Big Brother could slow British motorcycles down, track routes

Most would argue that the UK certainly doesn't need one more piece of surveillance equipment watching its citizens, but regardless of the naysayers, it just might be getting another anyway. The latest implementation of Big Brother in our everyday lives comes courtesy of the Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA), which are devices (presumably GPS-based) that will purportedly track motorcyclists' speeds and throttle things down if they attempt to break the posted speed limit(s). Moreover, the ISA could even be used to track bikers' journeys, and if things "prove successful," could eventually find its way into cars and other vehicles (like Segways beefed-up wheelchairs) in a reported attempt to "drastically cut the death toll on the country's roads." As expected, bikers and bike sellers are less than enthused about the new device, as they expect customers will be the ones footing the bill for the homing beacons and that sales could drop when folks realize they can't get a little footloose every now and then. While there's no hard dates on when (or if) these trackers / speed-controllers would hit motorcycles in the UK, the ISA has already undergone testing at the Motorcycle Industry Research Association (MIRA), so those looking to kick up a little two-wheeled dust best get a move on before the eyes in the sky put the clamps on your fun.

[Via Fark]

[mike @ Jan 15th 2007 3:48AM]

That is total BS, if i buy a bike that is supposed to go 180MPH, then it better go 180mph, this control device is so retarded whoever implements this device will lose sales, because people want control of the own bike/vehicle

[anonymous @ Jan 15th 2007 4:08AM]

First thing I would do if I bought a bike with that limitation is find a way to remove it. That is so bullshit though. If it can't drive itself then I better be able to drive it however I want.

[Rich @ Jan 15th 2007 4:39AM]

I can just see it now... biker pulls out to overtake, opens the throttle; and His Toniness says no. Stuck at 60mph into oncoming traffic.

This ongoing notion that 'speed kills' is nonsense. Poor, inattentive, and erratic driving kills. This will only add to that.

Christ I hate this government we've been foisted with.

[Al @ Jan 15th 2007 4:46AM]

This has been proposed before and ruled too dangerous for bikers - unlike driving a car when cornering a bike you need to have selected the correct gear for the conditions of the corner keeping about half of the available revs to allow for acceleration or deceleration during the corner. The rate the bike turns at while cornering is a result of a combination of power and the degree the bike is banked over. Allowing a "big-brother" style device to control the throttle or power of the bike in a situation like this would more than likely leave the biker wrapped around the nearest lamp-post.

[MPG @ Jan 15th 2007 4:56AM]

"This has been proposed before and ruled too dangerous for bikers - unlike driving a car when cornering a bike you need to have selected the correct gear for the conditions of the corner"

So what you're saying is essentially that such a system would endager people who are going faster than the speed limit while turning a corner? Do you see the irony in that?

[MPG @ Jan 15th 2007 4:53AM]

"That is total BS, if i buy a bike that is supposed to go 180MPH, then it better go 180mph, this control device is so retarded whoever implements this device will lose sales, because people want control of the own bike/vehicle"

I think it's quite revealing how people are basically saying "If I buy a bike, I want to be able to break the law with it." That just goes to show how urgently necessary it is that such a mechanism is mandated by law.

[Genghis @ Sep 1st 2007 7:34AM]

I think you missed the point here - you go round a bend at the posted 60mph and the limit changes to 30 (entering a village from a lane for example). Now you have the bike shutting the throttle in mid-corner with the usual scraping noises and ground-sky-ground result...

Now you could argue that on an unfamiliar road you should be careful and expect the unexpected - Or you could get out of your Volvo/Saab (insert favorite middle-class twat mobile) and actually ride a bike every now and then :)

[Bard @ Jan 15th 2007 5:00AM]

As a rider since the age of 5, I TOTALY agree with AI!! The "need" to remotely control a motorbike's speed without the rider's consent is negligent if not a few other things. A bike has multiple elements affecting it's centre of gravity, with speed being a HUGE factor. The minute you start altering the speed (wether by accelerating or decelerating), the rider must compensate by shifting weight, altering his or her stance, or by changing gear setting or brake pressure. If you suddenly get your speed cut while, say, going into a banked 70 degree turn at any speed, you're going to have problems.

Also, to the guy who said "if I buy a bike that can go 180, I want it to go 180".... you ever go over 100mph on two wheels?? I have YET to see any rider who hasn't been riding for over 30+ years able to handle a bike decent at speed over 120. It's not like getting in mommy's solara and pushing the pedal down. There are so many forces acting on your body that if you don't have a TON of experience and a little more mechanical knowledge than the average schmuck behind the wheel, your bike's going to be a parts donor and your body's going to be an organ donor.

