is attempting to gain a victim by abuse of the blue lights.
which means for public safety it would be beneficial that all police cars have this system as well as identifying marks that are readily visible from the front. that way if a person is in doubt of whether it is a predator they can call 911 and ask. - or if a policeman leaves his car, he can have his failsafe on his person and the car will secure itself if he is more than a set distance from it - or if it goes more than a set distance from him.
#2: on the hackproofing. as has been said, there ain't no such thing until you get to the old cars with nothing there to hack. (unless you is crawling under it with a hacksaw) thus any such "pursuit ending" technology would want to have a minimum of two inputs to make it happen; just to make malicious action more difficult to accomplish.
on retrofitting older cars and on governing speeds: I can argue in both directions on this. there are those who go the speed limit where they can be passed, and then slow down to "significantly impeding traffic" where they can't. limiting speeds to the posted limit prevents any possibility of getting around these clowns. on the other hand, it would change the metric on the people who drive at 40 MPH regardless of the speed limit. I see having a top end governor that could receive a code chip at a track facility to release it as a thing that could be well marketed simply by selling insurance companies on the idea. "hmm. I see here your control log shows the governor was disabled at the time of the crash. you'll note that paragraph one sentence one says we do not cover damages when your governor is disabled."
as far as retrofitting classics, there comes a point where you have to decide if the classic warrants it. is a Model T going to take off on a high speed chase? I'd be more in thinking if I had a classic like that I would want a disable system that would prevent an unauthorized person taking it and breaking it.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Oct 12, 2016 14:03:12 GMT
Simple solution for police vehicles. Turn off the engine and take the keys when you exit the vehicle. If you need to leave the engine running to operate auxiliary equipment, at least lock the doors. How many times have we heard of people taking emergency vehicles that have been left running with the doors unlocked?
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 12, 2016 14:31:12 GMT
Simple solution for police vehicles. Turn off the engine and take the keys when you exit the vehicle. If you need to leave the engine running to operate auxiliary equipment, at least lock the doors. How many times have we heard of people taking emergency vehicles that have been left running with the doors unlocked? the technology for doing that is now more common. back in the dark ages, the officer would have had to run a lap around his car locking things, and carry an extra set of keys. now his car an automatically lock when he steps away from it, and unlock when he walks up with the detainee.
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Oct 12, 2016 14:36:20 GMT
Simple solution for police vehicles. Turn off the engine and take the keys when you exit the vehicle. If you need to leave the engine running to operate auxiliary equipment, at least lock the doors. How many times have we heard of people taking emergency vehicles that have been left running with the doors unlocked? As I read the OP, I started thinking, "Maybe it would be a good idea for police vehicles to have this system. Pair it with bullet resistant glass and steel and add an automatic lock function and the person who stole the car would not only be stopped, but also detained on the spot." But then sanity took over. Nothing with a computer chip in it is unhackable! Could you imagine what a treat it would be for criminals or even terrorists if they could hack that system? You'd be able to almost completely stop, or at least severely limit police response. Cops at the scene wouldn't be able to get out of their cars and cops at the station or elsewhere in the city won't be able to get to the scene (at least not very quickly). Yeah, that sounds like a great idea! I'm with you. If you're smart enough for the public at large to trust you with a badge and a gun, they should also be able to trust you to be smart enough to lock your car when you leave it.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 12, 2016 14:45:58 GMT
Simple solution for police vehicles. Turn off the engine and take the keys when you exit the vehicle. If you need to leave the engine running to operate auxiliary equipment, at least lock the doors. How many times have we heard of people taking emergency vehicles that have been left running with the doors unlocked? As I read the OP, I started thinking, "Maybe it would be a good idea for police vehicles to have this system. Pair it with bullet resistant glass and steel and add an automatic lock function and the person who stole the car would not only be stopped, but also detained on the spot." But then sanity took over. Nothing with a computer chip in it is unhackable! Could you imagine what a treat it would be for criminals or even terrorists if they could hack that system? You'd be able to almost completely stop, or at least severely limit police response. Cops at the scene wouldn't be able to get out of their cars and cops at the station or elsewhere in the city won't be able to get to the scene (at least not very quickly). Yeah, that sounds like a great idea! I'm with you. If you're smart enough for the public at large to trust you with a badge and a gun, they should also be able to trust you to be smart enough to lock your car when you leave it. I agree that public safety is better served by not letting the bad guy into the front of the police car in the first place. and yes, a police officer should have a means to do a hard override on his vehicle's immobilization system. but on the other hand, he shouldn't have to spend a minute activating his vehicle security when he exits the vehicle, either. it should be automatic, and with current vehicle technology, it can be. if you add a passcode, then it can be more theft resistant than a keyring, too.
