To continue my earlier reply about statistics: let me suggest to you the Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health Publication No. 2003-119:
"roadway crashes are the leading cause of death from unintentional injury in the general population and also the work place."
"[W]orkers employed in the Transportation, Communications, and Public Utilities industry...were at the highest risk of fatality."
"Collisions between vehicles accounted for nearly half the fatal events, followed by non-collision events (e.g., loss of control, rollover) and collisions in which the worker's vehicle left the roadway and struck a stationary object on the roadside."
I have, as you suggested, read the government sites and info, and I keep coming up with facts that are contrary to your statement...

My replies that quote statistic may seem brash and over the top, but you accused me of "skewing statistics," an accusation at which I take umbrage. So bring your numbers and facts: I have been proven wrong before and I am a better person for it...

 

We already have that policy in place but we don't have enough clerical staff to pull records for 200 drivers every month. As for responsiblity for personal actions allow me to introduce you to Mr. "Contributory Negligence"...if we allow a driver to use our vehicle irresponsibly then we may be contributing to damages in the legal sense.
You are responsible for your own actions and we are responsible for our vehicles and how they are used.

 

maybe you should use up to date info, 2003 shows a different story.

 

Why not have them all use horse and bugies then, bet they wouldn't get over 10-15 mph.

 

man, this post is insane. All of this because of one simple question........

 

Let me ask you something; If you do limit your vehicles in road speed, how will you most likely feel if there are rear end collisions and your trucks is determined to contribute to the accident?
After all, there are such situations as driving with a known condition (speed limited by design in your case) that can contribute to an accident.
Are you just going to ignor that?
We are trying to tell you that reguardless of you good intent, it is not an answer that is without it's own generated dangers to other people.
The point here is not about "can a chip be used" .
The results of doing this can well override common sense.

 

Every single USAF truck I ever drove had a speed limiter at 65MPH. I don't ever recall hearing of one single accident, that was caused by going too slow in those 4 years. As a matter of fact, we had more roll-over accidents on rural roads, than anything. I guess since they couldn't drive 100 on the interstate, they figured they would make up for it, by doing 65 on dirt roads.

On top of that, I was stationed in Great Falls, MT. They do not even have a speed limit on the Interstate. So....you had civilians driving 80, 90, 100MPH....me and everyone else dispatching that day from the base, doing 65MPH.

I think I would take my chances with the speed limiters vs. immature employees.

As a bonified, card carrying republican...I don't feel your safety concerns qualify you as a liberal.

No matter what you do, there will always be a certain amount of risk and liability. However, I do undersand why you are taking these steps. Good Luck!!

 

I appreciate your willingness to correct me, and I ask you again: where do you get your information?
I have told you where I get mine, you have shown me...what?!? You keep referring to some nebulous "up to date" information and "government" sites. I have shown you that I get some of my numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) you on the other hand seem to offer only BS.
I am willing to admit that I am wrong, I am willing to learn, but not until you show me why and how I am wrong. I have quoted you my facts, you have quoted me your opinion but not fact one that I can go back and read for myself.
So please put up your facts or stay on the porch.

 

We have yet to be able to spec a buggy with tool-body and crew cab.

So I took your idea and googled for amish buggy crash and the first news article that popped up had this headline:

Lake Geneva man charged in fatal Amish buggy crash.
(Published Tuesday, February 8, 2005 09:37:36 AM CST by Associated Press)

The short of the story is that the buggy was rearended by a car on a public highway even though the buggy was driving on the shoulder (off the main roadway).

 

How will I feel when you ask nonsensical questions? The trucks are already limited from the factory: we can prove this by removing the limiters programmed into the ECM and letting the engine run free. But an extension of your logic would mean that a stock truck going at 95mph and gets rearended by a reprogrammed truck going 120mph would automatically put Ford Motor Company at fault because they issued the stock truck with "a known condition" as you put it. Or that the slower driver is automatically at fault for "impeding the flow of traffic."
And by "common sense" you mean driving flat out even when passing other vehicles?

If our vehicle and driver complies with all the rules of the road, including going over the minimum speed limit but below the maximum speed limit, then it is not our fault that lesser drivers do not have the ability to drive well enough to see us in time to slow down and pass. We have several cranes that have a top road speed of about 55mph. They are legal to road on all permitted interstates.
I think that you assume that I want to govern our trucks to an absolute 65mph top speed, which I agree may be too slow for some conditions. What I am trying to do is govern the trucks to not do 85 to 95mph. How about 72mph? Very few roads allow more than 70mph so why do our drivers need more than 70mph top speed in our vehicles?

 

True, but...
"No one should drive at such a slow speed [that] they impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when a reduced speed is necessary for the safe operation of the vehicle or in compliance with the law[my emphasis] ."
From "Driver's Handbook", Motor Vehicle Administration, Maryland Department of Transportation, Publ. DL-2B 04/04.
This means I can govern the vehicles down to a legal speed if I choose.

At this point I will venture a wild guess that most, if not all, states have similiar language on their books...

Also, we regularly road slow vehicles through WV. We have yet to be cited in that state for going too slow with a 70-ton-crane on a public road.

 

This is ridiculous. There are many many companies that govern their fleet vehicles. This is done on a regular basis and no one has yet to show any real facts about speed governed vehicles either causing accidents or being in them more than any other vehicle. The guy asked a simple question and instead of simple answers gets a bunch of know-it-all naysayers with their trumped up theories of why it should not be done. As was said above the military has done this for years. Limo services, school busses, taxi and livery services, couriers and delivery, etc have done this for years. In most cases that I have seen the limit has been about 5 or 10 MPH above local speed limit. Say 75mph for sake of arguement. That gives you passing ability but not reckless speed.

 

Thank You!
I can deal with 75mph...

 

Ah, so the buggy was traveling to slow and caused the accident. I geuss speed limiters isn't such a good idea afterall?

 

Yes, the buggy was apparently travelling too slow to occupy the regular travel lane and was travelling [b]on the shoulder of the roadway/[b]. That would mean that the motorist approaching from behind had at least eight feet worth of clear travelling lane in his favor to pass the buggy.
For your benefit it appears I must review what a "shoulder" is as it relates to a roadway: a "shoulder" is a strip of pavement that runs parallel to the travelling lane. In this case there was enough roadway to allow the passing car to overtake the buggy without even having to get into the opposing traffic lane. I hope you are not the type of person who cannot shoulder (no pun intended) personal responsibility and wants to blame all mishaps on everyone but themselves.

To carry this a little further: I think you will agree with me that there are vehicles that are slower by nature, for example postal service vehicles, bicycles, farmtractors, cranes, garbage trucks and that these vehicles have just as much right to share the road with you except on limited access highways. They are not governed, they're just a slower than your average passenger car.
Now, I'm just going to pretend that you have a valid drivers license and that you are allowed to drive on public roads; just out of curiousity, how often do [i]you[/y] ignore and run into these slower vehicles? How stationary objects like bridges or quarries? Do like running into them too? Convenince stores?
Personally, I do my driving when I am awake and sober and I have my head unscrewed from any given orifice. this means I generally try to slow down and avoid these vehicles. And the times I've gotten too close it was my fault for not paying attention or going too fast for conditions.