Besides, most bikes that "claim to be 180mph aren't. SURE their engines MIGHT hit those speeds on closed tracks with 115 octane, but don't dilute yourself to think that the stock suzuki GSXR-1100 with the stock tires and semi-composite brakepads are even close to handling speed over 120. It's like taking a VTECH honda hatchback, slapping some ugly wing, some alloys and painting the brake calipers and thinking that it will be some sort of l33t rally racer. It's just a pretty version of the stock machine.

[Al @ Jan 15th 2007 5:03AM]

Who said anyhing about speeding - ANY corner - inside the speed limit or not, that's the physics of putting a bike round a corner...to take any control of that away from the rider would put their life and others' at risk...

[MPG @ Jan 15th 2007 5:42AM]

"Who said anyhing about speeding"

The mechanism only kicks in when someone exceeds the speed limit. That's the whole point.

[Markp.com @ Jan 15th 2007 5:08AM]

Yawn yawn... more typical stories from Engadget about how they think we live here in the UK.

Just because you've seen Children of Men, does not mean thats how we live!

This system is proposed by insurance companies, who figure if they can limit your speed for a time then you won't have an accident, so they won't have to pay out.

The up side of this is insurance premiums for these users are significantly lower than normal insurance.

Now I know Engadget is just a bunch of kids posing as journalists and reporters, but at least have some decency, check your facts and report the truth when reporting on a whole country. Its not 1984.

[justdave @ Jan 15th 2007 9:11AM]

Indeed, it's not 1984... it's not all that far from it tho. We're the most watched nation on earth, and I think that's the point they were trying to make. On the subject of bikes.... mine was written off (as was I for three months) when what I'll call a 'blind bastard' decided to drive into me, 2 days before my birthday too.

Generally a speeding motorcyclist will kill himself and nobody else (I've never seen a bike win in a fight with a car) - car drivers are statistically more dangerous to a bikers' life than speeding. Bikers know to 'ride safe,' and if you do open it up a bit then you know the risks your taking with your own life - limiting a bikes speed is just ridiculous, are we all 12 years old? AND BEFORE THE FLAMES BEGIN, I'm not condoning speeding - what I'm saying is a) ppl will do it and b) bikes aren't really a danger to pedestrians or cars - you'd have to be pretty unlucky to get hit by a speeding bike while crossing a B road. Next they'll want to put stabilizers on them too. Nanny State 2.0 here we come.

[grable @ Jan 15th 2007 11:18AM]

Are you even aware of some of the laws in your own country?
ASBO feks is a very draconian one (antisocial behavoir?! wtf!).
And how about any of the other "laws" that your gov are trying to push trough?
its not 1984.. YET.

But be thankful your contry isnt alone in this, the americans feks are allso on their way.

[Jesper Bram @ Jan 15th 2007 5:35AM]

There was a bit of a rumble in the motorcycle community about this a few months ago.
http://www.helmethairblog.com/entries/government-planning-to-cut-the-power-on-speeders-by-satellite/

[hcker2000 @ Jan 15th 2007 5:39AM]

Wow glad I am in the usa. I have been riding for about half a year now and here in the states (at least around here) motorcycles get pulled over a lot less than cars. I think they don't pull them over as much for a few reasons. A lot of idiots on bikes try and run from the cops and bike vs car accidents seldom result in the person in the car getting hurt.

In the end I will never think this is a good idea. Make the punishments steeper for those who break the speed limit.

[Pete @ Jan 15th 2007 5:44AM]

The M in MIRA doesn't stand for motorcycle as stated here -- they deal with all vehicles, so I'm pretty certain it's simply 'motor'.

I really think that this system is a good thing -- lower insurance (as markp said), and only affects those attempting to break the law. It won't affect your cornering at sub-limit speeds, since it apparently simply restricts you to the road's maximum (and though I don't ride a motorcycle, I doubt you accelerate into corners).

I do agree that using the system to provide speeding tickets would perhaps be a more acceptable solution, but I think you need more evidence/accuracy when it comes to issuing a fine. After all, I've frequently seen in-car GPS devices that have placed me at a significant offset to my actual location (often claiming I'm driving through a field parallel to the road).

[Dan Thornton @ Jan 15th 2007 6:41AM]

Incidentally, the application of power is necessary to maintain constant momentum whilst cornering on a motorcycle.
If the power is restricted, the rider will run wide into oncoming traffic, or just topple off.

A motorcyclist will brake before a corner. Select the appropriate speed, and then use an increase in power to 'drive' out of the corner, or to tighten their line.

