backtop


Print 29 comment(s) - last by Flunk.. on Feb 6 at 12:02 PM

No word on how the system would be integrated into vehicles

GM has steadily improved its Onstar telematics system since its original introduction way back in 1996.  In its most recent iterations, OnStar can be called upon to disable/stop a stolen vehicle at the request of the owner or police.
 
Documents have now turned up that show police in Europe have plans for a similar, but universal system that would allow them to remotely stop cars. The system would allow cars involved in high-speed chases to be stopped remotely without resorting to tire spikes or other destructive methods.
 
The European Network of Law Enforcement Technology Services is researching the system, which could be rolled out by 2020.

 
"Cars on the run can be dangerous for citizens," the report stated. "Criminal offenders will take risks to escape after a crime. In most cases the police are unable to chase the criminal due to a lack of efficient means to stop the vehicle safely."
 
Other facets of the program include the development of better tech for automatic license plate recognition and better ways to share intelligence between agencies.
 
The plans for the remote stopping system has been approved by the EU Standing Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security

Source: AutoCar



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By inteli722 on 2/3/2014 10:07:32 AM , Rating: 3
I have a feeling that these things will get cracked rather quickly, making them considerably more dangerous than a runaway cat.

Imagine going 75 on a highway when someone's brakes suddenly trigger in front of you.

This just reeks of stupid.




By sorry dog on 2/3/2014 10:34:46 AM , Rating: 5
I can think of few greater joys than being able to hack the minivan going 53 in the left lane.... in the mean time I think I'll hold on my 8 year old Volvo for a while.


By Just Tom on 2/3/2014 10:36:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have a feeling that these things will get cracked rather quickly, making them considerably more dangerous than a runaway cat.


Those runaway cats are really dangerous... typos aside I would think that such a system would slow the car safely rather than slam the brakes on.


By quiksilvr on 2/3/2014 10:36:53 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. I feel something like this would be cooler:
http://static.entertainmentwise.com/photos/Image/0...


By retrospooty on 2/3/2014 11:05:58 AM , Rating: 2
"Imagine going 75 on a highway when someone's brakes suddenly trigger in front of you."

I don't know if I like this either, but your vision of its implementation isn't how it would work. If they do something like this it wont be connected to anything that could slam on the brakes, it would just be something that kills the acceleration so the vehicle cannot accelerate, therefore it would coast to a stop.


By MrBlastman on 2/3/2014 12:16:42 PM , Rating: 1
All major cities will eventually have completely computerized and controlled transportation systems, anyways so it won't be a big deal. Sometime in the not-so-distant future computers will "snap in" to the grid when they enter major thoroughfares and force the drivers to accept whatever the system chooses for them after they indicate their destination.

It will be a gigantic leap forward in traffic control and the efficiencies gained and time saved for travel will be tremendous.


By Solandri on 2/3/2014 2:18:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If they do something like this it wont be connected to anything that could slam on the brakes, it would just be something that kills the acceleration so the vehicle cannot accelerate, therefore it would coast to a stop.

He's confusing it with the collision avoidance systems which are starting to show up in cars. Those will automatically brake for you if they detect you're closing with something in front at too high a speed.

Ideally that system would be independent and not triggerable remotely via OnStar. (Remotely killing the engine is a feature the owner may want - e.g. if his car is stolen.) But given the penchant for government authority creep, I wouldn't be surprised if they eventually added the ability to remotely brake as well.


By Jeffk464 on 2/3/2014 2:39:36 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, no need to put the brakes on or kill the engine. Cars not are switching to drive by wire for the gas pedal, so there is no direct cable connection to the throttle body.


By Jeffk464 on 2/3/2014 2:54:33 PM , Rating: 2
cars now


By Flunk on 2/3/2014 11:31:58 AM , Rating: 2
This may speak to your driving habits as well, if you can't stop safely if the car in front of you on the freeway brakes hard you're following too close.

I can't see why they'd do that, just cutting the accelerator is enough to stop the car more than fast enough.


By dgingerich on 2/3/2014 11:39:19 AM , Rating: 3
That's how the Onstar system works on car thefts: it cuts the engine to idle and disconnects the transmission from the engine, leaving the power brakes and power steering usable and allows the car to coast safely to a stop. The car thief can hit the gas all they want, the engine won't rev and the wheels will just coast, but it is still stoppable and steerable. It also turns on the hazard blinkers to show the police it has been triggered. Those engineers thought ahead.


By Wazza1234 on 2/3/2014 12:13:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
if you can't stop safely if the car in front of you on the freeway brakes hard you're following too close.


Actually he would be speaking about the driving habits of others , many of whom do drive far too close to the car in front.

Like retro says - the system wont slam on the brake. However, if you're in the fast lane on a busy motorway and your accelerator gives up - you're in trouble. If you can't switch lanes due to busy traffic, you'll end up coming to a stop in the fast lane . This clearly is extremely dangerous, will cause massive tail-backs and could cause a whole series of collisions.


