 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / February 2006Just witnessed an accident
I was in a group of 4 vehicles approaching a light on a 55 mph, 4 lane divided state road. I was in the left lane. Several car lenghts In front of me was a van. To my right, a semi pulling a full sized open bed trailer. In front of the semi, a large Ryder moving truck (of the McVeigh kind). We were about half a mile from the light, the light was green, everyone was doing about 55, I was doing 60 (I have been catching up with this group of 3 vehicles). As I approached the light, I passed the semi but stayed in the left lane as there wasnt enough space between the semi and the Ryder truck. The van and Ryder reached the intersection as the light turned yellow. To my surprise, both the van and the Ryder brake hard and stop. They had no reason to stop, they could have gotten through and I could have gotten through as well since that intersection has long yellows. I had no problem stopping behind the van, but the semi driver had to brake as well as steer rigtht to avoid rearending the Ryder and ended up jacknifing and overturning (the trailer did not overturn). It happened so very fast... And when in a few seconds the light turned green, the Ryder truck simply drove off. An umnarked cop car who just happend to be there came from the opposite direction to investigate, but did not pursue the moron in the Ryder. IMO, the culprit was the Ryder driver. The lessons I learned? Minimize the amount of time you drive in the proximity of a semi (had I been lingering near him, I'd been hit). Dont brake while frontgating a semi. Expect drivers of large rental trucks to be very dangerous. And to not tailgate. > As I approached the light, I passed the semi but stayed in the left > lane as there [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > IMO, the culprit was the Ryder driver. While the Ryder driver shouldn't haven't driven off, what did he do that was so wrong? He stopped for a red light, and the semi driver needs to keep a safe following distance in case of such braking. I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a red, light. >I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > red, light. Besides which, what if a deer had run out in front of the Ryder van? This is the semi driver's fault. It doesn't matter what color the light as. -Dave > I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > red, light. Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it were green ? Graham If it's too late to stop safely, or if you can beat the red, then yes (sometimes you have to nail the gas pedal actually). > If it's too late to stop safely, or if you can beat the red, You're idea of 'beating' the red shows you to be a potentially dangerous driver. Driving isn't about 'beating' anything like some competitive sport. > then yes(sometimes you have to nail the gas pedal actually). Once again your idea that 'nailing the gas' is right shows you to be an aggressive driver who needs some corrective tuition. I'll happily speak in favour of being flexible about speed limits ( outside of urban areas ) but ignoring traffic lights is not an area I have *any* time for. Graham >> If it's too late to stop safely, or if you can beat the red, > >You're idea of 'beating' the red shows you to be a potentially dangerous >driver. Beating the red is not dangerous. FAILING to beat the red (and therefore running it) is what is dangerous.  SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > >> If it's too late to stop safely, or if you can beat the red, > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Beating the red is not dangerous. FAILING to beat the red (and > therefore running it) is what is dangerous. Treating traffic lights as a game is dangerous. Graham > If it's too late to stop safely, or if you can beat the red, then yes For the Ryder truck, he stopped fine. It was the semi that didn't stop safely. >> I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a >> red, light. > > Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it > were green ? I don't stop for fresh yellows unless NOBODY is behind me. It requires harder braking than I feel the driver and/or vehicle behind me may be capable of. Too risky as the experience with RLCs has shown. > >> I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > >> red, light. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > harder braking than I feel the driver and/or vehicle behind me may be > capable of. Too risky as the experience with RLCs has shown. Nobody is saying you should have to do a 'crash stop' for a yellow. Graham >> >> I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a >> >> red, light. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Nobody is saying you should have to do a 'crash stop' for a yellow. Even what is simply heavier than normal braking can get me rear ended, especially since my car's brakes are better than stock. > >> >> I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > >> >> red, light. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Even what is simply heavier than normal braking can get me rear ended, > especially since my car's brakes are better than stock. It seems that US drivers like tailgating too much. I've never known a European driver be concerned about stopping at lights in case they were 'rear-ended'. Yet more bad aggressive USA driving. No wonder your 'accident' figures are so high. Graham > It seems that US drivers like tailgating too much. Just got home. Had some guy in escort 6 inches off my rear bumper. Would you advise stopping for a yellow signal? > I've never known a European driver be concerned about stopping at lights in > case they were 'rear-ended'. I've been rear ended when I stopped at a yellow. > Yet more bad aggressive USA driving. No wonder your 'accident' figures are so > high. The root cause is in two basic areas. 1) The speed kills nonsense which has in turn caused a break down in lane discipline and enouraged lane blocking. 2) 'just let them do it' Which has given many people a sense of an entitlement that any aggressive move they make should be rewarded and others should yield for it. > > I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > > red, light. > > Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it > were green ? And why not? The amber light means "proceed with caution". That includes analyzing whether it is safer to stop immediately or to continue on through the intersection, assuming you *enter* it while the light is amber. Both are correct and legal options. -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that) > > > I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > > > red, light. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > continue on through the intersection, assuming you *enter* it while the > light is amber. Both are correct and legal options. I've never heard the amber described as meaning "proceed with caution" before. Sounds like bad advice to me. Graham >>> Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it >>> were green ? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I've never heard the amber described as meaning "proceed with caution" > before. Sounds like bad advice to me. Did you get your licence off the back of a cereal box? > >>> Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it > >>> were green ? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Did you get your licence off the back of a cereal box? Perfect! I got nothin'. =:^| -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that) >> I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a >> red, light. > >Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it >were green ? If you can enter the intersection before the light turns read, then the answer is an unequivocal "yes!" SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > >> I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > >> red, light. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If you can enter the intersection before the light turns read, then > the answer is an unequivocal "yes!" Sounds to me like you treat it as a contest. Graham >> >Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it >> >were green ? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Sounds to me like you treat it as a contest. Sounds to me like you have your knickers in a twist. ;) SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > red, light. Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. The semi should have kept an adequate following distance; tough to do at that speed, I know. If he *had* been following far enough back from the Ryder, you would probably have pulled in between them SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- But you also must look in the rearview mirror and make sure there is no semi who cant stop on dime. The Ryder truck had no such mirror and wasnt experienced enough to make do without. If he *had* been following far enough back from the Ryder, you would probably have pulled in between them ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're probably right, as I believe in KRETP. Not any more, in situations like that. > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > But you also must look in the rearview mirror and make sure there > is no semi who cant stop on dime. The Ryder truck had no > such mirror and wasnt experienced enough to make do without. Bullshit. He may not have had a centre mirror, but I'll bet large he had side mirrors. > If he *had* been following far enough back from the > Ryder, you would probably have pulled in between them > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > - > You're probably right, as I believe in KRETP. Not any more, > in situations like that. You apparently don't believe in maintaining adequate following distances. Nevertheless, although the Ryder driver screwed up from a safety standpoint, it was the semi driver who was in the wrong. SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." > > I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a > > red, light. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The semi should have kept an adequate following distance; tough to do at > that speed, I know. What's tough about keeping a safe distance ? You Yanks seem to be hell bent on automotive immolation ! Graham What's tough about keeping a safe distance ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A large gap is usually filled in immediately by someone. And what do you want the semi driver to do then? Slow down again? To make more room for yet another idiot frontgater? I wonder if you Brits realize just how many large trucks we have to share our roads with. Pooh Bear wrote: <brevity snip> > You Yanks seem to be hell bent on automotive immolation ! ----- You're fuckin'-A right! We like our cars fast and explosive! We refuse to half-a.s anything... well, except maybe wars. We're balls to the wall, everywhere, all the time... well, except maybe for human or civil rights. We don't take no sh.t from nobody... well, unless maybe they got oil. We're the protectors of all peoples oppressed on this planet... well, except maybe for the poor ones.... Uh, nevermind... ----- - gpsman >You Yanks seem to be hell bent on automotive immolation ! This incessant Yank-bashing is getting a little old, Graham. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave Alan Baker wrote: <brevity snip> > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. ----- Rule of -what- road?! I'd be interested in a cite on THAT... > The semi should have kept an adequate following distance; tough to do at > that speed, I know. If he *had* been following far enough back from the > Ryder, you would probably have pulled in between them Probably. But it's the hotcake of truck drivers to maintain a safe following distance, regardless of what dumbass 4-wheelers are doing. That usually means driving at a speed a couplefew mph below the flow so that at least most of the cars constantly cutting you off are pulling away. I don't even think about it anymore, I just do it. ----- - gpsman > Alan Baker wrote: <brevity snip> > > > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. > ----- > > Rule of -what- road?! I'd be interested in a cite on THAT... I'll look up *one* for you. You can then find a countering reference, etc. <http://www.dol.wa.gov/ds/guide/guide3.htm> "A steady yellow traffic light means the traffic light is about to change to red. You must stop if it is safe to do so." > > The semi should have kept an adequate following distance; tough to do at > > that speed, I know. If he *had* been following far enough back from the [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > - gpsman SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." Alan Baker wrote: <brevity snip> > > > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. > > ----- [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > "A steady yellow traffic light means the traffic light is about to > change to red. You must stop if it is safe to do so." ----- That's great and all... looks like a pretty official guide... but it ain't the law. So a person *must*... mmm-maybe not so much... (2) Steady yellow indication (a) Vehicle operators facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal are thereby warned that the related green movement is being terminated or that a red indication will be exhibited immediately thereafter when vehicular traffic shall not enter the intersection. Vehicle operators shall stop for pedestrians who are lawfully within the intersection control area as required by RCW 46.61.235(1). (deals further w/pedestrians) http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.055 ----- - gpsman >> Alan Baker wrote: <brevity snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >"A steady yellow traffic light means the traffic light is about to >change to red. You must stop if it is safe to do so." Observation #1: This accident did not occur in Washington, and is therefore the law you cited it irrelevant. Observartion #2: Even if #1 did not hold, it was clearly NOT safe to panic stop directly in front of a 60-ton semi. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave >> Alan Baker wrote: <brevity snip> >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >"A steady yellow traffic light means the traffic light is about to >change to red. You must stop if it is safe to do so." Here's your countering reference: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.055 RCW 46.61.055 (2) Steady yellow indication (a) Vehicle operators facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal are thereby warned that the related green movement is being terminated or that a red indication will be exhibited immediately thereafter when vehicular traffic shall not enter the intersection. Vehicle operators shall stop for pedestrians who are lawfully within the intersection control area as required by RCW 46.61.235(1). Driver's guides are not reliable indications of the law, unfortunately. They are necessarily imprecise, and on occasion (as this one) simply wrong. > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. Not in IL. Not in any other US state I know of. Other nations I am not so sure. Care to make a cite? >From the Maryland Driver Handbook: Steady Yellow Signal This means that the signal is changing from green to red. Its purpose is to provide time for approaching traffic to stop safely and to clear other vehicles from the intersection before the light turns red. If you are too close to the intersection to stop safely, continue through the intersection with care. On the written test, the question is written: What does a steady yellow light mean? A. Proceed with caution B. Stop or clear the intersection (whichever is safest) C. Slow down D. Firetrucks are coming. The correct answer is B. I was on a 50mph route today. About 5-7 car lengths away the light turned yellow. The group of cars and trucks ahead of me by several car lengths went through the intersection. My pack all braked steady and a touch hard (we were cruising down a hill). No accidents. General rule of thumb is if you see a yellow light you must try to stop at the very least. If it's apparent you'll end up in the intersection then you must clear it, but in no way do you assume you have the right of way or speed through. Those who try beating a light are just in a race to their funerals. >>From the Maryland Driver Handbook: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >The correct answer is B. [...] >General rule of thumb is if you see a yellow light you must try to stop >at the very least. There's no such rule of thumb. IMO, the worst thing to do is to "try" to stop and then change your mind or fail. When you see the yellow -- or preferably, before -- decide whether or not you're going to stop. You don't want to brake, decide you won't make it, then speed up again; that just makes it more likely you're going to run the light. >then you must clear it, but in no way do you assume you have the right >of way or speed through. Those who try beating a light are just in a >race to their funerals. That reminds me; I should leave instructions to the hearse driver to ignore all red lights, stop signs, and railroad crossings. I'll be damned if I'm going to be slow in death. I never said you speed up. I said you attempt to stop (take foot off accelator and apply your brake in steady pressure). If it's apparent you can't stop in time, you let off your brake and coast through at the same level (and lower) speed. Otherwise you risk having to hit your brake hard at the last second to keep from entering the intersection and cause hazards to the drivers behind you. Another thing to do is practice the defensive driving method for intersections. When you approach an intersection, take your foot off the accelator and be prepared to stop. You may drop back a few MPH but it gives you the time to save yourself from a red light runner or other fool. [When posting through Google groups, be sure to click on the 'Show Options' link at the top of the message and then click the 'Reply' link. This will quote the message you're replying to, unlike the 'Reply' link at the bottom of the message.] > I never said you speed up. I said you attempt to stop (take foot off > accelator and apply your brake in steady pressure). If it's apparent > you can't stop in time, you let off your brake and coast through at the > same level (and lower) speed. That's the worst thing you can do. Where you would have made the light while keeping your original speed, you're far more likely to run it after having slowed down by 20 mph. My decision on whether to stop or not is determined by how far I am from the intersection and how long it would take me to get to the intersection. I make this decision before the light changes to yellow. I don't change my speed while making this decision. > > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. > > Not in IL. Not in any other US state I know of. Other nations I am not so > sure. Care to make a cite? > "A steady yellow traffic light means the traffic light is about to change to red. You must stop if it is safe to do so." <http://www.dol.wa.gov/ds/guide/guide3.htm> SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia "If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard." >> > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "A steady yellow traffic light means the traffic light is about to > change to red. You must stop if it is safe to do so." ><http://www.dol.wa.gov/ds/guide/guide3.htm> Poorly written and not reflective the actual underlying law I would guess. > > > > Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. > > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Poorly written and not reflective the actual underlying law I would > guess. In California's driver handbook it's explained as follows: Solid Yellow- A yellow signal light means "CAUTION." The red signal is about to appear. When you see the yellow light, stop if you can do so safely. If you can't stop safely, enter the intersection cautiously. http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/pgs16thru17.htm#traffic_lights IOW, it's about warning a driver of an upcoming red light. It recommends that the driver stop, if