Spy In The Sky
Every now and then, on a slow news day, the newspapers print another story about Road Charging, and how GPS satellites are going to track our every movement and charge us depending on how far we drive, and on what roads.
This weekend was no exception, with a report published by the ex-chief of BA (his name escapes me at the moment), recommending it as a good measure to cut congestion.
Given that I work for a firm that could conceivably supply such a system (and has supplied other government transport systems so already has a foot in the door) and that my job involves writing software for such systems, I probably have a slightly better viewpoint than most.
And my view is this: It won't work. (my view, not the company view!)
Sure, for businesses, telematics is a useful tool. Knowing where your vehicles (and valuable loads) are, how long they stop for and the whole host of other info we provide is great business info. For individuals, getting your car back after it's been nicked is also rather handy.
But nationally? I don't think they've thought about the technical details, yet alone the entire ridiculousness of the scheme, which we'll examine shortly. So why won't it work?
1. Data collection. How will the data be transmitted? For accurate charging you need a very frequent reporting rate - once every ten seconds or so realistically - and this all needs to be transmitted to a server somewhere. Private radio? Too many vehicles and not enough bandwidth. Plus it would be severely open to jamming and would require receivers all over the country. Mobile phone network? Again, capacity is a bit of a problem, but mainly the cost is the issue here. Who is going to pay for the data transmission costs and the network subscription? A lot of people seem to be under the impression that the vehicles would transmit up to the satellites. Wrong, I'm afraid.
2. Coverage. GPS is pretty good most places, but not everywhere. In cities, multipath error is very frequent (the signal "bounces" off of buildings, leading to a greater margin of error), plus the number of visible satellites is smaller. Same goes for heavily foliated areas, tunnels and valleys. Newer GPS chipsets are getting better at this, and EGNOS will help somewhat (provided you can see the EGNOS satellite) but it is still an issue. Galileo (the European GPS system) should solve much of this when it goes live, however.
3. Ownership. The GPS network is owned by the US Dept. Of Defence, who can literally turn it off should they want, or move the satellites around to provide greater coverage to different areas. They threatened to do this in the last gulf war, but didn't. I don't think it would ever happen really, as too much shipping and aviation relies on it now, but the possibility is there. If the uS thought a GPS-guided missile was headed their way I'm sure the C/A ("civillian") code would be turned off, leaving just the military (much more accurate) code on for their own use. Again, Galileo would solve much of this issue, although US has reserved the right to shoot the Galileo satellites out of the sky, should they so desire.
4. Hackability. The term "Faraday Cage" will become very well known soon after introduction. If the unit can't receive or transmit any kind of radio signal, you won't be charged. A piece of metal over the antenna would do the same trick, or disconnecting the antenna. Or simply removing the box and leaving it at home whilst you go out. And what happens when the unit "breaks"? To solve some of this you'd need to patch it into the CANbus in the car, but doing this for each model of car would be tricky to say the least.
5. Installation. Getting ten million or so of these things fitted is not a trivial task. Nobody is going to volunteer to be the first to have it, so it would have to be enforced somehow, and each one is likely to take an hour at least to fit. Getting through ten million is likely to take a looooooong time. And what happens when the installer breaks something in the car whilst doing it? Or wires it up wrong. This happens a fair bit, and I speak from experience here. Trying to track-down a problem with a unit that works sometimes and not others, is not easy when the engineer has wired it up to the windscreen wipers or something instead of the ignition. Yes, that is a true story.
And so onto the entire ridiculousness of the scheme:
The fact remains that most people don't make really unnecessary journeys; petrol simply costs too much. So roads are crowded because they have to be. People need to make these journeys. Public transport is not an alternative in many cases, and neither is walking. If I were to walk Jessica to school, it'd take a good hour to do the three miles there. She would then be knackered for the rest of the day. By the time I'd have got home another hour later it would be 09:30 and I'd be half an hour late for work before I've even left. So, get a bus? Only there isn't one. House and school are at opposite ends of a dual-carriageway A-road that bypasses the town, and there is not one bus that actually goes down it. I'd have to go a very long way round - bypassing the bypass - to get to it.
