 |
 | 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 2008Robert Moses anti-speeding stance
Master builder Robert Moses was one of the country's foremost expert and advocate of superhighway construction. He was respected and consulted worldwide for highway projects his entire life. But many highway people may not be familiar with the fact that Moses was strongly against excessive highway speeds and often wrote about it. He resisted pressure to raise speed limits on parkways directly under his control. Moses has been gone for a while now. I took some extracts from one of his articles and am posting it here for discussion. Obviously his figures may (or may not) be out of date, so if anyone knows of an authoritative source of more recent figures, please do share them with us. Moses said, "The automobile is a lethal projectile of any make, size, weight, age, and condition operated by drivers of all sorts, ages, skills, conditions of health, mental, and moral attributes and with widely varying reactions, temperaments, susceptibilities, dependabilities, and responsibilities. Fully half of all our traffic deaths are due to speed." He advocated "more drastic regulation of speed without regard to unrealistic, theorectical design limits and political pressure for higher limits". Moses also said, "The Pennsylvania Turnpike has a rate of 8.0 per 100,000,000 vehicle miles. The slightly slower New Jersey Turnpike has a rate of 6.5. The slower New York State highways is 6.0. On the still slower Long Island parkways the rate is 1.0." [Relative speeds at the time he wrote this.] Moses provided the following tables comparing speed limits and death rates: Speed Date Limit Rate 40 4.2 45 4.5 50 6.7 55 8.1 Speed Travel time Chances for fatal accident for 400 miles 45 8 hrs 54 min 1 in 16 55 7 hrs 18 min 1 in 12 65 6 hrs 10 min 1 in 6 > Master builder Robert Moses was one of the country's foremost expert > and advocate of superhighway construction. He was respected and [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > 55 7 hrs 18 min 1 in 12 > 65 6 hrs 10 min 1 in 6 Too bad he never had the opportunity to visit Germany. nate  Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > Master builder Robert Moses was one of the country's foremost expert > and advocate of superhighway construction. He was respected and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > He resisted pressure to raise speed limits on parkways directly under > his control. So a speed kills control freak wanted highways built with sleep inducing limits. He's been proven wrong by the Germans. Data trumps theory. >> Master builder Robert Moses was one of the country's foremost expert >> and advocate of superhighway construction. He was respected and [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >So a speed kills control freak wanted highways built with sleep inducing >limits. He's been proven wrong by the Germans. Data trumps theory. What a wonderful guy. Without him, LA and SF wouldn't have the Dodgers and the Giants.... -- "The greatest thing of trucking, apart from knocking down a biker... Is swinging up a roundabout and picking up a hiker! You're chatting up that piece of skirt sitting by your side When you pop the crucial question, 'A ride for a riiiiide...." --from Not the 9 O'clock News On Jul 23, 12:07 am, necromancer > What a wonderful guy. Without him, LA and SF wouldn't have the Dodgers > and the Giants.... Not true. The record is clear it was the owner of the Dodgers, who wanted out of NYC and that Los Angeles gave him a wonderful deal. There is always talk about the so-called wonderful benefits of having a sports team. But no one ever takes a hard look at the cost to the city for providing a stadium and assistance to the team. Seems to me that major league professional sports teams, being quite profitable, ouught to finance and build their stadia with private funds only, not municipal assistance of any kind. Certainly not bridge toll money, as is the case in some places. On Jul 22, 10:36 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > So a speed kills control freak wanted highways built with sleep inducing > limits. He's been proven wrong by the Germans. Data trumps theory. Moses was referring to US highways and US drivers, not those elsewhere. Data trumps theory? Moses provided data to prove his point. In addition, Moses had extensive experince _operating_ superhighways in his capacity as commissioner, as well as reviewing the operating results of other highways for which he was a consultant. Moses' article had extensive comments about accidents and traffic safety that were too volumnious to transcribe. I would suggest Moses had more than enough data to support his assertions. > On Jul 22, 10:36 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Moses was referring to US highways and US drivers, not those > elsewhere. Human beings are the same everywhere. If a German can drive properly so can an American. many americans are genetically German anyway! You can't slow things down to protect idiots. All you end up doing is building better idiots and you have to go slower yet. Compensating for idiotcy is a foolish and wrong-headed game. > Data trumps theory? Moses provided data to prove his point. So present it. Not refined and massaged results. > In addition, Moses had extensive experince _operating_ superhighways > in his capacity as commissioner, as well as reviewing the operating > results of other highways for which he was a consultant. Um, being a burecrat working for the government bodies that benefit from underposted speed limits just proves more bias. > Moses' article had extensive comments about accidents and traffic > safety that were too volumnious to transcribe. I would suggest Moses > had more than enough data to support his assertions. I would guess it is probably the same clap-trap and manipulations the speed kills types have used for decades in the US. On Jul 23, 1:38 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Human beings are the same everywhere. Are you in a "Stupidest Post to Usenet" contest...? > If a German can drive properly so > can an American. Germans get a lot better training, and enjoy better enforcement... (including a shitload of cameras) because they pay half their income to taxes, and the other half for fuel. I don't know what they spend the third half on... rent, I suppose. > You can't slow things down to protect idiots. Lol. Speeding things up for idiots bodes well for... whom, Sparky? > All you end up doing is > building better idiots and you have to go slower yet. I don't think you have a scientifically documented example of this ever occurring. > Compensating for > idiotcy is a foolish and wrong-headed game. Why? Because it takes a few more minutes to go from A to B? It seems a small price for remaining alive and/or unmaimed. > Um, being a burecrat working for the government bodies that benefit from > underposted speed limits just proves more bias. With which private highway designer/administrator are you familiar, you incredible f.cking dumbass? > I would guess it is probably the same clap-trap and manipulations the > speed kills types have used for decades in the US. If velocity at the moment of impact is unrelated to driving fatalities, what kills the people in a crash? ----- - gpsman On Jul 23, 1:38 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Human beings are the same everywhere. If a German can drive properly so > can an American. many americans are genetically German anyway! Apples and oranges. > You can't slow things down to protect idiots. All you end up doing is > building better idiots and you have to go slower yet. Compensating for > idiotcy is a foolish and wrong-headed game. What exactly is the definition of an "idiot" in this context? > > Data trumps theory? Moses provided data to prove his point. > > So present it. Not refined and massaged results. The post presented fatality rates at various speeds, and fatality rates on three major highway systems, as stated by Moses. You're certainly welcome to provide your substantiated figures against his if you think his are wrong. > > In addition, Moses had extensive experince _operating_ superhighways > > in his capacity as commissioner, as well as reviewing the operating > > results of other highways for which he was a consultant. > > Um, being a burecrat working for the government bodies that benefit from > underposted speed limits just proves more bias. I'm pretty sure EVERYONE who knew Robert Moses would not agree with your statement. Moses was not a bureaucrat, nor did he work "for" government bodies, rather, he was the boss man. He had no time to waste on bureaucracy. Your claim of "benefits from underposted speed limits" is not substantiated in the case of Moses empire, indeed, it proves your own bias. [Maybe you should be pushing for roads owned, built, and operated totally by independent private companies per your specifications if you hate the government so much.] > > Moses' article had extensive comments about accidents