 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> I once made a safe stop at a red light.
>> I started to fiddle with the radio and started to hear tires squealing.
>> Next thing I know a guy blows past me sideways spinning into the
>> intersection.
>
> Oh wow, yeh at least he didn't just plough into the back of you.
>
I now keep an eye on traffic behind me when stopping at lights.
> I had a similar experience on my bike once, it was at some construction
> work and the light went red, so I stopped and was first in line. A
> split second later I see a cyclist (who must have been right behind me)
> come flying past me in the air pretty much separated from his bike. Once
> he'd picked himself up off the road and collected up his (now
> unrideable) bike, he said to me how stupid I was to stop at the light
> and I should have just gone through it like all the other cyclists!
>
>
Don't cyclists have to obey the traffic laws as well - I guess that's
the way of things. If someone does not do something you expect them to
do - it's your fault.
I've seen 1 or 2 accidents that were just that accidents.
But most of the accidents out there should be labeled stupidities -
because someone was doing something stupid and the 'accident' was
totally avoidable.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Depends on the intersection, sometimes you would have no chance of seeing
>> someone coming from the side at 50mph until it was too late to take any
>> avoiding action.
>
> Yes, but then you have the perfectly clear view of a person sitting in
> your way - and you aim for them.
Even cars going at speeds like 20mph cover a distance like 5 metres (maybe
the distance from being hidden to being in the middle of the intersection)
in well under one second. I suspect if you're going 50mph and you see a car
crossing your path 0.5 seconds before you are about to hit it, there's not a
lot you can do, cars don't turn very sharply at 50mph.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Huh? What do the cars do that are on green? Here I see max. 1 second red
>> light running, and even that is very rare.
>>
>
> The cars waiting on green just have to keep waiting.
Oh wow, that would never happen here, if it was a fast road there would
definitely be a load of accidents because the people on green would just go
without looking left&right very far, some would probably see you and drive
out anyway forcing you to do an emergency stop and crash into them.
Insurance would certainly blame the person for red light jumping no matter
what happened.
On a slower road the cars on green would just force their way over and force
the red-light runners to stop (this happens sometimes when the exit is
blocked and people get stuck in the middle and then try to go when it frees
up, forgetting that they don't have green anymore).
>> Yeh a lot of them here too, although IMO they make the cameras too
>> obvious.
>>
>
> What's the goal - to stop red light running or to give the most fines
> possible?
It seems to just stop people red-light running at certain junctions, and
they can tell which ones they need to stop at before they get to there. If
they hid them somehow you'd never know which ones had cameras so you'd have
to stop at all of them. The police could just announce "we've fitted red
light cameras under-cover to around 10% of intersections on a rotating
basis".
> I've seen this on regular roads with stop lights.
We don't usually have shoulders on regular roads, if there's space for a
shoulder it will be a proper lane.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>>> Depends on the intersection, sometimes you would have no chance of
>>> seeing someone coming from the side at 50mph until it was too late to
>>> take any avoiding action.
>>
>> Yes, but then you have the perfectly clear view of a person sitting in
>> your way - and you aim for them.
>
> Even cars going at speeds like 20mph cover a distance like 5 metres
> (maybe the distance from being hidden to being in the middle of the
> intersection) in well under one second. I suspect if you're going 50mph
> and you see a car crossing your path 0.5 seconds before you are about to
> hit it, there's not a lot you can do, cars don't turn very sharply at
> 50mph.
>
I agree, but a car sitting in an intersection for 5 seconds doesn't
count in this situation. - OK, it only counts if the person hitting him
actually got on the brakes.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> In the UK at least, the law says that you must not go over the white
> line that is painted across the road next to the signal, if it is on
> red.
In most states in the USA, if your car hasn't gotten across the *far*
white line when the light goes red, technically you're in the
intersection on a red light. As for what the cameras look for, I
couldn't say.