And then my journey to work: My house and office are about 7 miles away by road (not as the crow flies, but actual driving distance). This takes me about 30 minutes, during which I can listen to music as loud as I want, listen to the news on the radio, pick my nose, whatever I want to do. Sometimes it only takes 20 minutes (i.e. when the schools are on holiday). To do this journey by public transport would take a minimum of 45 minutes on three trains (and let's face it - that is never going to work as at least one train is bound to go wrong), followed by a fifteen minute walk, or an hour and twenty minutes by three buses. That's only to the nearest station though, I might need a fifteen minute walk on top of that as well. So it's two to three times longer by public transport. Given that public transport is inhabited by strangers, teenagers, terrorists and drunks, you are squashed into a tiny space with no room to sit, and can't sing along to your music (at least without strange looks), it's hard to see the appeal, to be honest.
Clearly, public transport is not an alternative for me. I HAVE to make this journey. I already pay for it with fuel tax and road tax. Why should I have to pay more than I do now? Even if fuel and road tax are abolished, I can't see the cost going down, somehow.
The only way charging will cut congestion is by forcing people off the road. Children won't visit their elderly parents and parents won't take their children to out-of-school activities. Families will not go on weekend visits to parks or farms or wherever they feel like going. Everybody will sit at home, miserable as hell, because they won't be able to afford to go out.
Also, as motorways are to be more expensive than A/B roads, it'll have the effect of moving traffic back onto the roads the motorways were designed to keep them off of in the first place. If the A-Road bypass I use daily is to be more expensive than the rat-runs through town, what am I going to drive, even if it takes longer?
In one article I read, somebody idiotic in the government said "We can't build our way out of trouble", and then went on to say "The M6 Toll is a great example of how charging cuts congestion". ??????? How contradictory is that? The M6 Toll WAS building out of trouble. Even if it weren't a toll road it would have cut congestion on the M6, because half the traffic would use it instead. In fact, it would cut congestion EVEN MORE if you didn't have to pay to use it because the traffic would be split evenly over the two routes, instead of 80/20 or so. But that wouldn't favour the rich, would it?
Stupid, stupid, stupid. And why can't we build our way out of trouble? We aren't "paving over the countryside" as the greenies would have us think. Fire up Google Earth and have a browse over the country. You'll be amazed at just how little of it is roads. Frankly, building some more isn't going to remove all greenery from the place.
Hopefully this scheme will not get off the ground. Mr Cameron - you are lacking somewhat in policies, testicles and any kind of public esteem. Rathern than kow-towing on green taxes and crazy plans, promise the nation that you will NOT introduce environmental taxes and that road charging under the Tories would never happen.
You'll find yourself with the keys to No. 10, I guarantee.
This weekend was no exception, with a report published by the ex-chief of BA (his name escapes me at the moment), recommending it as a good measure to cut congestion.
Given that I work for a firm that could conceivably supply such a system (and has supplied other government transport systems so already has a foot in the door) and that my job involves writing software for such systems, I probably have a slightly better viewpoint than most.
And my view is this: It won't work. (my view, not the company view!)
Sure, for businesses, telematics is a useful tool. Knowing where your vehicles (and valuable loads) are, how long they stop for and the whole host of other info we provide is great business info. For individuals, getting your car back after it's been nicked is also rather handy.
But nationally? I don't think they've thought about the technical details, yet alone the entire ridiculousness of the scheme, which we'll examine shortly. So why won't it work?
1. Data collection. How will the data be transmitted? For accurate charging you need a very frequent reporting rate - once every ten seconds or so realistically - and this all needs to be transmitted to a server somewhere. Private radio? Too many vehicles and not enough bandwidth. Plus it would be severely open to jamming and would require receivers all over the country. Mobile phone network? Again, capacity is a bit of a problem, but mainly the cost is the issue here. Who is going to pay for the data transmission costs and the network subscription? A lot of people seem to be under the impression that the vehicles would transmit up to the satellites. Wrong, I'm afraid.
2. Coverage. GPS is pretty good most places, but not everywhere. In cities, multipath error is very frequent (the signal "bounces" off of buildings, leading to a greater margin of error), plus the number of visible satellites is smaller. Same goes for heavily foliated areas, tunnels and valleys. Newer GPS chipsets are getting better at this, and EGNOS will help somewhat (provided you can see the EGNOS satellite) but it is still an issue. Galileo (the European GPS system) should solve much of this when it goes live, however.
3. Ownership. The GPS network is owned by the US Dept. Of Defence, who can literally turn it off should they want, or move the satellites around to provide greater coverage to different areas. They threatened to do this in the last gulf war, but didn't. I don't think it would ever happen really, as too much shipping and aviation relies on it now, but the possibility is there. If the uS thought a GPS-guided missile was headed their way I'm sure the C/A ("civillian") code would be turned off, leaving just the military (much more accurate) code on for their own use. Again, Galileo would solve much of this issue, although US has reserved the right to shoot the Galileo satellites out of the sky, should they so desire.