and traffic > > safety that were too volumnious to transcribe. I would suggest Moses > > had more than enough data to support his assertions. > > I would guess it is probably the same clap-trap and manipulations the > speed kills types have used for decades in the US. Moses was a prolific writer with several books and numerous articles to his credit. Anyone into highways would be familiar with his work. To say Moses offers the "same clap trap and manipulations" is not supported by Moses' record in highways. Many of the engineers who built the Interstate highway system learned at Moses' feet. > On Jul 23, 1:38 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Apples and oranges. Um no. Humans driving on limited access highways. Same and same. >> You can't slow things down to protect idiots. All you end up doing is >> building better idiots and you have to go slower yet. Compensating for >> idiotcy is a foolish and wrong-headed game. > What exactly is the definition of an "idiot" in this context? Oh geebus... go back read the last decade of r.a.d. If you dumb down the system all that does is surpress the bell curve further down as most people will not put any more effort in than the minimum. Lower the minimum, push down the average. Building a better idiot through lowest common denominator practices. >> > Data trumps theory? Moses provided data to prove his point. >> >> So present it. Not refined and massaged results. > The post presented fatality rates at various speeds, and fatality > rates on three major highway systems, as stated by Moses. You're > certainly welcome to provide your substantiated figures against his if > you think his are wrong. Those numbers were meaningless massaged results with no basis for comparison. Where's the data? >> > In addition, Moses had extensive experince _operating_ superhighways >> > in his capacity as commissioner, as well as reviewing the operating >> > results of other highways for which he was a consultant. >> Um, being a burecrat working for the government bodies that benefit from >> underposted speed limits just proves more bias. > I'm pretty sure EVERYONE who knew Robert Moses would not agree with > your statement. Moses was not a bureaucrat, nor did he work "for" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > built, and operated totally by independent private companies per your > specifications if you hate the government so much.] You just said his career was built on being a consulant for highways which are built through the government political process. It's not my fault that you don't understand the whole picture. If you want to have a career in highway building you tow the government line. The government line is 'speed kills' >> > Moses' article had extensive comments about accidents and traffic >> > safety that were too volumnious to transcribe. I would suggest Moses >> > had more than enough data to support his assertions. >> >> I would guess it is probably the same clap-trap and manipulations the >> speed kills types have used for decades in the US. > Moses was a prolific writer with several books and numerous articles > to his credit. Anyone into highways would be familiar with his work. > To say Moses offers the "same clap trap and manipulations" is not > supported by Moses' record in highways. Then present something meaningful. > Many of the engineers who built the Interstate highway system learned > at Moses' feet. So he's responsible for engineering by table instead of by data? The odd thing about highway engineers is that data doesn't seem to matter, the table based on what must be a half-broken model T ford driven by a blind 90 year old woman in poor health is what sets the sign numbers. On Jul 23, 11:33 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Human beings are the same everywhere. If a German can drive properly so > >> can an American. many americans are genetically German anyway! > > > Apples and oranges. > > Um no. Humans driving on limited access highways. Same and same. There are many tangible and intangible differences between the U.S. and other countries (except perhaps Canada). Other countries have different cultures which emphasize different things, and that will result in differences in both skill and attitude of drivers. In some cases they may have better drivers, in some cases worse. "Limited access highway" covers a very broad definition of road, from a 1930s narrow curvy parkway with non-existent ramps to a 1970s broad superhighway with the latest engineering. It's certainly not comparable within the US so it can't be comparable to another country. Another issue is traffic volume. Again, highways in the US carry very diverse volumes of traffic; so that is not a comparable aspect. Please be reminded that it has been often stated that no one cares about speed on a wide open expressway in the middle of nowhere, with unlimited sight lines and not a car in sight. In such a condition you could safely drive as fast as your car could go. But the reality is that most highway experiences aren't like that, that roads are not perfect by a long shot and there are other vehicle, sometimes a great many other vehicles, sharing the road with you. > > What exactly is the definition of an "idiot" in this context? > > Oh geebus... go back read the last decade of r.a.d. "Read the last decade"? Sorry, that's too vague. If there have been that much posting activity, I can't help but wonder if actually there isn't much agreement on the definition. OR, if there is agreement, why can't the definition be summarized in a few clear paragraphs? > If you dumb down the > system all that does is surpress the bell curve further down as most > people will not put any more effort in than the minimum. Lower the > minimum, push down the average. Building a better idiot through lowest > common denominator practices. This is an interesting opinion. Is it substantiated anywhere as related to driver skills? > Those numbers were meaningless massaged results with no basis for > comparison. Where's the data? Actually, Moses provided fatality rates by speed, and also rates on three specific highway systems. Please see the original post. > You just said his career was built on being a consulant for highways > which are built through the government political process. It's not my > fault that you don't understand the whole picture. If you want to have a > career in highway building you tow the government line. The government > line is 'speed kills' Actually, I've never met anyone passionately interested in highways who never heard of Robert Moses. Frankly I'm surprised you have not heard of him with all the research you have done, nor heard of the Pulitzer winning prize biography of him ("The Power Broker" by Robert Caro). Anyway, it is impossible to summarize Moses long and successful 40 year career as a highway builder and operator (and builder of lots of other things) in just a few sentences. Suffice it to say Moses did not "tow the government line" to have a career. Moses was totally independent and gave orders to others, he did not take them. Moses built his highways his way. He built roads no one else could do. In any event, your vague unsubstantiated attacks on Moses as a 'bureaucrat' do not diminish his quoted figures one bit. In essence, you're asking us to take your opinion over his. > On Jul 23, 11:33 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >> Um no. Humans driving on limited access highways. Same and same. > There are many tangible and intangible differences between the U.S. > and other countries (except perhaps Canada). Other countries have > different cultures which emphasize different things, and that will > result in differences in both skill and attitude of drivers. In some > cases they may have better drivers, in some cases worse. Again. > "Limited access highway" covers a very broad definition of road, from > a 1930s narrow curvy parkway with non-existent ramps to a 1970s broad > superhighway with the latest engineering. It's certainly not > comparable within the US so it can't be comparable to another country. Now you are trying to 'win' with semantic games. A parkway isn't what was meant and you damn well know it. The autobahn is safer than the interstate and uses less land. Those original 1930s limited access highways like the PA turnpike supported 100+mph speeds in 1930s cars and it's a piece-of-crap compared to modern interstates let alone autobahn. > Another issue is traffic volume. Again, highways in the US carry very > diverse volumes of traffic; so that is not a comparable aspect. The autobahn has everything from large trucks to 2CVs and motorcycles.Every nation has varried traffic volumes and varied vehicles. You are grasping at straws. I've driven in heavy traffic at 90-100mph and I was middle-range to SLOW. But, people paid attention to the task and drove properly. It was some of the safest driving I've ever experienced. The problem is that in the USA it's about stupid numbers on signs, not about _DRIVING_. > Please be reminded that it has been often stated that no one cares > about speed on a wide open expressway in the middle of nowhere, with [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > perfect by a long shot and there are other vehicle, sometimes a great > many other vehicles, sharing the road with you. There is no reason 100mph cannot be an average cruising speed with traffic other than the astounding stupidity that is allowed and encouraged on US roads. Telling people to go slow and allowing all the unsafe moves is pure idiotcy. 