If, for instance, they haven't noticed a change in speed limit on a corner (Which is certainly the case with overgrown hedges in East Anglia), or perhaps, they make a slight error in opening the throttle, the device will kick in, they'll lose control and be badly injured.

If you're never ridden a bike correctly, it's near impossible to understand the processes that go on during cornering.

[Al @ Jan 15th 2007 5:53AM]

Still doesn't matter - can't allow any control to be taken away from the rider - so the biker is breaking the speed limit on the approach to a corner, the unit steps in, restricts the power, the biker enters the corner at a legal speed, all the time slowing down to take the corner appropriately, the device sees that you've slowed down and stops controlling the speed and all of a sudden the bike gets a surge of power and the biker is in trouble. It's a nice idea but i think it will kill more than it will save...

[Dan Thornton @ Jan 15th 2007 6:31AM]

Luckily, the UK Government has promised to scrap plans for speed controls for at least five years, due to a campaign by UK magazine MCN to highlight the dangers in limiting a vehicle which uses variations in speed to negotiate corners, for example.

More details, including a test of the test speed-limiter bike, see http://www.motorcyclenews.com/nav?page=motorcyclenews.articles.articleCategory.article&resourceId=5632276&articleCategory=NEWS_-OTHER-

[sparx104 @ Jan 15th 2007 6:52AM]

Whilst I agree that putting this on a bike is probably unsafe (I don't ride but have a relations who do) if people stopped breaking the damn speed limits there would be no need for this sort of thing.

And, to whoever said that pulling out to overtake at 60 then getting stuck at 60 in oncoming traffic is the problem - it's illegal to break the limit at ANY time - this includes overtaking - If you are already doing 60ish why overtake?

[Andrew Devis @ Jan 15th 2007 7:05AM]

HAHHAHAHAH ! Bring it on I say !

http://www.uab.edu/icrc/hondacrash.html

There are enough idiot motorcycle riders on the roads to make most car drivers want to ban motorcyles altogether !

BTW - A speed limiting device would only limit your power when you were significantly over the speed limit, so if you went into a corner at a legal speed, you would have no problem.

If you want to ride at a ridiculous speed you should go to a racetrack, where no doubt you will be able to ride a bike that is not limited !

[Rynth @ Jan 15th 2007 7:17AM]

This Countries goverment is complete Bollocks, if you'll pardon my french. At this point i could quote RAge against the machine, but I wont.

I hate the UK goverment, and apart from the fact they are completly rubbish at running the country, and spend no time toward the matter that our country is still full of uneducated idiots drawwing money of us taxpayers, they decide to spend more money on uneeded things, like this.

Speeding is against the law, so what, Balls to them. If i want to own a bike, and want to drive it at whatever speed I feel like, then I will. If they want to control my speed, let them try.

This country has far to much bullshit filling it, and it wont stop.

Just my couple of pounds..

Anyhoo - Speed! it fucks 'em off, so do it!

Ryn.

[Don @ Jan 15th 2007 1:17PM]

"If they want to control my speed, let them try. "

Anarchy for the UK indeed. You realize that YOU and those like you are the reason this device has been proposed, right? It's funny the rationalizations used by selfish people to endanger the public safety. Besides, people could control your speed quite handily with a length of rope across the road. You should be glad that they don't.

I like motorcycles; as machines they are amazing. On the other hand, with few exceptions I dislike the attitudes of most "motorcyclists".

[MPG @ Jan 15th 2007 7:35AM]

"You are obviously members of that group that believes the BS the government pushes about "speed kills". When will you realise that it's not speed, but inappropriate speed (there is a difference) that kills."

Yea, that's why there are speed limits. They determine which speed is appropriate. People who don't want to accept that shouldn't be participating in traffic in the first place.

"Most people break the law in some way, but only speeding gets the attention (not to say breaking the law is ok in any way)."

Huh? I'd say pretty much every attempt to break the law gets attention. Or are prisons filled with speeders while thiefs, rapists and murderers are going free? Or is this just a case of irrational paranoia?

"Don't be fooled into letting the government control how you drive. People should take more responsibility for their actions and this is just one more way that the nanny state is eroding your rights."

But if you have an accident, you go crying to the "nanny state" to pay for your wheelchair, right? People who have an accident while disobeying traffic rules should automatically be exempt from receiving any health benefits from the state, but sadly, the "nanny state" still pays for idiots who broke the law. That is the REAL problem.

The state doesn't control traffic because there's some control freak making the traffic laws, but because idiots who think they are smart enough to know how fast is too fast cost the society money and often enough injure or kill other people who weren't breaking the law.