|
|
|
Post by Lokifan on Oct 12, 2016 15:24:53 GMT
It already exists. It's called Lojack. $700 is a bit steep to demand someone to pay, though, especially if they're poor.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 12, 2016 15:40:59 GMT
It already exists. It's called Lojack. $700 is a bit steep to demand someone to pay, though, especially if they're poor. especially if it exceeds the resale value of their car.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Oct 13, 2016 6:34:33 GMT
Couple of good points raised, so can we adress them, in order of the question....
2] The remote kill switch. Can this be as simple as setting the "limp home mode" that many modern cars have that limit you to a slower speed?..
Hack proof, the signal has to be double-verified by an operator, a Human one, and again, throw resources at it, if they can make an i-diot-phone that the FBI cant hack without help, surely the same kind of technology can be at the forefront of this, and use updates to keep ahead of the hackers. FBI cyber Crime unit is quite good, it aint no slouch when it comes to hacking stuff.
5]nav systems that limit you to the posted limit. I am against this system, because there will always be "the one", the one ijurt who decided you AINT overtaking, and the one time you need to get out the way safely, "with a little extra", the one time they decide to car-jack you from a mo-ped, I think an upper limit of the national speed limit has reasons, but below that, I see to many valid arguments against that. Maybe an annoying alarm when you exceed the limit?.. for any period of time?.
Plus 3am on a road of MAMBA, you are the only person, you can see for miles, yet its 30?..
It isnt if it can get up to speed, its if it can stop. I have driven one, and the Brakes, how to describe them?.. optimistic?... Even a Mini on all-round drum brakes sort of indicates it is going to stop in a reasonable distance...
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 13, 2016 13:48:26 GMT
Couple of good points raised, so can we adress them, in order of the question.... 2] The remote kill switch. Can this be as simple as setting the "limp home mode" that many modern cars have that limit you to a slower speed?.. Hack proof, the signal has to be double-verified by an operator, a Human one, and again, throw resources at it, if they can make an i- diot-phone that the FBI cant hack without help, surely the same kind of technology can be at the forefront of this, and use updates to keep ahead of the hackers. FBI cyber Crime unit is quite good, it aint no slouch when it comes to hacking stuff. 5]nav systems that limit you to the posted limit. I am against this system, because there will always be "the one", the one ijurt who decided you AINT overtaking, and the one time you need to get out the way safely, "with a little extra", the one time they decide to car-jack you from a mo-ped, I think an upper limit of the national speed limit has reasons, but below that, I see to many valid arguments against that. Maybe an annoying alarm when you exceed the limit?.. for any period of time?. Plus 3am on a road of MAMBA, you are the only person, you can see for miles, yet its 30?.. It isnt if it can get up to speed, its if it can stop. I have driven one, and the Brakes, how to describe them?.. optimistic?... Even a Mini on all-round drum brakes sort of indicates it is going to stop in a reasonable distance... one of our neighboring towns has its annual pig & Ford races at its county fair. the entire goal in the race is to be able to go and stop quickly, and to be able to restart without trouble. but if I were a squad of police in a pursuit of a model T, I would just box it in and stop it. I'd estimate it would take a quarter mile or less, and no more than 4 cars. the worst case scenario would be the driver running down a pedestrian out of spite.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Oct 14, 2016 9:37:57 GMT
Thats four cars out of circulation, I am proposing a system where one car can radio for help and get a "remote kill" that stops that vehicle before any other vehicle needs even divert to help with the arrest?..