100mph or 55mph vehicles are totalled and people get hurt or die. The concept of going slow to avoid the moron or arsehole is entirely a.s-backwards. It says do-what-ever-you-want, it's the other guy's responsibility to avoid you. It leads to the me-first-fsck-you driving on the road. It's part of a larger breakdown of civil society. Concentrating on speed is idiotcy if your concerns are safety and traffic flow. Lower speed is except in special bottleneck cases, irrelevant or counter productive to solving either problem. >> > What exactly is the definition of an "idiot" in this context? >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > isn't much agreement on the definition. OR, if there is agreement, > why can't the definition be summarized in a few clear paragraphs? Because I am sick and tired of doing it for every arrogant speed kills believer who wanders in here saying he's right and we all have to drive slow like he does for 'safety'. Maybe you're new to the internet, the general practice is for new comers to lurk and read the old material. It's even true on new-fangled web forums! >> If you dumb down the >> system all that does is surpress the bell curve further down as most >> people will not put any more effort in than the minimum. Lower the >> minimum, push down the average. Building a better idiot through lowest >> common denominator practices. > This is an interesting opinion. Is it substantiated anywhere as > related to driver skills? Oh buhgeebus. You're a perfect example. You've obviously stayed inside the claybrookian 'speed kills' bubble since you saw your first blood on the highway film at 15 years old. Look at what dumbing things down in any subject has produced. Name one thing where people are more knowledgable and better skilled because of it. Just one. My statement above is one that should get a snide 'captain obvious' remark not a demand for cite! >> Those numbers were meaningless massaged results with no basis for >> comparison. Where's the data? > Actually, Moses provided fatality rates by speed, and also rates on > three specific highway systems. Please see the original post. *sigh* You spewed numbers that say speed kills. That's not data. Those are results. Results that do not show where they came from. As far as I am concerned they were pulled out of your a.s. >> You just said his career was built on being a consulant for highways >> which are built through the government political process. It's not my >> fault that you don't understand the whole picture. If you want to have a >> career in highway building you tow the government line. The government >> line is 'speed kills' > Actually, I've never met anyone passionately interested in highways > who never heard of Robert Moses. Frankly I'm surprised you have not > heard of him with all the research you have done, nor heard of the > Pulitzer winning prize biography of him ("The Power Broker" by Robert > Caro). Funny, maybe that's because he was a builder not anyone who was in anway way someone who should have been dealing with traffic flow issues. From the wiki: "Moses himself never learned to drive[10], and his view of the automobile was shaped by the 1920s, when the car was thought of as entertainment and not a utilitarian lifestyle." His education was in POLITICAL SCIENCE. > In any event, your vague unsubstantiated attacks on Moses as a > 'bureaucrat' do not diminish his quoted figures one bit. In essence, > you're asking us to take your opinion over his. I should take the word of someone who never learned to drive a car and made his living on government projects on this subject is pure insanity. bureaucrat may not be the proper word. Probably too kind. The guy was a central planning I-know-what-is-best-for-you type. This guy's entuiire career was in the political area. Not science. Not engineering. He was a central power statist. Of course he was for low speed limits and controls. That was his political bent. Sorry. You play follow the leader and believe political math. I'll stick with engineering. On Jul 23, 3:54 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Now you are trying to 'win' with semantic games. A parkway isn't what > was meant and you damn well know it. The autobahn is safer > than the interstate and uses less land. Those original 1930s limited > access highways like the PA turnpike supported 100+mph speeds in > 1930s cars and it's a piece-of-crap compared to modern interstates let > alone autobahn. "Parkway" was explicitly referred to as one of the comparative baselines in the first post. The Pennsylvania Turnpike originally had no-speed-limit but after several deaths the legislature approved a 70 mph limit for autos and lower ones for trucks and buses (NYT May 1941). In any event, my focus is on Mr. Moses' report, which focused on US highways and their death rates due to speeding, not on foreign highways. A comparison between foreign roads would be an interesting topic for a separate thread. Certainly a comparison between fatality rates, overall accident rates, and accident severity indexes would be interesting and I look forward to your sharing those numbers with us in a separate thread. As to your statement of "win", this is not a competition, but rather a sharing of ideas among hopefully open-minded people. > There is no reason 100mph cannot be an average cruising speed with > traffic other than the astounding stupidity that is allowed and > encouraged on US roads. . . . Once again you mention "stupidity" without an exact definition in context. I think you'll find that there are many different opinions on what constitutes "stupid" or "idiotic" behavior. To give an example: some people think it's perfectly ok to talk on a cell phone, while others, backed up by studies, feel it is hazardous. (FWIW, Mr. Moses was offered a car phone long ago but refused it.) Another example would be the conflicts of left-lane exits and entrances, discussed elsewhere. I would suggest opening a separate thread with your specific definitions of such "stupid" activities or situations. Perhaps I should repost Mr. Moses' figures on fatalities from speed: Speed Death Limit Rate 40 4.2 45 4.5 50 6.7 55 8.1 [snip] > > This is an interesting opinion. Is it substantiated anywhere as > > related to driver skills? > > Oh buhgeebus. You're a perfect example. You've obviously stayed inside > the claybrookian 'speed kills' bubble since you saw your first blood on > the highway film at 15 years old. . . . Actually, I never saw any blood on the highway, thankfully, in a film or in real life. Nor do I know what "claybrookian" means. So, I fail to understand how you were able to reach such "obvious" conclusions. That doesn't sound like an engineering approach. By substantiation, I was expecting a reference to a respected book, magazine, or website. > *sigh* You spewed numbers that say speed kills. No, I quoted numbers provided by a highway expert showing the fatality rate of various speeds. The statement preceeding the table read, ""Fully half of all our traffic deaths are due to speed. The New York Good Roads Assocation has compiled the following tabulation" > That's not data. Those > are results. Results that do not show where they came from. As far as I > am concerned they were pulled out of your a.s. Obviously someone who has done as much research on the subject as you have would have his own tabulation at his fingertips. I certainly hope you'll share those numbers with us. But unless I missed it, I don't believe you have provided any numbers or any citations to support your own arguments. You're certainly entitled to your opinion and your own personal experiences, but then, nother readers might conclude your views "were pulled out of your a.s", especially when you use that tone of voice. > > Actually, I've never met anyone passionately interested in highways > > who never heard of Robert Moses. Frankly I'm surprised you have not [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > His education was in POLITICAL SCIENCE. You neglected to mention the following from Wiki: "Although he never held elected office, Moses was arguably the most powerful person in New York state government from the 1930s to the 1950s." This contradicts your statement that he was some lowly bureaucrat towing the "party line". "Moses succeeded in diverting funds to his Long Island parkway projects (the Northern State Parkway, the Southern State Parkway and the Wantagh State Parkway), although the Taconic State Parkway was later completed as well.