[indigo80 @ Jan 15th 2007 9:53AM]

"Yea, that's why there are speed limits. They determine which speed is appropriate"

Woah now, a speed limit near me is 30mph are you saying that its perfectly safe to drive at 30mph in that area at all times (by a school) and in all weather conditions

I really hope i never meet you on the road anywhere, its a limit not a target. I can just imagine you driving down a motorway in very heavy rain parping your horn and flashing your lights to get people out of your way as they're only driving at 40mph

No piece circular metal can determine what is 'appropriate speed'

[Badger Gravling @ Jan 15th 2007 7:39AM]

Are you arguing that human beings are infallible? That humans never make any mistakes? That's the only way this device would be safe...

Imagine the scenario. You pull out to overtake a coach travelling below the speed limit. You get over halfway past the coach when you realise there is traffic coming the over way.


Do you a: Speed up and pull in safely, cursing yourself for making a mistake and vowing to be more careful.

b: Hit the brakes and try and force your way back in, bearing in mind the traffic behind will have closed up?

or C: The speed limiter kicks in, and you end up on the front of a lorry going the other way?





That's before the whole debate about whether speed kills, or bad drviing coupled with speed kills. I'd suggest the safespeed website, but I know enough about this argument to know the absolute faith some people have that it's impossible to die if you're driving under the speed limit.

[Badger Gravling @ Jan 15th 2007 7:40AM]

Oooops forgot.


Should the 'nanny state' also refuse treament to smokers?
Fat people? They chose to eat...
Eye treatment for those using VDU monitors? After all they didn't need to stare at a computer monitor all day?

[Maff @ Jan 15th 2007 7:44AM]

now if only they could get motorcyclists to obey the rules of the road too and stop them swerving in and out of traffic, undertaking, driving in bus lanes and overtaking when they shouldn't be.

Hopefully this will come into force and stop them driving at stupid speeds as they do at the moment

[Badger Gravling @ Jan 15th 2007 7:47AM]

"now if only they could get motorcyclists to obey the rules of the road too and stop them swerving in and out of traffic, undertaking, driving in bus lanes and overtaking when they shouldn't be.

Hopefully this will come into force and stop them driving at stupid speeds as they do at the moment"



Filtering is legal, as long as it is done with due care. Normally motorcyclists are only forced to switch lanes to filter due to inconsiderate and jealous car drivers.

Using bus lanes is also legal in many cities. It's also safer than sharing the road with car drivers.

Undertaking is illegal, but so is sitting in the second or third lane of a carriageway if you are not engaged in overtaking a vehicle.

Why are motorcyclists overtaking where they shouldn't? Unless it's on a patch of road marked by solid white lines, then legally it's a judgement call depending on visibility, space and safety of all concerned.

[Badger Gravling @ Jan 15th 2007 7:44AM]

Oh and...


"idiots who think they are smart enough to know how fast is too fast cost the society money"

Bearing in mind the police are legally able to disregard the speed limit due to the advanced training they've had, and I've had several years of advanced training...


Surely it's just as idiotic to deny that moving a human body from one place to another will be dangerous in some way?

[Rynth @ Jan 15th 2007 7:52AM]

@Badger Gravling:

Bearing in mind the police are legally able to disregard the speed limit due to the advanced training they've had, and I've had several years of advanced training...


Lol! My Gran has more car handling skills than your average policeman, their toss, trust me , I've evaded enough of them!

Police these days dont deserve any respect, they do a shit job, and are shit at it.

[Badger Gravling @ Jan 15th 2007 7:57AM]

I'm not commenting on the driving skills of the police, as much as I am commenting on how one group are legally able to set their own pace, and others are deemed to be idiots for questioning it.

The skill of police drivers has been eroded due to the fact almost every traffic division in the UK has been replaced by speed cameras, and now officers multi-task, meaning they don't have the experience and knowledge to drive correctly.

I've ridden with several serving, and ex, officers, and found them almost always to be smooth, safe, and able to keep up with anyone they've needed to...but they were all trained at a time when traffic officers were valued....try going on a Bikesafe course to see what I mean...

[RSVGuy @ Jan 15th 2007 9:01AM]

@MPG

Sorry, I thougth we were taking about road laws, didn't mention murderers and rapists.. WTF?

So, according to your weird dystopian world view, if I smoke or am obese (self inflicted), I can get treatment, but if I break the law (should I mention that road law is the only part of the law where you're guilty until proven innocent?), well then no treatment for you!

If you think that all speed signs give 'appropriate' speed for where they are placed then you've got rocks in your head. Did you even give any thought to, time of day, quality of light, volume of traffice or whether it's raining?

You sir are an idiot!

[Sqube @ Jan 15th 2007 10:01AM]

From what I understand, maneuvering in a motorcycle is a much bigger deal than just getting on or coming off of the gas, like it is in a car.