the driver can to so safely, but it's not a requirement. I've never seen, heard, or read about an instance where a law enforcement officer had pulled over a vehicle that could have stopped safely after a light had turned yellow but instead proceeded to cross the intersection BEFORE the light turned red. - Peter >I've never seen, heard, or read about an instance where a law >enforcement officer had pulled over a vehicle that could have stopped >safely after a light had turned yellow but instead proceeded to cross >the intersection BEFORE the light turned red. Check the archives of this newsgroups. Someone said they were cited for violation of the California yellow light law, which neither prohibits any action nor specifies a penalty. I guess it's unfair to expect a traffic cop to know the law, though. http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/3072964ca42266b3 > >I've never seen, heard, or read about an instance where a law > >enforcement officer had pulled over a vehicle that could have stopped [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/3072964ca42266b3 That was clearly a "he said, i said" example. The cop said he ran a *red*. *Not* a yellow. A good example why it makes sense to stop on yellow instead of taking a chance. Graham >> >I've never seen, heard, or read about an instance where a law >> >enforcement officer had pulled over a vehicle that could have stopped [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >That was clearly a "he said, i said" example. No, it wasn't. >The cop said he ran a *red*. *Not* a yellow. Yet he charged him with a section of the vehicle code which referred only to the yellow. >A good example why it makes sense to stop on yellow instead of taking a >chance. Because cops will cite you for nonexistent offenses? They may well cite you for stopping on yellow if that's the worry. >A good example why it makes sense to stop on yellow instead of taking a >chance. Hey Graham - I drove through at least three yellow lights yesterday (or, if you prefer, I beat three red lights by entering the intersection before the red light came on). In two of the cases, there was another vehicle behind me that would have probably plowed into me had I stopped (unless you think an SUV can out-stop a Corvette). But the other one I did just because I felt like it. ;) Sorry to have disregarded your advice. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > >A good example why it makes sense to stop on yellow instead of taking a > >chance. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Sorry to have disregarded your advice. You guys are awesome. I've noticed that you, 'Scott' like to criticise others' driving but you can't even obey simple traffic instructions yourself. No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're all driving aggressively and competitively. Graham >You guys are awesome. I've noticed that you, 'Scott' like to criticise >others' driving but you can't even obey simple traffic instructions >yourself. I have no intentions of obeying your instructions unless they happen to coincide with the law. >No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're >all driving aggressively and competitively. Where "aggressively and competitively" is defined as "contrary to the way Graham the Pooh Bear demands?" SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're > all driving aggressively and competitively. You ever drive in Rome? Mexico City? Oh, wait; those aren't inside the Hundred Acre Wood, are they? Never mind. Go suck down some 'hunny'. -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that) > > No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're > > all driving aggressively and competitively. > > You ever drive in Rome? Mexico City? Oh, wait; those aren't inside > the Hundred Acre Wood, are they? Never mind. Go suck down some > 'hunny'. Your suggestion is that because some other countries also exhibit aggressive driving makes it a good idea ? Graham > > > No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're > > > all driving aggressively and competitively. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Your suggestion is that because some other countries also exhibit aggressive > driving makes it a good idea ? No; my suggestion is that you don't have a clue what you're talking about. You have yet to suggest facts indicating otherwise. -- C.R. Krieger (Been there; done that) >> I stated clearly that the Ryder and van stopped for a YELLOW, not a >> red, light. > >Rule of the road: if you *can* stop for a yellow, you *must*. Not in IL, and probably not in IN, which are the two states in which 223rem was most likely to have been when that accident occurred. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > I was in a group of 4 vehicles approaching a light on a 55 mph, 4 lane > divided [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Ryder > reached the intersection as the light turned yellow. Missing from this story are the real distances. If the semi and Ryder had indeed reached the intersection travelling at 55mph there is no way they (or any other vehicle) could have stopped in that short a distance. From that speed they would have had to have been many car lengths back to stop outside the intersection. > To my surprise, both the van and the Ryder brake hard and stop. They > had no > reason to stop, they could have gotten through and I could have gotten > through as > well since that intersection has long yellows. Ignoring the distances if the Ryder truck had a yellow and the distance to stop then he did right. > I had no problem stopping behind the van, but the semi driver had to > brake as > well as steer rigtht to avoid rearending the Ryder and ended up > jacknifing and > overturning (the trailer did not overturn). The semi-driver was following too close...as they tend to do at highway speeds. > It happened so very fast... And when in a few seconds the light turned > green, the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > IMO, the culprit was the Ryder driver. No - he stopped as he should have. It's up to the drivers behind to maintain a safe distance for stopping. > The lessons I learned? Minimize the amount of time you drive > in the proximity of a semi (had I been lingering near him, I'd been > hit). Good advice for many reasons. > Dont brake while frontgating a semi. Get out of the way would be another. > Expect drivers of large rental > trucks > to be very dangerous. Actually, expect that large trucks do not handle like, brake like or have the driver visibility of passenger cars would be better advice. > And to not tailgate. Good advice. To make a long story short: the van (in front of me) and the Ryder (in front of the semi) reached the intersection close to the moment when