[6] Moses is frequently given credit as the father of the New York State Parkway System from these projects." Moses was in charge of operating those parkways throughout his career, and his disciples continued his methods after his retirement. "From the 1930s to the 1960s, Robert Moses was responsible for the construction of the Throgs Neck, the Bronx-Whitestone, the Henry Hudson, and the Verrazano Narrows bridges. His other projects included the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, the Staten Island Expressway, the Cross-Bronx Expressway, the Belt Parkway, the Laurelton Parkway, and many more. Federal interest had shifted from parkway to freeway systems, and the new roads mostly conformed to the new vision" "Moses had direct influence outside the New York area as well. City planners in many smaller American cities hired Moses to design freeway networks for them in the 1940s and early 1950s. " "Numerous public works bear Moses's name. On Long Island: the Robert Moses Causeway, and Robert Moses State Park - Long Island. Also, at Niagara Falls: the Robert Moses Power Dam, and Robert Moses State Parkway follows the Niagara Gorge to Lewiston, New York and beyond. " > > In any event, your vague unsubstantiated attacks on Moses as a > > 'bureaucrat' do not diminish his quoted figures one bit. In essence, > > you're asking us to take your opinion over his. > I should take the word of someone who never learned to drive a car and > made his living on government projects on this subject is pure insanity. Your description of Moses is highly inaccurate. I have not heard of any writings complaining about how he built or operated his highway projects. Indeed, Caro goes to great lengths to describe the excellence in Moses' highway construction. As Caro pointed out, people came around worldwide to seek his advice. But given the intensity of your comment, perhaps we should ask if you've ever built any highways or operated them? Or, what highway builders or operators do you think we should be listening to? And if you think Moses is wrong, what are your numbers? > bureaucrat may not be the proper word. Probably too kind. The guy was a > central planning I-know-what-is-best-for-you type. Well, obviously highways require 'central planning' because otherwise none of them would connect up with each other or be coordinated. Moses' highways were not only interconnected with each other, but also highways of other administrations. > This guy's entuiire > career was in the political area. Well of course, since 99.9% of US highways are constructed by the government. Privately owned and operated highways were a failure, and it was only large government, with its large resources, that could come up with the big money necessary to build big roads. But if you think roads should be privately built and operated, you should start a separate thread and discuss that. > Not science. Not engineering. He was a > central power statist. Of course he was for low speed limits and > controls. That was his political bent. Where is the connection established and proven--starting in the 1930s to present--that a "statist" was for low speed limits? With all due respect, it is clear you know absolutely nothing about Moses career and accomplishments and I fail to see how you could reach any such automatic conclusion, particularly about his "political bent". As a reminder, Moses answered to no one. > Sorry. You play follow the leader and believe political math. I'll stick > with engineering. ??? Once again, obviously someone who has done as much research on the subject as you have would have his own tabulation at his fingertips. I certainly hope you'll share those numbers with us. > On Jul 23, 3:54 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > "Parkway" was explicitly referred to as one of the comparative > baselines in the first post. I don't care about the study of a political scientist who didn't drive. > The Pennsylvania Turnpike originally had no-speed-limit but after > several deaths the legislature approved a 70 mph limit for autos and > lower ones for trucks and buses (NYT May 1941). That wasn't the story in Rask's book. > In any event, my focus is on Mr. Moses' report, which focused on US > highways and their death rates due to speeding, not on foreign > highways. From a political creature who depended on taxpayer dollars who never drove and you presented results without units, not data, not analysis. When you present something beyond black box results I can discuss the study. > A comparison between foreign roads would be an interesting > topic for a separate thread. It's been done to death. The roads without speed restrictions win. Even in the US. When Montana returned to a speed limit fatalities skyrocketed. When the NMSL was repealed states that increased their speed limits had their fatality rates per mile driven drop MORE than the states that kept NMSL era speed limits. > Certainly a comparison between fatality > rates, overall accident rates, and accident severity indexes would be > interesting and I look forward to your sharing those numbers with us > in a separate thread. Montana. 1990s. > As to your statement of "win", this is not a competition, but rather a > sharing of ideas among hopefully open-minded people. You come into this group without reading spouting the same tired 'speed kills nonsense' that has been discussed to death in here. That's not an open minded discussion it's at the very best, 'not this sh.t again'. >> There is no reason 100mph cannot be an average cruising speed with >> traffic other than the astounding stupidity that is allowed and >> encouraged on US roads. . . . > Once again you mention "stupidity" without an exact definition in > context. I'm sorry you didn't take the time to lurk in the group like you were supposed to. It covers many different dumb behaviors from poor lane usage on up. I'm not here to catch you up on 15 years of group history. > Perhaps I should repost Mr. Moses' figures on fatalities from speed: > Speed Death [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 50 6.7 > 55 8.1 Meaningless results. Might as well be numbers pulled out of your a.s. There aren't even UNITS on the numbers. Death rate is what? WHat units? None are given. The above is gibberish. Nonsense. garbage. >> > This is an interesting opinion. Is it substantiated anywhere as >> > related to driver skills? >> Oh buhgeebus. You're a perfect example. You've obviously stayed inside >> the claybrookian 'speed kills' bubble since you saw your first blood on >> the highway film at 15 years old. . . . > Actually, I never saw any blood on the highway, thankfully, in a film > or in real life. Those films they've been showing everyone in US driver's ed classes in high schools across the nation since about 1950. > Nor do I know what "claybrookian" means. Joan Claybrook, of the Carter era. Largely responsible for the modern growth of the 'speed kills' nonsense. Far more relevant that a guy who built parkways in the 30s. > So, I fail to understand how you were able to reach such "obvious" > conclusions. That doesn't sound like an engineering approach. I'm not here to give you remedial lessons. > By substantiation, I was expecting a reference to a respected book, > magazine, or website. GOOGLE. Use it. If you haven't had enough life experience to know that people most often do the bare minimum to get by, I can't help you. >> *sigh* You spewed numbers that say speed kills. > No, I quoted numbers provided by a highway expert showing the fatality > rate of various speeds. You quoted numbers from a political hack that didn't even have UNITS! > The statement preceeding the table read, ""Fully half of all our > traffic deaths are due to speed. The New York Good Roads Assocation > has compiled the following tabulation" 'due to speed' when you dig into these studies means 'one or more vehicles involved were moving at the time'. Of course I can't do that, because all you offer is a bunch of unitless numbers! >> That's not data. Those >> are results. Results that do not show where they came from. As far as I >> am concerned they were pulled out of your a.s. > Obviously someone who has done as much research on the subject as you > have would have his own tabulation at his fingertips. Yes, I do. It shows the autobahn is safer. > I certainly > hope you'll share those numbers with us. But unless I missed it, I > don't believe you have provided any numbers or any citations to > support your own arguments. You're too fing lazy to come up to speed on your own. I've been posting to this newsgroup for about 12-13 years now. I am not going to give every new comer a review of every study we've discussed here. Of all the data we've gon through. It's your job as a newcomer to catch up! > You're certainly entitled to your opinion > and your own personal experiences, but then, nother readers might > conclude your views "were pulled out of your a.s", especially when you > use that tone of voice. You're lazy. I am not going to spoon feed you everything that's been discussed here for the last 15 years only for