By Rukkian on 2/3/2014 1:44:14 PM , Rating: 2
I am guessing this would only be used when the car is already being followed, so most of the traffic should be away (thanks to all of the pretty blue/red lights).

I am sure there will be large black market of people willing to disable this feature, or at least the means to do it.


By dgingerich on 2/3/2014 11:35:24 AM , Rating: 3
You're not seeing the lazy official use of such things:

Bank robbery takes place, police trigger this in every car in a 20 block radius to slow down the robbers. Hundreds of innocent bystanders are trapped in the process.

Police leave a nice car in an area known for car thefts, unlocked, then use this to lock down and stop the car when people take the bait. (Yes, this is in use now, and smacks of entrapment to me. Lazy police work, to be sure.)


By Flunk on 2/6/2014 12:02:05 PM , Rating: 2
Just leaving a car sitting around to see if it gets stolen doesn't qualify as entrapment unless the police contract people to steal it.


Forget remote stop
By ballist1x on 2/3/2014 10:12:04 AM , Rating: 3
Im thinking remove Eject O seat...

If someone steals my car, that would be my preferred action of choice. I'd probably do it whilst they're going through a tunnel or under a bridge..




RE: Forget remote stop
By lagomorpha on 2/3/2014 10:17:30 AM , Rating: 3
Why wait? You can build that sort of thing into your own car with a prepaid mobile phone, a little soldering and welding, and a few rocket motors.

...

Though there may be some liability concerns.


RE: Forget remote stop
By ritualm on 2/3/2014 10:47:01 AM , Rating: 2
It's going to end up awfully similar to unintended acceleration. The radar jamming tech is already available to be installed in cars, and it's proven to prevent such cases from happening, but nobody is allowed to use them legally because only the military is ever authorized on its usage.

Cops can install the remote-stop against your car without warrant, while you'll have no legal recourse to remove the killswitch. This entire spat is disturbing.


Wow
By Argon18 on 2/3/2014 11:25:28 AM , Rating: 4
Who knew that 1984 would turn out to be a documentary? Lol




RE: Wow
By MrBlastman on 2/3/2014 12:09:57 PM , Rating: 3
George Orwell did. :)


By stm1185 on 2/3/2014 11:46:43 AM , Rating: 2
That way instead of the cops having to confront the gun wielding suspect they just push a button and he falls over. Certainly a system like that wont get abused.




Robocop...
By euler007 on 2/3/2014 1:00:38 PM , Rating: 2
Brought to you by Magnavolt : Lethal Response.




It's funny
By flyingpants1 on 2/3/14, Rating: -1
RE: It's funny
By ritualm on 2/3/2014 10:53:56 AM , Rating: 3
You're giving the ruling authorities one big easy button for instant nationwide suppression of dissent, and they have way too many of these buttons already.

"Why hide if you have done nothing wrong?"

Exactly why we need to hide. You can agree with the government on everything it does, and the government still sends you to jail and die as soon as it has no more use out of your pathetic shell of human flesh.


RE: It's funny
By SuckRaven on 2/3/2014 10:56:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I can already hear all the luddites complaining about safety features like this that have the potential to save lives. The police already have the power to pull you over, how on earth is this any different?


It's different because this approach removes the element of choice from the driver. This, sadly, is a trend occurring not just in the automotive industry. Just turn on any news outlet. Governments all around the world are deeming their citizens too dangerous and stupid to be able to make decisions on their own.

Remove choice from the person, and it becomes easier to catch people who might decide to run.

I call B.S. on this and hope it doesn't go this way, but recent trends would seem to suggest otherwise.


RE: It's funny
By Reclaimer77 on 2/3/2014 11:05:57 AM , Rating: 4
Luddites? You must be insane. This is a horrible idea that expands the police state beyond all measure.

quote:
The police already have the power to pull you over, how on earth is this any different?


If that is as far as your mental process goes, you have no business calling others names.

Every day a story hits the news of a cop abusing his position and violating the rights of citizens. The potential for abuse here is alarming.

Also this technology could be used to allow ANYONE to pull you over and car jack you, rape you, what have you.

Maybe you are comfortable with the idea of your vehicle being able to be remote driven and controlled by the Government, but I sure as hell don't.


RE: It's funny
By Gondor on 2/3/2014 11:08:44 AM , Rating: 2
It is different in the exact same way as paying with cash is different compared to payment with a credit card and the store keeping transaction records on file "just in case" (only to get hacked months later when you all but forgot your purchase).

Current cars cannot be manipulated remotely, hence there is no way for anybody to misuse them. Once this becomes possible, rest assured that misuse will happen.


RE: It's funny
By Flunk on 2/3/2014 11:35:32 AM , Rating: 2
Not true at all, all recent GM cars ship with OnStar. OnStar can both remote unlock and shutdown all the cars in their system and even if you're not paying for the service they're still connected. The only way to stop it is to disconnect or remove the antenna. I'm sure this is also true of some other brands but GM is the one I know about.


RE: It's funny
By dgingerich on 2/3/14, Rating: 0
"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki