 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / July 2005Ya gotta love California "drivers"
How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup -Kenny  SignatureKenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles H: 3630 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #138, L.A., CA 90034-6809 (310) 391-1898 > How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > > http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup Awesome ! I expect Sheriff John Bunnell would have something to say ? I guess sleeping whilst driving is unwise ? Graham > How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > > http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup > > -Kenny Geez! I thought DC drivers were bad, but those people wouldn't last 10 minutes here! nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel Not surprising given the speed that California traffic moves at and how closely the cars are spaced. A trip down the 405 is downright scary at the usual 70+ mph. > Not surprising given the speed that California traffic moves at and how > closely the cars are spaced. A trip down the 405 is downright scary at > the usual 70+ mph. I don't see much difference between there and here, except (based on pictures - I've never been) the California freeways are wider, flatter, and straighter. Sudden slowdowns are common here as well. Every now and then someone gets a love tap from behind but multi-car pileups are, thankfully, uncommon. nate Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there. The 10, 405, 5 it doesn't seem to matter...if they can go that fast they will with only 2 car lengths between. > Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways > seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there. > The 10, 405, 5 it doesn't seem to matter...if they can go that fast > they will with only 2 car lengths between. It isn't you imagination. Unfortunately, when conditions do not cause traffic jams and the freeways are free-flowing... 75mph to 80mph is the norm at the LOW end of the speed violations. The high end often exceeds 100mph. The left lane is often bunched up with less than 1 car length between cars, very dangerous for those in the #1 lane and in the #2 lane. Of course, to add to the mess, often the #3 and #4 lanes have big rigs. Interstingly enough, the local talk radio, KNX 1070 AM, reports traffic every six minutes... and at least one new accident will be reported every other traffic report. Some of those are even solo spinouts. >Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways >seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there. >The 10, 405, 5 it doesn't seem to matter...if they can go that fast >they will with only 2 car lengths between. If you're lucky. Often, they'll be so close, you could hand the other driver a cigarette... -LMB > Often, they'll be so close, you could hand the other driver a cigarette... Now THAT will scare California drivers. At least if it's the tobacco kind. --Joe > Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways > seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there. > The 10, 405, 5 it doesn't seem to matter...if they can go that fast > they will with only 2 car lengths between. Here's the chain of causation that leads to this situation. 1. California law stupidly says that if someone cuts into your lane right in front of you, and you hit him anywhere behind the lights, it's a "rear ender" and YOU are blamed. 2. A large number of skillful but stupid drivers take advantage of that law by performing a maneuver known as the "LA lane change": jam your front fender into a 2-3 foot gap between cars in an adjacent lane, then just follow it in, thus forcing the driver behind the gap to slam on his brakes and let you in. 3. Drivers who fall for the "LA lane change" get it done to them over and over again and become "rocks in the stream" of traffic, and are rightly regarded as complete idiots and a.sholes by everyone else. 4. Naturally, all drivers with sufficient skill and brains start keeping up very closely, because it's the only way to prevent themselves from becoming part of that category. Of course, this situation is marginally less safe than if everyone followed at a safe stopping distance. But the only step in the chain that can sensibly be changed is step 1. So long as that law stands, the possibility of these pileups must be regarded as one of the unavoidable risks of driving on the freeway. >> Maybe it is more my imagination, but the southern California freeways >> seem to fly...75 and 80mph seems to be the norm on visits out there. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > possibility of these pileups must be regarded as one of the unavoidable > risks of driving on the freeway. Can you cite the law that says this? I don't know about California, but in NC there are laws that cover people making unsafe manuvers that lead to accidents. Surely California is the same. I looked through the California Vehicle Code and couldn't find anything that says "if someone cuts into your lane right in front of you, and you hit him anywhere behind the lights, it's a "rear ender" and YOU are blamed." I did find the following laws that might apply in some way (depending on how they are interperted): "23103. (a) Any person who drives any vehicle upon a highway in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving." Seems like cutting in front of someone so that he is unable to stop is operating a vehicle "in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property...." "22107. No person shall turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a roadway until such movement can be made with reasonable safety and then only after the giving of an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement." Seems like cutting in front of someone violates this part of the code. "22109. No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle on a highway without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear when there is opportunity to give the signal." If you cut in front of someone and brake rapidly, it seems to me your are violating this part of the code. "21703. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the roadway." I suppose if they cut in front of you and you continue to follow too closely and later have an accident you are violating this portion of the code. Regards, Ed White >Of course, this situation is marginally less safe than if everyone >followed at a safe stopping distance. But the only step in the chain >that can sensibly be changed is step 1. So long as that law stands, the >possibility of these pileups must be regarded as one of the unavoidable >risks of driving on the freeway. Except that none of the people in the video were doing "LA Lane Changes" or tailgating. The video merely shows a bunch of dumbshits who aren't paying attention to what's in front of them. > >Of course, this situation is marginally less safe than if everyone > >followed at a safe stopping distance. But the only step in the chain [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Changes" or tailgating. The video merely shows a bunch of dumbshits > who aren't paying attention to what's in front of them. You have to cut them some slack. How can you expect them to pay attention to what is happening when they have a phone stuck in their ear and eyes firmly locked on the trunk of the car in front of them. Harry K >who aren't paying attention to what's in front of them. Indeed, it seems that many drivers' field of view ends about one car length in front of their vehicle. Drive in the right lane on a lightly traveled freeway (pass on the left if you encounter slower traffic in the right lane, then return to the right lane when you are safely past). If a faster vehicle comes up behind you, it will probably come to tailgating distance and tailgate you for a while before passing, even though the left lane was empty the whole time. Or worse, will just tailgate you forever ("duckling" behavior) unless you actively try to lose it (by speeding up and/or slowing down). Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Timothy J. Lee Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. No warranty of any kind is provided with this message. >Drive in the right lane on a lightly traveled freeway (pass on the >left if you encounter slower traffic in the right lane, then return >to the right lane when you are safely past). If a faster vehicle >comes up behind you, it will probably come to tailgating distance >and tailgate you for a while before passing This is true even if they were going 10 or 15 MPH faster than you. Either they can only think in one dimension and the idea of passing never occurs to them, or they are trying to intimidate you into speeding up - as if everyone in every lane should have to drive as fast as THEY want to drive. > >Drive in the right lane on a lightly traveled freeway (pass on the > >left if you encounter slower traffic in the right lane, then return [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > speeding up - as if everyone in every lane should have to drive as > fast as THEY want to drive. It's quite common in San Diego to see a car behind you that just won't pass no matter what, even if you're going 70 when they start tailgating and slow to 55, they still won't pass. I've slowed as low as 45 (with hazard lights flashing) to see if a tailgater would bother passing. Nope, she just sat right on my a.s. Maybe she just was waiting for her exit, but I drove like that for about 5 miles before exiting and she just kept following until I was on the ramp. Stupid people, you know? Dave >Here's the chain of causation that leads to this situation. That's assuming much more knowledge, skill, intent, and even willingness to _knowingly_ take risks (of crashing) on the part of drivers than actually exists in California. >1. California law stupidly says that if someone cuts into your lane >right in front of you, and you hit him anywhere behind the lights, it's >a "rear ender" and YOU are blamed. Name the section of the code. Even if it were true, most drivers are not aware of such intricacies in the law. >2. A large number of skillful but stupid drivers take advantage of that >law by performing a maneuver known as the "LA lane change": jam your >front fender into a 2-3 foot gap between cars in an adjacent lane, then >just follow it in, thus forcing the driver behind the gap to slam on his >brakes and let you in. A more likely reason why someone tries such a thing: the vehicle behind the too-small gap is in the "LA lane changer's" mirror blind spot, and the "LA lane changer" doesn't check the blind spot before changing lanes. Yes, mirrors on many cars can be adjusted to eliminate car-size blind spots, but few drivers actually do that. >3. Drivers who fall for the "LA lane change" get it done to them over >and over again and become "rocks in the stream" of traffic, and are >rightly regarded as complete idiots and a.sholes by everyone else. It really only happens frequently if you drive in the right lane near heavily used on-ramps and off-ramps. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Timothy J. Lee Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. No warranty of any kind is provided with this message. [http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup] > Not surprising given the speed that California traffic moves at and how > closely the cars are spaced. >From the time I first saw the place in the mid-80s, I was amazed at how Californians will drive with their hood ornament up the next guy's trailer hitch at freeway speeds. Very much a faith-based institution. In this case, however, I'd speculate the main cause was a combination of speed and inattention, not following too close. The guy in the blue Mustang who started it all by rear-ending the stalled van appeared to be sailing along at a pretty good clip for a CONSTRUCTION ZONE. Hello? There are lanes coned off, work lights and four-ways or beacons on the other side, all sorts of indicators that you need to be driving with your head up and your speed down. Some of the people who piled on later also seemed to be carrying a lot of speed very deep into what was not only a construction zone but also the scene of an evolving accident, with brake lights and cars in weird positions and so forth. I've seen any number of accidents, though none as spectacular and dangerous-looking as this one, caused by people braking too little too late in a situation they might well have taken in stride had they been looking and thinking further ahead. It's also interesting to note the variety of responses by subsequent drivers. Some stop in plenty of time (including some whose vehicles are not stereotypically associated with high-effectiveness braking). Some combine braking with maneuvering whereas others might have been well advised to do so but did not even try it. At least one proved unable to stay in one lane with the pointy end forward during an emergency stop. Lucky somebody didn't cream a highway worker or two. Complicating the issue, it isn't clear to me whether the van, stalled in what appears to be the #1, HOV lane (or is it a breakdown lane?), had its hazard lights on, or maybe the battery had gone down and they weren't very bright anymore. It is however possible to imagine an electrical failure so utter that he couldn't get to anyplace better and didn't have any lights to show. And it *was* a dark-colored vehicle, at night. He did have the highly reflective license plate that is the usual issue these days, though -- this is plainly visible in people's headlights. So what was done well? * Several people handled it with some semblance of aplomb and avoided being caught up in the various chains of collisions. (For the most part these seemed to be the people who bled off a good bit of speed well in advance, presumably because they were well "ahead" of their cars. At least two of the three drivers who wiped out in the subsequent accidents, and a fourth who was saved from doing so only by good skill and/or brakes applied very hard at the last possible moment, seemed to be carrying a lot of speed deep into the accident scene.) * The driver who appeared to get slightly sideswiped by the van kept a level head and didn't allow the mishap to turn into either a loss of control or a collision with another car. * The accident victims appeared to stay with their cars and presumably belted in. A couple of times I've seen people get out and go wandering around on the freeway when it is still early in the evolution and other cars are flying past very fast and close. This seems to be a fairly common reaction. I guess in some situations (fire, or an obvious short path to a safe haven) it might be justified, but in something like this, with no way to run and no place to hide, all it does is increase the likelihood of being the guest of honor in a subsequent car-pedestrian accident. --Joe >Not surprising given the speed that California traffic moves at and how >closely the cars are spaced. A trip down the 405 is downright scary at >the usual 70+ mph. If 70 MPH scares you, you'd no doubt have a heart attack if you rode with me at 100 MPH down the 5... ;) >Not surprising given the speed that California traffic moves at and how >closely the cars are spaced. A trip down the 405 is downright scary at >the usual 70+ mph. One, it's rare you get to move at any speed, and please stay out of here if you think it's "scary"- as you can see, we've got the country's worst drivers, and we don't need anyone *else* coming here that's any worse! -Kenny, who's lived in 6 cities and driven in 35 states and these folks here *can't drive* (but they know how to brake really well) SignatureKenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles H: 3630 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #138, L.A., CA 90034-6809 (310) 391-1898 > -Kenny, who's lived in 6 cities and driven in 35 states and > these folks here *can't drive* Oh, and I suppose Massholes or Cheeseheads are any better? In article <eb7md1hi3nkv6vma5v2ou8km1t7k6cr0he@4ax.com>, newsgroup says: >Oh, and I suppose Massholes are better? MOST EMPHATICALLY *YES*! Boston drivers are *deliberate* in the things they do; here in Cali, they're just *clueless*. It's easy to think like an aggressive driver; but short of alcohol or a head injury, I'll never be fscking clueless. -Kenny SignatureKenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles H: 3630 S. Sepulveda Blvd. #138, L.A., CA 90034-6809 (310) 391-1898 (Cross-post to to M.T.R.) This video shows an unfortunate series of collisions on SB CA-170, outside North Hollywood. > How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > > http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup > > -Kenny > How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > > http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup > > -Kenny Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived! > > How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived! I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine? SignatureCheers, Bev <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please hassle me, I thrive on stress. >>>How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine? That's what I had to do too. > >>>How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > That's what I had to do too. Was it good for you? SignatureCheers, Bev ---------------------------------------------------------- "When I was in college, the only job I could get was sh.tting on people's lawns. Sure, the owners complained, but it was honest work and it kept me off welfare..." -- M. Tabnik in mcfl (paraphrased) >>Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived! >I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine? It needs WiMP (fortunately, it plays in MacWiMP too). -- Cameron Kaiser * ckaiser@floodgap.com * posting with a Commodore 128 personal page: http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/ ** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! ** ** http://www.armory.com/%7Espectre/cwi/ ** > >>Amazing that the passenger in the Mustang survived! > > >I see nothing. Is it worth firing up the winmachine? > > It needs WiMP (fortunately, it plays in MacWiMP too). I know. The question was whether the movie was funny enough to start up the windows machine to view it. Apparently not. SignatureCheers, Bev ================================================================= "A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses." -- C.M.Cipolla >How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > > http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup > > -Kenny Video never loads - nothing to see! Signature-john wide-open at throttle dot info >How the hell do you not see all this coming before you get there? > > http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Pileup > > -Kenny Yeah, right... Windows Media Player cannot play the file because the server is not responding. If you entered a URL or path to play the file, verify that it is correct. If you clicked a link to play the file, the link may not be valid. Crap server. Try again Signature-john wide-open at throttle dot info Works fine...just slow |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.