the standard usenet game of 'that's not good enough, I'm not convinced'. Nate gave you the basic core cites. There are many others. You want a book, "American Autobahn" by Mark Rask. The tables and graphs are online. Google it. I read that book about 10 years ago now and have cited it more times than I can count. >> > Actually, I've never met anyone passionately interested in highways >> > who never heard of Robert Moses. Frankly I'm surprised you have not >> > heard of him with all the research you have done, nor heard of the >> > Pulitzer winning prize biography of him ("The Power Broker" by Robert >> > Caro). >> Funny, maybe that's because he was a builder not anyone who was in anway >> way someone who should have been dealing with traffic flow issues. >> From the wiki: >> "Moses himself never learned to drive[10], and his view of the >> automobile was shaped by the 1920s, when the car was thought of as >> entertainment and not a utilitarian lifestyle." >> His education was in POLITICAL SCIENCE. > You neglected to mention the following from Wiki: > "Although he never held elected office, Moses was arguably the most > powerful person in New York state government from the 1930s to the > 1950s." This contradicts your statement that he was some lowly > bureaucrat towing the "party line". That's POLITICAL power. > "Moses succeeded in diverting funds to his Long Island parkway > projects (the Northern State Parkway, the Southern State Parkway and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Moses was in charge of operating those parkways throughout his career, > and his disciples continued his methods after his retirement. POLITICAL. > "From the 1930s to the 1960s, Robert Moses was responsible for the > construction of the Throgs Neck, the Bronx-Whitestone, the Henry [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > many more. Federal interest had shifted from parkway to freeway > systems, and the new roads mostly conformed to the new vision" POLTICAL. > "Moses had direct influence outside the New York area as well. City > planners in many smaller American cities hired Moses to design freeway > networks for them in the 1940s and early 1950s. " POLITICAL. > "Numerous public works bear Moses's name. On Long Island: the Robert > Moses Causeway, and Robert Moses State Park - Long Island. Also, at > Niagara Falls: the Robert Moses Power Dam, and Robert Moses State > Parkway follows the Niagara Gorge to Lewiston, New York and beyond. " POLITICAL. >> > In any event, your vague unsubstantiated attacks on Moses as a >> > 'bureaucrat' do not diminish his quoted figures one bit. In essence, >> > you're asking us to take your opinion over his. >> I should take the word of someone who never learned to drive a car and >> made his living on government projects on this subject is pure insanity. > Your description of Moses is highly inaccurate. I have not heard of > any writings complaining about how he built or operated his highway > projects. Indeed, Caro goes to great lengths to describe the > excellence in Moses' highway construction. As Caro pointed out, > people came around worldwide to seek his advice. He was clearly a political creature. And like most political creature got the credit for what very talented engineers did. > But given the intensity of your comment, perhaps we should ask if > you've ever built any highways or operated them? Or, what highway > builders or operators do you think we should be listening to? And if > you think Moses is wrong, what are your numbers? I'll take the papers of the rank and file engineers who actually designed the roads. And this isn't about the strength of reinforced concrete. It's about traffic flow. The man spent his entire career in politics, in government. Those aren't qualifications. You seemingly think that government work makes him the authority. It doesn't. >> bureaucrat may not be the proper word. Probably too kind. The guy was a >> central planning I-know-what-is-best-for-you type. > Well, obviously highways require 'central planning' because otherwise > none of them would connect up with each other or be coordinated. False. >> This guy's entuiire >> career was in the political area. > Well of course, since 99.9% of US highways are constructed by the > government. And then you think that this guy spouting the proper political line of 'speed kills' is completely independent and valid. If you don't tow the line, you're out. > Privately owned and operated highways were a failure, and > it was only large government, with its large resources, that could > come up with the big money necessary to build big roads. But if you > think roads should be privately built and operated, you should start a > separate thread and discuss that. False and statist. >> Not science. Not engineering. He was a >> central power statist. Of course he was for low speed limits and >> controls. That was his political bent. > Where is the connection established and proven--starting in the 1930s > to present--that a "statist" was for low speed limits? With all due > respect, it is clear you know absolutely nothing about Moses career > and accomplishments and I fail to see how you could reach any such > automatic conclusion, particularly about his "political bent". As a > reminder, Moses answered to no one. Stop being lazy and catch up on the group before posting!!! I'm not going to catch you up. Learn some basic net etiquette. And again, why should I care about the views on driving by some guy who played the politics of road building mostly in new york and didn't even drive? But it does explain a lot of the bone-headed things that were done. Old man Daley's POLITICAL decision to have the interstates meet in chicago is about the same. This Moses decided what neighborhoods would get torn down, where the roads would go.... did the political games, this is of no interest with regards to basic driving such as speed and keep right except to pass. One could be ENTIRELY ignorant of those concepts and do that job.... oh wait, apparently he was because he NEVER LEARNED HOW TO DRIVE. >> Sorry. You play follow the leader and believe political math. I'll stick >> with engineering. > Once again, obviously someone who has done as much research on the > subject as you have would have his own tabulation at his fingertips. > I certainly hope you'll share those numbers with us. I'm tired of putting stuff together for speed-kills newcomers demanding cites. Google '85th percentile method'. On Jul 23, 1:08 pm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > On Jul 23, 11:33 am, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > result in differences in both skill and attitude of drivers. In some > cases they may have better drivers, in some cases worse. True, but attitude and skill can and should be changed. The only differences that should be meaningful would be the design of the roads themselves, and the vehicles traveling on them. In the specific case of Germany, this is a very valid comparison, as the US Interstate highway was patterned after the Autobahnen of the 1930s, and therefore should be similar but improved. A quick side by side comparison of design features shows this to be the case. http://www.ajfroggie.com/roadpics/autobahn/ the Autobahnen actually have narrower lanes and shoulders than the US Interstates, the only place where the Interstates fall down is "design speed" which is a function of a whole mess of stuff. Obviously, a flat, straight Interstate may have a "design speed" of 70 MPH but would meet the criteria for a far higher speed, were they used in the US. Or are you saying that Americans are genetically inferior to Germans and are physically incapable of safely handling the unlimited-speed sections of the Autobahnen? Should non-Germans not be allowed to drive in Germany, as they'd inevitably pose a hazard to German motorists? nate >So he's responsible for engineering by table instead of by data? The odd >thing about highway engineers is that data doesn't seem to matter, the >table based on what must be a half-broken model T ford driven by a blind >90 year old woman in poor health is what sets the sign numbers. Don't forget to reduce those sign numbers because modern cars are lower to the ground than the venerable T. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >> Moses' article had extensive comments about accidents and traffic >> safety that were too volumnious to transcribe. I would suggest Moses >> had more than enough data to support his assertions. > >I would guess it is probably the same clap-trap and manipulations the >speed kills types have used for decades in the US. No need to guess. He compared the Pennsylvania Turnpike -- the country's first superhighway, traversing the mountains of Central Pennsylvania, including steep grades, short sight lines, substandard medians, and tunnels -- to the New Jersey Turnpike, which is newer and crosses the relatively flat expanse of New Jersey. He also claimed the PA Turnpike was a faster road, which I doubt was true then. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. > On Jul 22, 10:36 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > safety that were too volumnious to transcribe. I would suggest Moses > had more than enough data to support his assertions. Have you done any research into opposing viewpoints? There's plenty of data supporting those, as well. Most of our problems with high speed driving could be solved if we stopped handing out driver's licenses like Betty Crocker points. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > Have you done any research into opposing viewpoints? There's plenty of > data supporting those, as well. Moses' claims make good sense to me. Moses was extremely pragmatic-- he focused on what would actually work in the real world, not on theory. Accordingly, I am not familiar with opposing data. (I am aware of one Interstate segment where the fatality count dropped after speed limits went up--the count went one fatality to zero-- obviously statistically irrelevent. However, the overall accident and severity index went up after the speed went up. Fatality is only one of several indexes that need to be reviewed; accident rate and severity index are important too, and perhaps statistically more important and reflective of actual conditions.) The statistics and specific turnpike experiences Moses offers are pretty straightforward. Perhaps someone who has different numbers, in the form of Moses' tables, will share them with us. As mentioned elsewhere, obviously there's been a drop in the rate of highway fatalities since actual fatality counts have remained stable while vehicle miles have increased; thus the drop in rate. HOWEVER, that is a very broad statistic covering crashes of all causes (DUI, weather, mechanical failure, etc). Moses' numbers focused on fatalities at a particular speed and on particular superhighways. > Most of our problems with high speed driving could be solved if we > stopped handing out driver's licenses like Betty Crocker points. That's a totally separate issue. The reality is our system of roads are public, open to all. Further, this country is very auto-dependent with alternative transit options usually very limited for most people. (Using the bus to bring home groceries ain't easy). Most people must have a car to get around, even if used only occassionally. Accordingly, our driver's licensing is much broader than perhaps it should be. But eliminating many so-called 'high risk' drivers would be devastating to those people as well the economy. On Jul 23, 10:05 am, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > Have you done any research into opposing viewpoints? There's plenty of > > data supporting those, as well. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > weather, mechanical failure, etc). Moses' numbers focused on > fatalities at a particular speed and on particular superhighways. And yet his conclusions have been contradicted by many studies dating back to decades before his death, of which he should have been aware. There's plenty of statistics from other countries that seem to indicate that even *unlimited* speeds do not necessarily result in increases in fatality rate over what we're seeing here. Of course, those other countries actually take traffic law enforcement seriously and aren't simply concentrating on raising revenue. > > Most of our problems with high speed driving could be solved if we > > stopped handing out driver's licenses like Betty Crocker points. > > That's a totally separate issue. No, it is THE issue. > The reality is our system of roads > are public, open to all. Further, this country is very auto-dependent [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > than perhaps it should be. But eliminating many so-called 'high risk' > drivers would be devastating to those people as well the economy. If it's so devastating, perhaps real enforcement might actually cause people to change their behavior. The threat of not being able to legally drive is of more concern to US residents than possibly any other country, and yet when was the last time you heard of someone getting a ticket for something *other* than speeding? Pretty much all traffic laws are violated with flagrant abandon by most road users, this might have something to do with why our safety record isn't better than it is. It's not that hard to drive correctly; most people just don't do it. nate > > As mentioned elsewhere, obviously there's been a drop in the rate of > > highway fatalities since actual fatality counts have remained stable [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And yet his conclusions have been contradicted by many studies dating > back to decades before his death, of which he should have been aware. Could you share the names of several of the many studies dating back to decades before his death that contradict Moses? > There's plenty of statistics from other countries that seem to > indicate that even *unlimited* speeds do not necessarily result in > increases in fatality rate over what we're seeing here. Of course, > those other countries actually take traffic law enforcement seriously > and aren't simply concentrating on raising revenue. Several people mentioned the issue of "enforcement raising revenue". Moses' toll roads were cash cows, he had plenty of money from tolls and didn't need play games with fines. But where has the issue of "enforcement raising revenue" been documented and proven, in an authoritative publication, that it exists as a pervasive practice across the entire United States, and uniformly practiced by both state and local police? > > The reality is our system of roads > > are public, open to all. Further, this country is very auto-dependent [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > other country, and yet when was the last time you heard of someone > getting a ticket for something *other* than speeding? Actually, people get tickets for being in the left lane when they shouldn't be; big enforcement drive going on for this. (This is ironic since people complain this is a major cause of problems--but it is being enforced). Many people are cited for DUI. Making an illegal left/right turn. Running a red light. Chnaging lanes without signalling. > Pretty much all > traffic laws are violated with flagrant abandon by most road users, > this might have something to do with why our safety record isn't > better than it is. > It's not that hard to drive correctly; most people just don't do it. On Jul 23, 12:41 pm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > > As mentioned elsewhere, obviously there's been a drop in the rate of > > > highway fatalities since actual fatality counts have remained stable [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > across the entire United States, and uniformly practiced by both state > and local police? Where in the US *ARE* speed limits set to the guidelines recommended by almost every serious organization, publication, or study? e.g. where are they set at the free-flowing 85th percentile or higher? nowhere, that's where. What possible explanation can you come up with for this other than a) misguided, uneducated Claybrookian attempts to keep us "safe" or b) revenue? (likely the answer is actually C - the speed limits were lowered either by the Claybrookians or during the NMSL/gas crisis era, and the municipalities found that artificially low speed limits provided a nice revenue stream and therefore are not motivated to correct them.) > > > The reality is our system of roads > > > are public, open to all. Further, this country is very auto-dependent [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > ironic since people complain this is a major cause of problems--but it > is being enforced). I'll believe it when I see it. What I DO see is people camping out in the middle and left lanes and cops ignoring them. > Many people are cited for DUI. I've seen this one, so one point for you. > Making an illegal left/right turn. > Running a red light. Chnaging lanes without signalling. Holy sh.t, you're funny. Stop, you're killing me. You can do all of that sh.t right in front of a cop and he won't blink. Just don't go over his threshhold speed and you'll be just fine. nate > Where in the US *ARE* speed limits set to the guidelines recommended > by almost every serious organization, publication, or study? e.g. > where are they set at the free-flowing 85th percentile or higher? > nowhere, that's where. There are few statistics available to support that conclusion, so you obviously have no method of leaning what you purport to know. > What possible explanation can you come up with for this other than a) > misguided, uneducated Claybrookian attempts to keep us "safe" or b) [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > provided a nice revenue stream and therefore are not motivated to > correct them.) Well, there's D: You don't know what the f.ck you're talking about. > I'll believe it when I see it. What I DO see is people camping out in > the middle and left lanes and cops ignoring them. Then it all works out. People camping in the middle and L lanes prevent speeding tickets. > > Many people are cited for DUI. > > I've seen this one, so one point for you. One minor spot where you miss the boat is believing what you've "seen" is perfectly irrelevant. You... would conclude an LLB being pulled over was being pulled over for LLBing, when it could be any number of other things. Your entire POV is simplistic and of a single dimension. If another dimension peeks in its head, it's only cognitive dissonance. > Holy sh.t, you're funny. Stop, you're killing me. You can do all of > that sh.t right in front of a cop and he won't blink. Just don't go > over his threshhold speed and you'll be just fine. Again, this may be your perception, but anecdotal evidence has no place in a rational argument over such vast territory. And, for the thousandth time, if revenue was the motivation for traffic tickets, why wouldn't cops write everything they see? ----- - gpsman Corrections:<> > There are few statistics available to support that conclusion, so you > obviously have no method of leaning <learning> what you purport to know. > > One minor spot where you miss the boat is believing what you've "seen" > is <isn't> perfectly irrelevant. Thanks you for your kind attention. ----- - gpsman (ahit, as usual) go away, troll. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel On Jul 23, 12:41 pm, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > > As mentioned elsewhere, obviously there's been a drop in the rate of > > > highway fatalities since actual fatality counts have remained stable [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Could you share the names of several of the many studies dating back > to decades before his death that contradict Moses? Sorry, I missed this on a first skim. Solomon (1963) and Cirillo (1968) are the two biggies that first come to mind. Both studies established a U-shaped risk curve for accident involvement vs. travel speed, but on slightly different types of highways. nate > hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > On Jul 22, 10:36 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Having driven the eastern roads mentioned as well as European roads during my eight years there, and thousands of km on the westcoast, I will go along with those who fault the driving tests. So many here learn how to pass the test and nothing more, other than what scares them, if they're right enopugh to see how they could have avoided it. We all go through what the other guy did wrong, but how may figure what we diod wrong? I'v learned a lot more from near-misses that from accidents. Of course, that was my profession. Safe driving (and safe living, fopr that matter) is a series of "risk analisyses" (I never claimed to be a gud spellar.) > Safe driving (and safe living, fopr that matter) is a series of "risk > analisyses" Are you saying that Moses, in his capacity of head of numerous highway commissions (that operated highways, not just built them) for many years, had no experience in risk analysis of accidents that occured on his network? The article was too long to transcribe. But FWIW, it sure seemed to me he did extensive analysis. >> Safe driving (and safe living, fopr that matter) is a series of "risk >> analisyses" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The article was too long to transcribe. But FWIW, it sure seemed to > me he did extensive analysis. You must really do think that those in the government offices do all the work... Another example why this nation is going down the toilet Most of these political hacks make tons of bad decisions and requirements that the good knowledgable people who do the day to day work struggle to make less bad and in some cases even work well. Meanwhile people like you give the political hack all the credit. On Jul 25, 3:26 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Safe driving (and safe living, fopr that matter) is a series of "risk > >> analisyses" [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > You must really do think that those in the government offices do all the > work... Another example why this nation is going down the toilet That statement makes no sense whatsoever. The private sector utterly failed in building highways, so the govt took the function over. A few private bridges exist and some had to be bailed out by the govt after screwing up. No private interest ever stepped forward to build the nation's turnpikes, bridges, or Interstates. You may wish to read "Empire on the Hudson", a history of the Port of NY Authority, which discusses this issue in great detail. > Most of these political hacks make tons of bad decisions and requirements > that the good knowledgable people who do the day to day work struggle to > make less bad and in some cases even work well. > > Meanwhile people like you give the political hack all the credit. I would suggest you read Robert Caro's, "The Power Broker", the biography of Robert Moses. That book completely contradicts your statement. > On Jul 25, 3:26 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > after screwing up. No private interest ever stepped forward to build > the nation's turnpikes, bridges, or Interstates. Why not make a comment on the giant red spot of jupiter? It would make as much sense as a reply. > You may wish to read "Empire on the Hudson", a history of the Port of > NY Authority, which discusses this issue in great detail. I don't give a flying f about the politics of NY. You're sitting there calling a political hack an authority on engineering. that's bullshit. >> Most of these political hacks make tons of bad decisions and requirements >> that the good knowledgable people who do the day to day work struggle to >> make less bad and in some cases even work well. >> >> Meanwhile people like you give the political hack all the credit. > I would suggest you read Robert Caro's, "The Power Broker", the > biography of Robert Moses. That book completely contradicts your > statement. Lol. He wasn't an engineer and the figures you posted prove it. No engineer worth two cents would have endorsed such figures. Notice the title of the book you say I should read. Brokering power. POLITICS. On Jul 26, 1:17 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I don't give a flying f about the politics of NY. You're sitting there > calling a political hack an authority on engineering. that's bullshit. Your statement contradicts itself. If you have no interest in New York and no knowledge of its highway builders, then you have no way of knowing about Mr. Moses' background and accomplishments. Moses has been called many nasty things, but never ever a "political hack". > On Jul 26, 1:17 pm, Brent P <tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > York and no knowledge of its highway builders, then you have no way of > knowing about Mr. Moses' background and accomplishments. I know what you've posted. Nonsense figures. I know what I googled and it was career of government figure who played the political game, not a technical person. > Moses has been called many nasty things, but never ever a "political > hack". His speciality was POLITICS. It fits. >Speed Travel time Chances for fatal accident > for 400 miles >45 8 hrs 54 min 1 in 16 >55 7 hrs 18 min 1 in 12 >65 6 hrs 10 min 1 in 6 An obviously false table. Try not just making sh.t up. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. On Jul 23, 6:02 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) wrote: > An obviously false table. Try not just making sh.t up. So in other words you have no idea of what you're talking about because otherwise you'd provide the correct numbers instead of profanity. Try a little courtesy next time. > On Jul 23, 6:02 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Try a little courtesy next time. Try reality checking your assertions before you post and people may be more polite. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > Try reality checking your assertions before you post and people may be > more polite. Do you also claim you know more about highways than Robert Moses did? > "Try not just making sh.t up. " I certainly hope you people drive more courteously than you debate. >> Try reality checking your assertions before you post and people may be >> more polite. > > Do you also claim you know more about highways than Robert Moses > did? About traffic flow, driving, road safety, etc yes, most of the regulars here know more than he did. About ramming through the bills, getting funding, destroying neighborhoods, and all the political aspects he knew more. But this is rec.autos.DRIVING, we concentrate on that DRIVING part. Moses NEVER LEARNED HOW TO DRIVE. With what you posted and what else I've read he didn't know the first thing about driving, traffic flow, etc. He might have known something about a nice recreational *ride* in the country though. >>Try reality checking your assertions before you post and people may be >>more polite. > > Do you also claim you know more about highways than Robert Moses > did? I claim that I know more about highways and road safety than you do. >> "Try not just making sh.t up. " > > I certainly hope you people drive more courteously than you debate. > a) the quote above is not mine b) there's no "debating" with a true believer who can't be swayed by facts. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I claim that I know more about highways and road safety than you do. Lol. You actually know less than someone who knows nothing, since what you know is almost entirely wrong. Oh, and you're stupid. You dismiss any authoritative cite without consideration that doesn't suggest the plethora of bad drivers would be better drivers if only they were traveling faster. And, of course, have never provided a single credible cite in support of your findings. You have no training in highway design or traffic management, and scant little in driving, misinterpret much of what you read, and consider yourself and your brothers "the" foremost authorities on every related subject. You have admitted you don't remember much of the little driving education you received, and that you are unequipped to monitor your speedometer and steer at the same time. Additionally, you have reported refusing to ever assist any motorist to merge onto a highway to your front... **because it will "inconvenience" those drivers to your rear**(!!!).... implying the merger vanishes into thin air once behind you. It couldn't be more obvious you don't know sh.t from apple butter. Oh. And you and your brothers post to Usenet all day during business hours which strongly suggests you're also thieves. I don't know when you think people are supposed to believe you acquired the knowledge you profess to possess... you couldn't possibly have applied the time to learn all you claim to know. ----- - gpsman > > hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > - gpsman Wow. Your post describes you perfectly, more so than any other poster to RAD. You've got some serious projection issues, and I hope that you get help. nate >On Jul 23, 6:02=A0pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) >wrote: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >because otherwise you'd provide the correct numbers instead of >profanity. I don't have the correct numbers. And BTW, "sh.t" is merely vulgar, not profane. I do know that numbers which provide a 1 in 12 chance of a fatal accident after only 400 miles on a 55mph highway are obviously false. If they were true, then after the well-over-100,000 miles I have on such highways, my involvement in a fatal accident would be a near certainty. >Try a little courtesy next time. Don't try to feed me bullshit and demand I accept it graciously and courteously. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. On Jul 23, 9:56 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) wrote: > >So in other words you have no idea of what you're talking about > >because otherwise you'd provide the correct numbers instead of > >profanity. > > I don't have the correct numbers. So you have no idea of what you're talking about. Period. And then you go get rude. . > On Jul 23, 9:56 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > So you have no idea of what you're talking about. Period. Nice projection. You spout obviously made up numbers on the 'authority' of a poltical creature who never drove who quoted them from someone else. Seriously, with those figures I should have died several times by now. > And then you go get rude. . Nice projection. Try learning the proper way to come into a newsgroup. If you had followed that maybe people wouldn't be rude right back at you. In article <5af32dea-dfed-4706-a55c-f13ef59fd15e@h1g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, > On Jul 23, 9:56 pm, russo...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > And then you go get rude. . Let me do a little math for you from what you snipped out. If there was even a 1 in 12 chance of being involved in a fatal accident in 400 miles of driving, then there would be a 11 in 12 chance, or a 0.9167 probability of *not* being involved in a fatal accident. Thus in 100,000 miles, or 250 times the 400 miles distance, the chance of not being involved in a fatal accident becomes (11/12)^250 (0.9167 raised to the power of 250). Do you want to hazard a guess what that probability then becomes? No? Well let me tell you: 3.572e-10, or expressed in regular notation. 0.0000000003572 About 3 and a half chances in 10 *BILLION* of not being involved in a fatal accident. IOW, anyone who has driven 100,000 miles at highway speeds would be essentially *guaranteed* to have been involved in a fatal accident if the figures from your table were even *close* to correct. Now let's examine the ludicrousness of 1 in 6 figure cited for 65 mph. For that ratio, the odds of *not* being involved in fatal accident after 100,000 miles are: 1.602095822885e-20, or 0.00000000000000000001602 Hell the odds that one will have been involved in fatal accident where there's a 1 in 6 chance after 400 miles approach certainty after perhaps as little as 5 years of highway driving -- say 40,000 miles are: 0.999999987925 Do you get how idiotic those figures are yet? SignatureAlan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> > In article > <5af32dea-dfed-4706-a55c-f13ef59fd...@h1g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > Do you get how idiotic those figures are yet? The odds of any crash are irrelevant, no matter who calculates them by what manner. Even if your odds of a Blackjack are astronomical, you might not want to bet your life on it. What matters most is how you drive. Defensively, without a first priority on velocity or time, is most likely to produce ultimate success most of the time, regardless of the odds. Most crashes, by far, the first critical event is easily detected and avoided. If you are impatient, obsessed with higher velocity, measure your trips in car lengths and seconds or fractions thereof, set intermediate goals (get ahead of that truck, make that light, etc.), and concentrate on the driving errors of others rather than your own, you are not driving defensively, and it does not seem unreasonable to guess you're probably more likely to be involved in a crash. An astute driver knows their driving consists of a litany of errors, error after error, however slight. An oblivious driver thinks he rarely if ever errs, it's *always* the "other guy". It's a matter of standards, and most regarding driving are low, especially evident here in r.a.d. ----- - gpsman > Let me do a little math for you from what you snipped out. > > If there was even a 1 in 12 chance of being involved in a fatal accident > in 400 miles of driving, then there would be a 11 in 12 chance, or a > 0.9167 probability of *not* being involved in a fatal accident. . . . Thank you for the detailed thoughtful analysis. Interesting material. Would you have any comment about Moses' stated fatality rates for a given speed level, or for the NJ or PA Tpks? On Jul 24, 9:39 am, hanco...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > Let me do a little math for you from what you snipped out. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Would you have any comment about Moses' stated fatality rates for a > given speed level, or for the NJ or PA Tpks? I believe that he and others have already expressed it, but to elaborate, it's entirely invalid. First of all, studies have repeatedly shown that actual travel speeds are only slightly influenced by posted speed limits, and that for the most part people will travel whatever speed they feel comfortable with, posted speed limit notwithstanding. (note that there are instances where this does not hold strictly true because of speed limits being posted significantly below the 85th percentile to the point where travel speeds actually are depressed due to significantly higher penalties kicking in at, say 20 MPH over the speed limit, which still may be below the 85th percentile speed.) thus it is very difficult to decouple travel speed from road design and features. Secondly, it is usually found that rates of incident are lowest on high-speed Interstate highways, and higher on lower-speed secondary roads. Anecdotally, my opinion is that artificially low speed limits combined with enforcement solely concentrated on speed actually decrease safety by encouraging some drivers to become sloppy and/or deliberately incorrect in their lane use; e.g. people driving too far to the left and feeling justified for doing so in "slowing down those speeders" and therefore causing faster drivers to pass on the right and/or stack up behind them. nate > > Would you have any comment about Moses' stated fatality rates for a > > given speed level, or for the NJ or PA Tpks? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > will travel whatever speed they feel comfortable with, posted speed > limit notwithstanding. . . . . Thanks for the interpretation and explanation. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message