the light turned yellow. They *stopped on yellow* instead of continuing as I (and the semi driver) expected. That intersection has LONG yellows. I probably wasnt doing 60 mph anymore at that point, more like 50 mph and was far enough from the van to have no problem stopping (my car has excellent brakes and I have new tires). The semi couldnt stop. > To make a long story short: the van (in front of me) and the Ryder (in > front of the semi) > reached the intersection close to the moment when the light turned > yellow. They > *stopped on yellow* instead of continuing as I (and the semi driver) > expected. Big mistake on your part and the semi driver's. > That intersection has LONG yellows. And those drivers are expected to have some psychic knowledge of this and ignore the yellow light ? > I probably wasnt doing 60 mph anymore at that point, more like 50 mph > and was far enough from the > van to have no problem stopping (my car has excellent brakes and I > have new tires). > The semi couldnt stop. The semi was travelling too close or too fast. Graham You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long yellows. > You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long > yellows. Always ? Invariably ? Every single junction ? Come one get real. Just stop on yellow ( we call it amber ) and avoid accidents. Graham The length of the yellow *has to* be related to the speed limit. These things are not set at random. > The length of the yellow *has to* be related to the speed limit. These > things are not set at random. Of course ! To accomadate those drivers who are very close to the interesction who aren't able to stop *INSTANTLY*. The time to stop will be related to road speeds. That much is obvious and common sense ! Every driver should know that a yellow/ amber means 'don't enter the junction unless you're already right on it' though. I suggest you read this before making yourself appear more silly still..... " Running a red light is no joke. Many people are killed or badly injured each year because someone cruised through a red light. You may be in a hurry, you may think the light doesn't stay green long enough. Whatever your excuse, it's no reason to endanger the lives of other motorists, passengers, pedestrians or bicyclists who may be in that intersection. The law is clear on how you must behave at traffic signals:........................................ ****Yellow**** ****When you see a yellow light with or following the green light, you should stop****............... before entering the intersection unless you're so close to it that a stop may not be made safely. A yellow light does NOT mean it's time to speed up and race through the intersection. That's how people get killed. " http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/motorist/behaviors/aggressive/red-lights.htm REPEAT " When you see a yellow light................... you should stop " Graham > The length of the yellow *has to* be related to the speed limit. These > things are not set at random. doesn't *have to.* Should. But doesn't have to. Google "red light cameras." nate >> You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long >> yellows. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Every single junction ? By law -- specifically, the federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. >Come one get real. Just stop on yellow ( we call it amber ) and avoid >accidents. If you enjoy being rear-ended, anyway. >>> You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long >>> yellows. >> >> Always ? >> Invariably ? >> Every single junction ? > By law -- specifically, the federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control > Devices. The MUTCD contains a lot of provisions that are widely ignored and/or flouted. > >> You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long > >> yellows. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > If you enjoy being rear-ended, anyway. It seems that your advice to deal with bad driving ( tailgating ) is to repond with more bad driving ( risking running a red ) . Very sensible ! NOT Graham >> >Come one get real. Just stop on yellow ( we call it amber ) and avoid >> >accidents. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >It seems that your advice to deal with bad driving ( tailgating ) is to repond >with more bad driving ( risking running a red ) . Traveling through a yellow isn't bad driving. Unnecessarily stopping for one it. > >> >Come one get real. Just stop on yellow ( we call it amber ) and avoid > >> >accidents. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Traveling through a yellow isn't bad driving. Unnecessarily stopping > for one it. Discouraging stopping for a yellow is bad advice. In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! Graham >> Traveling through a yellow isn't bad driving. Unnecessarily stopping >> for one it. > >Discouraging stopping for a yellow is bad advice. Fine. When the a.shole in the half-full gasoline tanker is tailgating you just as it has started raining, YOU put on the anchors when you see a fresh yellow light. >In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more >fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! If one junction uses a roundabout and another a traffic light, they're pretty obviously not at all similar. > >> Traveling through a yellow isn't bad driving. Unnecessarily stopping > >> for one it. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > you just as it has started raining, YOU put on the anchors when you > see a fresh yellow light. Once again you have to resort to examples of bad driving to 'excuse' your advice. > >In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more > >fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! > > If one junction uses a roundabout and another a traffic light, they're > pretty obviously not at all similar. Similar in the context of the number of lanes and quantity of traffic using them. Roundabouts are inherently safer and may actually have much better traffic flow. Graham >> >> Traveling through a yellow isn't bad driving. Unnecessarily stopping >> >> for one it. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Once again you have to resort to examples of bad driving to 'excuse' your advice. Bad driving is all around. If there were no bad driving, it wouldn't matter, safety wise, whether you stopped for the yellow or not; none of the cross traffic would run the red and hit you, and no one would be tailgating you. So the only difference would be that you'd not make an unnecessary stop if you didn't stop for the yellow. If you add bad driving to the mix, I find that tailgating and not paying attention are far more prevalant than running a _stale_ red. So bad driving tilts the balance even more in favor of proceeding through the yellow. >> >In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more >> >fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Similar in the context of the number of lanes and quantity of traffic using them. Yes, and an apple and an orange are similar in size and weight, too. > In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more > fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! It would be nice if there were more roundabouts here. The problem is that people here don't know the difference between a traffic-circle and a roundabout (traffic circles have the asinine ROW rule where entering traffic has priority over in-circle traffic). This has resulted in a general opposition to roundabouts because of the bad connotation that traffic circles have. Traffic engineers here are also wary of building multilane versions of them designed for higher speeds because of their preconceptions that drivers here are not capable of handling them. The only roundabout that I have first hand experience with cannot be negotiated at more than 15 mph (really tight radius). I have also observed that most drivers more or less deal with roundabouts in a correct way. I have also observed drivers approaching a roundabout and switch on their *left* turn signal (why?). Those same drivers stop despite the fact that there's no traffic to yield to. Other times, while in the roundabout, I've had a few problems with drivers failing to yield to me (though I suspect that problem also exists in the UK to some extent). But, if roundabouts were more widespread, then I suspect that most of these problems will go away. > > In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more > > fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > But, if roundabouts were more widespread, then I suspect that most of > these problems will go away. The UK more or less 'pioneered' roundabouts. Essential to their working is the 'yield at entry' rule. Traffic already on the roundabout can continue to its exit. They work brilliantly and become intuitive in no time at all. When traffic is quiet there's no waiting for lights and you can normally proceed without delay. When traffic's busier, they work well to give everyone equal priority. I see they are gradually being adopted by some highways engineers in the US now. Graham > > > In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more > > > fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > Graham Indeed they are. Spokane WA just finished one last year to cure the 'high accident' rate at one intersection. Quite a media blitz explaining the rules. Yes it is 'yield before entering'. I haven't heard of one accident there since. They also have at least one other (I think there are more). I am all for them. Harry K > > > > In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic lights have 10x more > > > > fatal accidents than similar Europeans ones using roundabouts ! [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > heard of one accident there since. They also have at least one other > (I think there are more). I am all for them. I think roundabouts are inherently safer than signal intersections, so I would not be surprised by a large reduction of fatal accidents when a signal intersection is redesigned as a roundabout. One problem I do find with roundabouts both in Europe and in the U.S. is that while they work well on roads with moderate or light traffic, on roads with very heavy traffic, roundabouts tend to cause worse congestion and delay than signal intersections would. Another problem with building new roundabouts in the U.S. is that a properly designed roundabout usually takes up more real estate than a regular signal intersection, limiting the number of places where a properly designed roundabout could be installed. - Peter >> > > > In another group I discovered that US junctions using traffic >> > > > lights have 10x more fatal accidents than similar Europeans [quoted text clipped - 63 lines] > > - Peter I like roundabouts for all the reasons stated. But I also agree that they take up space. They put one in around here over a year ago and it works great. It's just they took one whole house and most of another's front yard to do it. I guess it's best when it part of a totally new road or a total rebuild. Doug > > > > But, if roundabouts were more widespread, then I suspect that most of > > > > these problems will go away. [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > on roads with very heavy traffic, roundabouts tend to cause worse > congestion and delay than signal intersections would. Where the traffic is *really * heavy the entrance to the roundabout is sometimes supplemented by signals to regulate the flow onto the roundabout. > Another problem with building new roundabouts in the U.S. is that a > properly designed roundabout usually takes up more real estate than a > regular signal intersection, limiting the number of places where a > properly designed roundabout could be installed. We also have 'mini-roundabouts' to deal with that scenario. Graham Roundabouts work well iff the vehicles in the roundabout signal their intention to exit, sparing the others who wait to enter an un-necessary wait. Otherwise, you can wait for ever, and needlessly. Of course, even is you see a vehicle in the roundabout signaling to exit the roundabout, do you really dare to pull in the roundabout in front of him? Not in the US you dont. > Roundabouts work well iff the vehicles in the roundabout signal their > intention to exit, sparing [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > exit the roundabout, do you really dare to > pull in the roundabout in front of him? Not in the US you dont. Once again, all your arguments seem to revolve around excuses for bad driving. They work just fine in Europe. Maybe we're simply better drivers ? Graham US drivers do not use turn signals with any consistency and drivers dont take turn signals seriously. >They work just fine in Europe. Maybe we're simply better drivers ? I would agree with that. Europeans generally take driving and driver education more seriously. If the typical American driver had the skills and the lane discipline of the typical European driver, I suspect I'd have far less to complain about. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > It would be nice if there were more roundabouts here. The problem is > that people here don't know the difference between a traffic-circle and > a roundabout (traffic circles have the asinine ROW rule where entering > traffic has priority over in-circle traffic). Wow, that sounds really bad. What is the point of such a construct? > Traffic engineers here are also wary of building multilane versions of > them designed for higher speeds because of their preconceptions that > drivers here are not capable of handling them. The only roundabout that > I have first hand experience with cannot be negotiated at more than 15 > mph (really tight radius). Might be a good way of helping Darwin out. Especially when beater Mercs run off the side of it and flip. > I have also observed that most drivers more or less deal with > roundabouts in a correct way. I have also observed drivers > approaching a roundabout and switch on their *left* turn signal (why?). They're morons. The correct move is to indicate left once you have passed the roundabout exit just before yours (so that traffic entering from your exit knows it can go without waiting for you). But this is too much for some peoples' mental faculties and they do dumb sh.t like indicating left the whole time, or indicating right as they exit the roundabout. > Those same drivers stop despite the fact that there's no traffic to yield to. Yes, there are as many yield-impaired people as there are merge-impaired people. At the start of a motorway in my area, there is a large 4-way intersection. To cut a long story short, the motorway has a very wide left (slow) lane at the start. So it is easy for people entering it from the slip lane to merge with people coming through from the other side of the intersection turning or going straight through onto the motorway. But all the time, people just stop halfway along the slip lane waiting for traffic to clear. Now they've added a traffic light to the slip lane that's red when traffic is coming from the other side. Sigh. > Other times, while in the roundabout, I've had a few problems with > drivers failing to yield to me (though I suspect that problem also > exists in the UK to some extent). If you are the sort to not slow down at the yield sign if there is no car to yield to, then you catch people who should yield to you by surprise (they enter the roundabout assuming that you're going to slow down a bit at least). > But, if roundabouts were more widespread, then I suspect that > most of these problems will go away. They work best at medium traffic volumes. They cause trouble if the traffic volume is large and one entry has more traffic coming from it than the other entries. Then all the traffic at the entry after the main road is stuck until a car happens to come from an entry before the main road. >>The problem is that people here don't know the difference between a >>traffic-circle and a roundabout (traffic circles have the asinine ROW >>rule where entering traffic has priority over in-circle traffic). > Wow, that sounds really bad. What is the point of such a construct? This may help explain the reasoning: <http://www.alaskaroundabouts.com/history.html> >>Traffic engineers here are also wary of building multilane versions of >>them designed for higher speeds because of their preconceptions that >>drivers here are not capable of handling them. The only roundabout that >>I have first hand experience with cannot be negotiated at more than 15 >>mph (really tight radius). > Might be a good way of helping Darwin out. Especially when beater > Mercs run off the side of it and flip. Except that such roundabouts cannot be used for major intersections with higher speed traffic. >>I have also observed drivers approaching a roundabout and switch on >>their *left* turn signal (why?). > They're morons. The correct move is to indicate left once you have > passed the roundabout exit just before yours (so that traffic entering > from your exit knows it can go without waiting for you). Well, it's even worse than what you think considering we drive on the right side of the road. From your description, it appears that I start signalling a little late when going through the roundabout. I'll keep that in mind the next time I drive through there. > But this is too much for some peoples' mental faculties and they do > dumb sh.t like indicating left the whole time, or indicating right as > they exit the roundabout. I've yet to observe anyone signalling to exit a roundabout here. > Yes, there are as many yield-impaired people as there are > merge-impaired people. At the start of a motorway in my area, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > for traffic to clear. Now they've added a traffic light to the slip > lane that's red when traffic is coming from the other side. Sigh. Sometimes those types of situations "trick" me into stopping when it's not necessary when I'm not familiar with the area. This comes from the fact that a merge lane is not always available. The solution to that problem IMO is to not post a yield sign. > If you are the sort to not slow down at the yield sign if there is no > car to yield to, then you catch people who should yield to you by > surprise (they enter the roundabout assuming that you're going to > slow down a bit at least). That doesn't quite make sense. If I'm in the roundabout, yield signs don't apply to me. If I'm outside and see no cars are coming, I don't really slow down more than I need to to negotiate the roundabout. If I do see a car on the near side of the roundabout, I slow down and try to get behind him. >>But, if roundabouts were more widespread, then I suspect that >>most of these problems will go away. > They work best at medium traffic volumes. They cause trouble > if the traffic volume is large and one entry has more traffic coming > from it than the other entries. Then all the traffic at the entry > after the main road is stuck until a car happens to come from > an entry before the main road. That's true. IIRC, traffic engineers here say a single lane roundabout handles up to 25,000 vehicles per day (VPD). >>>I have also observed drivers approaching a roundabout and switch on >>>their *left* turn signal (why?). [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Well, it's even worse than what you think considering we drive on the > right side of the road. Sorry, forgot for a moment that you drive on the wrong side of the road ;) Here's the rules in NZ where we drive on the left and go clockwise around roundabouts: - Signal right when entering the roundabout if you're going to take an exit further than 180 degrees around from where you entered. - Signal left when you pass the last exit before yours. - If you are not on the roundabout, you must yield to traffic already on it, AND traffic entering from the next entry before yours. The idea is to maximise traffic flow by letting other people waiting to enter the roundabout, know whether or not you are going to get in their way. Actually I think the first rule is "signal right if you aren't taking the first exit" in the lawbook, but most people do it as I described because it's a bit weird to signal right when you are going straight on a small