> Quite often though, people are driving above the speed limit, so the
> amber phase is maybe not long enough for them to have enough warning to
> stop, or to get over the line before it goes red. Their only option to
> avoid running a red is to speed up.
Yep, that happens too. When I was learning to drive (and sometimes still
now), I start thinking to myself "No, no, no, no, YES!" and making the
decision in advance whether I'll stop for a yellow or not. At least that
way, I'm either speeding up or slowing down, and not hesitating trying
to decide which I should do when I should already be acting. Not that I
always make the right decision, but usually.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> Huh? What do the cars do that are on green? Here I see max. 1 second
> red light running, and even that is very rare.
The other ones that bug me is when traffic is heavy, and instead of
leaving the intersection open enough, when the light's green, five cars
will pull into the middle of the three-lane-road intersection, just so
they can "get through the light." Of course, when the cross traffic
gets the green, the intersection is still full. So most people will
drive in front of the people already stuck and start blowing the horn.
Very helpful, that.
>> I like that some places actually put in red light cameras - then it is
>> automatic with the ticket, not only when there is a cop around.
>
> Yeh a lot of them here too, although IMO they make the cameras too obvious.
I think in the USA you'd get even worse constitutional challenges if the
camera was hidden. The whole excuse for putting the camera in is to
encourage people to slow down and not run the red-light. (We all know
it's really to collect money.)
> accidents are caused by this behaviour,
I'd be more worried that in the case of an accident, there's no way for
the emergency vehicles to get to the problem area, myself.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> In most states in the USA, if your car hasn't gotten across the *far*
> white line when the light goes red, technically you're in the intersection
> on a red light.
Is that illegal then, to be *in* the intersection when the light you passed
on the way in is red? What happens if you are wanting to turn left and have
to wait until all the cars coming the opposite way have stopped on red - is
that illegal if your light has switched back to red? Or what if traffic is
moving slowly and you set off into the intersection on green, but then it
changes to red before you make it to the other side?
> Yep, that happens too. When I was learning to drive (and sometimes still
> now), I start thinking to myself "No, no, no, no, YES!" and making the
> decision in advance whether I'll stop for a yellow or not. At least that
> way, I'm either speeding up or slowing down, and not hesitating trying to
> decide which I should do when I should already be acting. Not that I
> always make the right decision, but usually.
Yeh I have that sometimes too, although usually it's just because I don't
want to break hard to stop in time, then I decide to keep going, but then I
realise it's going to be a bit risky and it might go red so I slam on the
brakes anyway!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> The other ones that bug me is when traffic is heavy, and instead of
> leaving the intersection open enough, when the light's green, five cars
> will pull into the middle of the three-lane-road intersection, just so
> they can "get through the light."
Here you're not meant to enter the intersection unless your exit is clear
(or you can be sure it will be clear when you get there). ie you're not
meant to stop in the middle of the intersection, the only exception is if
you are turning across the oncoming traffic, where you are allowed to wait
in the middle.
> Of course, when the cross traffic gets the green, the intersection is
> still full. So most people will drive in front of the people already stuck
> and start blowing the horn.
How do they drive in front of the people stuck in the middle? Usually here
the idiots who block the intersection go as far forward as they can so it's
impossible to go in front of them, sometimes you have to weave around behind
them, particularly fun if it's more than one lane.
> I think in the USA you'd get even worse constitutional challenges if the
> camera was hidden.
Hehe, a hidden camera to catch people driving illegally? Bah no we can't
possibly have that - the people must know exactly which section of road they
have to drive legally on!
> I'd be more worried that in the case of an accident, there's no way for
> the emergency vehicles to get to the problem area, myself.
When there is no shoulder here you are meant to leave a gap between the two
lanes (ie you stop over the left side of the left lane, and over to the
right side of the right lane), that usually leaves plenty of gap for
emergency services to come through. Pretty sensible as some of the
remaining old autobahns here don't have a shoulder, also some of the newer
ones can be switched from a shoulder to a proper lane depending on the
traffic volume.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> In most states in the USA, if your car hasn't gotten across the *far*
>> white line when the light goes red, technically you're in the
>> intersection on a red light.