The fact that anything would be able to negatively impact one of the factors that have to work together perfectly in order for you to pull a turn off... how can you think that's anything other than terribly ill-advised, to say the very least?

I think a good comparison to driving a car would be if something jerked the wheel out of your hands because it thought you were turning too aggressively. If something like that were to occur, I'm sure car drivers all over the world would be up in arms.

And to say that this is smart because all motorcycle riders are crazy and bob and weave through traffic like fools is specious, if not downright purposeful spreading of FUD to "win" the argument, such as it is. There are bad motorcycle riders just like there are terrible car drivers.

This is a bad idea. Besides, I'm pretty sure you don't have to be speeding massively to have something like this completely fuck you over. We don't know at what point this limiter would kick in. What if it keeps you under the speed limit unconditionally? Powering out of a corner doing 45 in a 40 would mean that your gas is cut off by Big Brother.

Come on, people. I know it's easy to place blind faith in government, but they're not infallible. They're just as likely to fuck up as anybody else.

[John Doe @ Jan 15th 2007 12:17PM]

Dude! I'd love to see this implemented in the US. I'd stay home from work and not leave my house for a week. 90% of the people who are susceptible to road rage would kill themselves within a week making the world a safer and better place for all. :-P

[morcheeba @ Jan 15th 2007 12:54PM]

Why do I think that their definition of the initial results "proving successful" will have nothing to do with whether the initial results "drastically cuts the death toll on the country's roads."

[ThePete @ Jan 15th 2007 1:27PM]

Yeah, I'm a bike rider, too and I have to say no one should be passing laws like this unless they've been on a bike and can honestly say they've never had to accelerate above the speed limit to get out of a dangerous situation.\

It's not about speeding for fun or excitement or any of that. It can often be a situation where you see a car about to hit you and it's clear they can't see you. However, you can't slow down because of a car behind you. What do you do? If this thing happens in the UK, you start to accelerate to get past this idiot who doesn't see you--your bike refuses to accelerate, the blind guy next to you hits you and you hit the ground.

This technology would be pretty dangerous in cars, too. If you can't break the speed limit on occassion in certain situations to get yourself out of dangerous situations, you might as well get your affairs in order and make sure your will is up to date (or at the very least your insurance payments).

[Catherine @ Jan 15th 2007 3:13PM]

I find it difficult to believe the BMF Spokesman, Jeff Stone is claiming the technology isn't dangerous.

This equipment is inherently dangerous because of the fact it has the ability to remove control from the rider.

It is disappointing that a rider's rights organisation would row in behind such a measure which is blatently discrimantory against bikers.

[Sanx @ Jan 15th 2007 11:57PM]

I'm am so glad I left that farking country. If Bliar & co. do end up introducing this, I will take great pleasure in seeing them sued, repeatedly, for directly causing the deaths of riders across the country.

When cornering on a bike, there are a number of things that affect your balance. Of these, perhaps the most important (after traction / grip) is the centrifugal force on you and the bike. If you affect the speed, you change the force. Any sudden change - like one, say, introduced by a ill-conceived bit of electronics suddenly retarding the ignition because some bureacrat thinks that a corner is a good place to change a speed limit - and the balance of the bike will be affected.

No balance, no biker.

And for people who want to blame bikers for all the deaths, may I suggest you go read the 2004 Department of Transport report named "In Depth Study of Motorcycle Accidents" (http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_035422.pdf). You'll find that most bikers are killed in accidents involving other vehicles. And in 80+% of the time, it's the other vehicle's fault. Blind SUV drivers drinking coffee, talking on the cellphone and listening to Magic FM "Hit of the 80s".

[Mark Tomlin @ Jan 17th 2007 6:55AM]

The British Government really wants these for cars so they can charge people for using a road at 'peak' time. Like Richard Hammond (of Top Gear) pointed out "There is this assumption by the government that we are on the roads at peak time just be be really annoying."

[Scott @ Jan 18th 2007 11:57AM]

Great idea. Need this in the US. Would like to see cars that emit an ear-piercing sound thru all the speakers when drivers don't use turn signals and when they are tailgaiting, since the police are usless at enforcement.

[Sean @ Jan 23rd 2007 4:17PM]

I think it's far more likely they will just put a GPS on your bike that tracks your speed. Let's say you have an accident, insurance company has a look at your file, sees that you were speeding at the time of the accident or just before it, and guess what, no coverage...

[RobG @ Jan 30th 2007 4:10AM]

MIRA stands for Motor Industry Research Association (not Motorcycle) as they do more than just work on two wheels.