4. Hackability. The term "Faraday Cage" will become very well known soon after introduction. If the unit can't receive or transmit any kind of radio signal, you won't be charged. A piece of metal over the antenna would do the same trick, or disconnecting the antenna. Or simply removing the box and leaving it at home whilst you go out. And what happens when the unit "breaks"? To solve some of this you'd need to patch it into the CANbus in the car, but doing this for each model of car would be tricky to say the least.
5. Installation. Getting ten million or so of these things fitted is not a trivial task. Nobody is going to volunteer to be the first to have it, so it would have to be enforced somehow, and each one is likely to take an hour at least to fit. Getting through ten million is likely to take a looooooong time. And what happens when the installer breaks something in the car whilst doing it? Or wires it up wrong. This happens a fair bit, and I speak from experience here. Trying to track-down a problem with a unit that works sometimes and not others, is not easy when the engineer has wired it up to the windscreen wipers or something instead of the ignition. Yes, that is a true story.
And so onto the entire ridiculousness of the scheme:
The fact remains that most people don't make really unnecessary journeys; petrol simply costs too much. So roads are crowded because they have to be. People need to make these journeys. Public transport is not an alternative in many cases, and neither is walking. If I were to walk Jessica to school, it'd take a good hour to do the three miles there. She would then be knackered for the rest of the day. By the time I'd have got home another hour later it would be 09:30 and I'd be half an hour late for work before I've even left. So, get a bus? Only there isn't one. House and school are at opposite ends of a dual-carriageway A-road that bypasses the town, and there is not one bus that actually goes down it. I'd have to go a very long way round - bypassing the bypass - to get to it.
And then my journey to work: My house and office are about 7 miles away by road (not as the crow flies, but actual driving distance). This takes me about 30 minutes, during which I can listen to music as loud as I want, listen to the news on the radio, pick my nose, whatever I want to do. Sometimes it only takes 20 minutes (i.e. when the schools are on holiday). To do this journey by public transport would take a minimum of 45 minutes on three trains (and let's face it - that is never going to work as at least one train is bound to go wrong), followed by a fifteen minute walk, or an hour and twenty minutes by three buses. That's only to the nearest station though, I might need a fifteen minute walk on top of that as well. So it's two to three times longer by public transport. Given that public transport is inhabited by strangers, teenagers, terrorists and drunks, you are squashed into a tiny space with no room to sit, and can't sing along to your music (at least without strange looks), it's hard to see the appeal, to be honest.
Clearly, public transport is not an alternative for me. I HAVE to make this journey. I already pay for it with fuel tax and road tax. Why should I have to pay more than I do now? Even if fuel and road tax are abolished, I can't see the cost going down, somehow.
The only way charging will cut congestion is by forcing people off the road. Children won't visit their elderly parents and parents won't take their children to out-of-school activities. Families will not go on weekend visits to parks or farms or wherever they feel like going. Everybody will sit at home, miserable as hell, because they won't be able to afford to go out.
Also, as motorways are to be more expensive than A/B roads, it'll have the effect of moving traffic back onto the roads the motorways were designed to keep them off of in the first place. If the A-Road bypass I use daily is to be more expensive than the rat-runs through town, what am I going to drive, even if it takes longer?
In one article I read, somebody idiotic in the government said "We can't build our way out of trouble", and then went on to say "The M6 Toll is a great example of how charging cuts congestion". ??????? How contradictory is that? The M6 Toll WAS building out of trouble. Even if it weren't a toll road it would have cut congestion on the M6, because half the traffic would use it instead. In fact, it would cut congestion EVEN MORE if you didn't have to pay to use it because the traffic would be split evenly over the two routes, instead of 80/20 or so. But that wouldn't favour the rich, would it?
Stupid, stupid, stupid. And why can't we build our way out of trouble? We aren't "paving over the countryside" as the greenies would have us think. Fire up Google Earth and have a browse over the country. You'll be amazed at just how little of it is roads. Frankly, building some more isn't going to remove all greenery from the place.
Hopefully this scheme will not get off the ground. Mr Cameron - you are lacking somewhat in policies, testicles and any kind of public esteem. Rathern than kow-towing on green taxes and crazy plans, promise the nation that you will NOT introduce environmental taxes and that road charging under the Tories would never happen.
You'll find yourself with the keys to No. 10, I guarantee.
posted by Nej at
2:16 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home