roundabout. On large roundabouts, signalling is important. I used to live near a monster one (it had 3 lanes and 6 exits), it was very difficult to navigate safely :) >> Yes, there are as many yield-impaired people as there are >> merge-impaired people. At the start of a motorway in my area, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > fact that a merge lane is not always available. The solution to that > problem IMO is to not post a yield sign. I should have been more clear; there was no yield sign there. People would just stop partway through the lane where they expected the yield sign to be (or usually, a few metres further on). >> If you are the sort to not slow down at the yield sign if there is no >> car to yield to, then you catch people who should yield to you by [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > don't apply to me. If I'm outside and see no cars are coming, I don't > really slow down more than I need to to negotiate the roundabout. I'm talking about when you are approaching a roundabout, and there's a guy who is also approaching the next entry around. Often he will see you coming but enter the roundabout anyway, because he assumes you're going to slow down and check for traffic. Also I see a lot of timidity. Suppose two people are both stopped at the yield signs. Now, the person on the later entry knows he must yield to the other guy. But, if they both went then they would miss each other by a long way so it isn't even a yield situation. Nevertheless, the later entry guy often enables. >> You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long >> yellows. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Every single junction ? Yes. If it doesn't, it's in violation of the law. SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > >> You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long > >> yellows. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Yes. If it doesn't, it's in violation of the law. Cite, Knucklehead. ----- - gpsman > You dont need to psychic to know that a high speed road has long > yellows. Unless there is an RLC present.... Seriously though, yellow light timing can be rather random. Higher speed generally longer than lower speed but that's all that can be counted on. [assuming vehicles ahead will proceed through a "fresh" yellow light] > Big mistake on your part and the semi driver's. I guess the law is different in the UK, but in the US, according to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), a steady yellow light indicates that one's right of way is about to end. IOW, one still has the right of way through the intersection on a yellow light, just as they would with a green light. It's only when the light is red that one no longer has the right of way (and that's only when entering the intersection). If the light changes to red while one is _in_ the intersection, one still has the right of way over cross traffic. > [assuming vehicles ahead will proceed through a "fresh" yellow light] > > Big mistake on your part and the semi driver's. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > the intersection). If the light changes to red while one is _in_ the > intersection, one still has the right of way over cross traffic. That much is no different. Recommending that you should continue on yellow is plain stupid. Graham >> That intersection has LONG yellows. > >And those drivers are expected to have some psychic knowledge of this and >ignore the yellow light ? Here in America the yellow light times are set according to certain standards. A major factor in the formula is the posted speed limit on the road - the higher the limit, the longer the yellow light stays on. For example, in CA, a road with a posted SL of 55 MPH would have a yellow light at least 5 seconds long. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/signtech/signdel/policy/05-01.pdf SignatureWhat the heck, I'll play too. - Dave > To make a long story short: the van (in front of me) and the Ryder (in > front of the semi) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > expected. That > intersection has LONG yellows. How in the world would a truck driver know that particular light hasd a long yellow. > I probably wasnt doing 60 mph anymore at that point, more like 50 mph > and was far enough from the > van to have no problem stopping (my car has excellent brakes and I > have new tires). > The semi couldnt stop. How in the world would a truck driver know that particular light hasd a long yellow. -------------------------- Easy: we were on a 55mph divided highway interesecting a secondary road. 55mph highways tend to have long yellows. > How in the world would a truck driver know that particular light hasd a > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > road. > 55mph highways tend to have long yellows. *TEND TO* doesn't equal 'always have' ! You were simply **BETTING** on the timing of the lights. A VERY UNSAFE PRACTICE ! This is *exactly* how accidents happen. Not a single person has agreed with your idea about 'beating the red' so far I'm pleased to see. Graham Most drivers do not stop on yellow. > Most drivers do not stop on yellow. What 'most drivers' do isn't the issue. It seems that most drivers you know a haven't a clue about safe driving and want to get involved in accidents. Or ( for once I'll agree with 'Judy' here ) they want to have crashes - since 'running a red' isn't accidental at all, it's simple wilful negligence. Note that........ http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/motorist/behaviors/aggressive/red-lights.htm *DOESN'T SAY * " When you see a yellow light you should nail the gas ! " Graham Most drivers do not stop on yellow. > Most drivers do not stop on yellow. They are bad drivers then. That is no excuse whatever. FYI British drivers *do* stop on amber. British roads are also among the very safest in the world ( low accident rate ) despite having very high traffic density in a lot of the country. Perhaps you'd like to mull over that ? It's called cause and effect btw. Graham FYI British drivers *do* stop on amber. British roads are also among the very safest in the world ( low accident rate ) despite having very high traffic density in a lot of the country. Perhaps you'd like to mull over that ? It's called cause and effect btw. ------------- So if we started stopping on yellow we'd also have a very low accident rate? :) > FYI British drivers *do* stop on amber. > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > So if we started stopping on yellow we'd also have a very low > accident rate? :) That would be part of the overall picture. Just reading here, I note that US interesections seem to have more than their fair share |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message