>
> Is that illegal then, to be *in* the intersection when the light you
> passed on the way in is red? What happens if you are wanting to turn
> left and have to wait until all the cars coming the opposite way have
> stopped on red - is that illegal if your light has switched back to
> red? Or what if traffic is moving slowly and you set off into the
> intersection on green, but then it changes to red before you make it to
> the other side?
Technically, yes, you're in trouble. You're not supposed to enter the
intersection unless you can clear the other side legally. Don't pull
into the middle of the intersection to turn - wait in the turn lane, for
example.
In New York City, where such leads to deadlock, the fine is something
like $500 to be in the intersection when the light changes.
In practice, no, you rarely get in trouble, unless you do something else
stupid too and it's something they add on top.
> Yeh I have that sometimes too, although usually it's just because I
> don't want to break hard to stop in time, then I decide to keep going,
> but then I realise it's going to be a bit risky and it might go red so I
> slam on the brakes anyway!
Yes, that's what my technique was invented to solve. I decide I'm going
to go, and if it turns red anyway, I go anyway. Of course, one has to be
somewhat concervative.
I've learned it helps if you're in a suit and tie, also.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> ie you're not meant to stop in the middle of the intersection,
Well, yes, that's why it bugs me. :-)
>> I think in the USA you'd get even worse constitutional challenges if
>> the camera was hidden.
>
> Hehe, a hidden camera to catch people driving illegally? Bah no we
> can't possibly have that - the people must know exactly which section of
> road they have to drive legally on!
Well, there were already constitutional challenges based on the fact
that the camera can't take the witness stand, for example. How are you
supposed to argue you weren't speeding if the police won't even tell you
where they caught you speeding?
>> I'd be more worried that in the case of an accident, there's no way
>> for the emergency vehicles to get to the problem area, myself.
>
> When there is no shoulder here you are meant to leave a gap between the
> two lanes (ie you stop over the left side of the left lane, and over to
> the right side of the right lane), that usually leaves plenty of gap for
> emergency services to come through.
I think that works well if everyone understands it. It works poorly if
half the people think you're supposed to squeeze right from the left lane.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:57:42 -0500, Tom Austin wrote:
> Yes, but at least you were not involved in the accident - given they
> were far enough ahead.
>
> If you get in their way you may be the indirect cause of an accident.
True, but if I can keep 'em behind me, then I'm not going to be stuck in
traffic for hours. ;-)
Jim (mostly joking)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Technically, yes, you're in trouble. You're not supposed to enter the
> intersection unless you can clear the other side legally.
That's sounds a bit silly, how are you meant to know if the light is going
to switch to red before you get to the other side? Just this morning I
entered an intersection as it switched to amber (no way to stop in time),
and I'm pretty sure it was on red by the time I got out the other side
(around 20mph I guess, crossing 4 lanes of traffic and 2 tram lines).
> Don't pull into the middle of the intersection to turn - wait in the turn
> lane, for example.
You must have to wait for a huge gap in the oncoming traffic then - usually
here you move forward until you are exactly lined up with the exit, and as
soon as there is a gap in the oncoming traffic you make the turn. Otherwise
you'd literally be there all day (and getting honked at from the cars
behind)!.
> In New York City, where such leads to deadlock,
It will only lead to deadlock if you enter the intersection when your exit
is not clear - we have that rule too.
> In practice, no, you rarely get in trouble, unless you do something else
> stupid too and it's something they add on top.
Ditto here, the police are not going to even do anything if they are right
behind you. They're probably doing the same thing :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Well, there were already constitutional challenges based on the fact that
> the camera can't take the witness stand, for example. How are you supposed
> to argue you weren't speeding if the police won't even tell you where they
> caught you speeding?
Of course they should tell you where you were caught, but there's no reason
to keep the cameras in the same place.