I am also thinking of a remote lock on all doors to prevent the occupants de-camp-ing and running away.... How cool would it be if they could just summon a tow truck and tow the whole thing, occupants included, to the police pound, and deal with them there?.. Or even just push it in the back of a covered "armoured truck" where they cant get to breaking windows and chucking things at other people?..
The number of officers needed to deal with one vehicle then drops to only those needed to stop the vehicle and then one for the tow, leaving the other officers free to deal with other crime, or stand and watch, buy doughnuts, free kittens from low trees, hell whatever they do when they aint chasing cars?.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 14, 2016 14:31:52 GMT
Thats four cars out of circulation, I am proposing a system where one car can radio for help and get a "remote kill" that stops that vehicle before any other vehicle needs even divert to help with the arrest?.. I am also thinking of a remote lock on all doors to prevent the occupants de-camp-ing and running away.... How cool would it be if they could just summon a tow truck and tow the whole thing, occupants included, to the police pound, and deal with them there?.. Or even just push it in the back of a covered "armoured truck" where they cant get to breaking windows and chucking things at other people?.. The number of officers needed to deal with one vehicle then drops to only those needed to stop the vehicle and then one for the tow, leaving the other officers free to deal with other crime, or stand and watch, buy doughnuts, free kittens from low trees, hell whatever they do when they aint chasing cars?. you mean sit around waiting for a car to chase? I came up with the idea of some sort of magnetic grapple you could hang from a skycrane, with heavy curtains that deployed. keep the skycranes a convenient spacing, and when you get a chase, simply plop the grapple on top of the car and lift it to the impound yard. (by skycrane, I mean the ones made by Sikorsky) pf course, what it would really take to stop the problem is to declare that we will no longer tolerate numpties putting our civilians at risk, and fit harpoons to the front of the interceptors. get someone who wants to run, you simply hit them with the harpoon, and drag them to an abrupt stop. if the numpties try to run, take them down with TASERs. "Protect and serve" refers to law abiding folk, and the police serve by protecting them from law unabiding folk.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Oct 16, 2016 12:31:04 GMT
you mean sit around waiting for a car to chase? I came up with the idea of some sort of magnetic grapple you could hang from a skycrane, with heavy curtains that deployed. keep the skycranes a convenient spacing, and when you get a chase, simply plop the grapple on top of the car and lift it to the impound yard. (by skycrane, I mean the ones made by Sikorsky) pf course, what it would really take to stop the problem is to declare that we will no longer tolerate numpties putting our civilians at risk, and fit harpoons to the front of the interceptors. get someone who wants to run, you simply hit them with the harpoon, and drag them to an abrupt stop. if the numpties try to run, take them down with TASERs. "Protect and serve" refers to law abiding folk, and the police serve by protecting them from law unabiding folk. You dont need the sikorsky, the flying banana [Chinook] would happily be enough to lift even a light tank. Hang on, I just remembered, the weight of a Cadillac, ok, maybe a BIGGER banana?.. point taken, I will succeed you may need that Sky-Crane ... But what will happen if the Crims "de-camp" whilst in the air?.. you are then in a world of mess when you get sued for allowing them to jump out, possibly kill themselves and then from the property of whoever they land on... If you have a magnetic crane, maybe best you get one that magnetically seals the doors shut?. Plus landing a magnetic pad on a fast moving object... not easy. Keeping it out the way of overhead street furniture, lamp posts, wires, signs?. But your idea of harpoons works, they are testing them at the moment, "shore range" spring loaded anchors that pop through the trunk, unfold, and grapple the thing to a stop by the police cruisers brakes. However, the legal challenge is, if you fail to stop for a red light and "Didnt notice" the cruiser behind you, if having a hole in the trunk "too harsh" a penalty for "moving traffic violation", if I have the American terminology right there?... I dont think it is. If you CANT see an emergency vehicle behind you, you shouldnt be driving, because its part of the training [or should be?..] to get the (beep) out the way of emergency vehicles, and to be aware at all times of what is behind you... proper use of mirrors.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Oct 16, 2016 14:17:53 GMT
My choice? Heat seeking missiles followed by a street sweeper.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 16, 2016 14:39:41 GMT
you mean sit around waiting for a car to chase? I came up with the idea of some sort of magnetic grapple you could hang from a skycrane, with heavy curtains that deployed. keep the skycranes a convenient spacing, and when you get a chase, simply plop the grapple on top of the car and lift it to the impound yard. (by skycrane, I mean the ones made by Sikorsky) pf course, what it would really take to stop the problem is to declare that we will no longer tolerate numpties putting our civilians at risk, and fit harpoons to the front of the interceptors. get someone who wants to run, you simply hit them with the harpoon, and drag them to an abrupt stop. if the numpties try to run, take them down with TASERs. "Protect and serve" refers to law abiding folk, and the police serve by protecting them from law unabiding folk. You dont need the sikorsky, the flying banana [Chinook] would happily be enough to lift even a light tank. Hang on, I just remembered, the weight of a Cadillac, ok, maybe a BIGGER banana?.. point taken, I will succeed you may need that Sky-Crane ... But what will happen if the Crims "de-camp" whilst in the air?.. you are then in a world of mess when you get sued for allowing them to jump out, possibly kill themselves and then from the property of whoever they land on... If you have a magnetic crane, maybe best you get one that magnetically seals the doors shut?. Plus landing a magnetic pad on a fast moving object... not easy. Keeping it out the way of overhead street furniture, lamp posts, wires, signs?. But your idea of harpoons works, they are testing them at the moment, "shore range" spring loaded anchors that pop through the trunk, unfold, and grapple the thing to a stop by the police cruisers brakes. However, the legal challenge is, if you fail to stop for a red light and "Didnt notice" the cruiser behind you, if having a hole in the trunk "too harsh" a penalty for "moving traffic violation", if I have the American terminology right there?... I dont think it is. If you CANT see an emergency vehicle behind you, you shouldnt be driving, because its part of the training [or should be?..] to get the (beep) out the way of emergency vehicles, and to be aware at all times of what is behind you... proper use of mirrors. I believe the chinook is a bigger, more cumbersome, beast than the skycrane is. though on comparison, maybe not. you would want the bird closely fitted to the task for maximum agility. and the flaps are the mechanism to keep the occupants inside the ride vehicle until it comes to a full and complete stop. when you deploy the grapple, the flaps roll down over the car to help center the grapple AND keep the passengers from opening doors, windows, skylights, etc. but yeah, the whole theory is pretty much unworkable, just fun to think about. as for the rest, the term I use is "consequences of decisions" and it is usually pretty easy to tell if a person actually didn't notice the officer or is actively trying to escape. and the harpoon would be for those who actively try to escape.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 16, 2016 14:40:29 GMT
My choice? Heat seeking missiles followed by a street sweeper. but that tends to ding the paint on the cars around it.
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Oct 16, 2016 17:54:05 GMT
My choice? Heat seeking missiles followed by a street sweeper. but that tends to ding the paint on the cars around it. Probably no worse than all the dust and debris that the Sikorsky's would kick up. But nonetheless, it's a small price that many of us would be willing to pay.
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Oct 18, 2016 10:45:53 GMT
I am posting this because I may have to drive one of these soon... its the latest in Volvo "radar" type technology that will avoid accidents [if it can..]
|
|