Actually in the UK they had almost this method, because I think 80-90% of
the camera housings are actually empty inside. A pretty good idea so long
as they put the camera housings near dangerous areas (and not just on a big
empty wide stretch with a ridiculously low limit). Naturally they move
around the actual cameras, so you're never sure which ones are actually
working or not.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Technically, yes, you're in trouble. You're not supposed to enter the
>> intersection unless you can clear the other side legally.
>
> That's sounds a bit silly, how are you meant to know if the light is
> going to switch to red before you get to the other side?
That's what the yellow is for.
> morning I entered an intersection as it switched to amber (no way to
> stop in time), and I'm pretty sure it was on red by the time I got out
> the other side (around 20mph I guess, crossing 4 lanes of traffic and 2
They need a longer yellow light there. As I said, in practice it's
usually not a problem.
> You must have to wait for a huge gap in the oncoming traffic then -
Or look ahead a bit. Or wait for the turn signal.
Of course it all falls apart if the lights aren't designed properly,
yes. If the yellow is too short to clear the intersection at a
reasonable speed, or you have no left turn arrow when there's usually
lots of oncoming traffic, you'll be in trouble.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> That's what the yellow is for.
So, you make the yellow phase last long enough to cross the entire junction
at the slowest speed you can imagine for that junction? I guess that would
work, but then when the road is flowing normally, people would just continue
to drive through on yellow, knowing that it is going to last for 5 seconds
or whatever, when the whole point of yellow is for you to stop if it's safe
to do so.
In China I saw a few lights where they had a big 7-segment countdown timer
above the lights, looked like a pretty cool idea, well it would have been if
they paid any attention to the lights in the first place :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> So, you make the yellow phase last long enough to cross the entire
> junction at the slowest speed you can imagine for that junction?
No. If you're going *that* slow, it's easier to stop. You make it long
enough to get through going at the slowest speed where it would be
unsafe to try to stop. :-)
> In China I saw a few lights where they had a big 7-segment countdown
> timer above the lights, looked like a pretty cool idea, well it would
> have been if they paid any attention to the lights in the first place :-)
Yeah. I'm rather surprised there's any Chinese people left alive, with
the way they do traffic there. :-)
"That's our hotel on the left."
"Then why did the taxi driver pull into the right-turn-only lane?"
"The line's shorter."
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> So, you make the yellow phase last long enough to cross the entire
>> junction at the slowest speed you can imagine for that junction?
>
> No. If you're going *that* slow, it's easier to stop.
But my whole point is, how do you know it's about to switch to amber? If
you enter the junction on green going slow enough, you won't make it to the
other side before it gets to red.
> Yeah. I'm rather surprised there's any Chinese people left alive, with the
> way they do traffic there. :-)
>
> "That's our hotel on the left."
> "Then why did the taxi driver pull into the right-turn-only lane?"
> "The line's shorter."
To be fair that isn't *that* bad, I've seen quite a few cars do that here,
using the turn-only lane and then going straight, getting in front of about
20-30 cars in the process. What I found particularly weird in China was
that they started to queue up in the lanes for oncoming traffic when at a
red light! Or that you can be going around a corner on a 2-lane road at
50mph and suddenly you're faced with an old woman on a tricycle coming
towards you!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
> If you enter the junction on green going slow enough, you won't make it
> to the other side before it gets to red.
Stop on the green. Wait till it's clear on the far side.
>> Yeah. I'm rather surprised there's any Chinese people left alive, with
>> the way they do traffic there. :-)
>>
>> "That's our hotel on the left."
>> "Then why did the taxi driver pull into the right-turn-only lane?"
>> "The line's shorter."
>
> To be fair that isn't *that* bad,
It was for me! That's not a story, that's an experience. :-)
> on a 2-lane road at 50mph and suddenly you're faced with an old woman on
> a tricycle coming towards you!
Yeah. And the people on bicycles weaving out in front of the oncoming
busses.
Like I said, I'm surprised there's any of them left alive.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
