|
Varance posted:Another victim of Toronto's many underground rivers. The bullshit wet sandy side is Mississauga's actually. THANKS HAZEL
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiadhlHHLG8 That sounds like a great idea, especially when it's not traffic already waiting for the light to go green, but cars that are already driving around 50km/h...
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Well if that system is really smart (and has enough sensors) it could only use this option when the current red light has cars waiting behind it. Thus if no one is waiting for a green signal it would wait for the junction to clear. I guess having movement sensors cover the junction wouldn't be a bad in any case. Though I have no clue if such a smart junction wouldn't drive costs through the roof.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Jeoh posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OiadhlHHLG8 Haha, Jesus, I couldn't imagine doing that in the US. Yes, I would like to violate the MUTCD and open myself to massive liability in order to squeeze an extra 1-2 seconds of green time into the cycle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 17:24
|
|
|
I can't tell you how many times I've waited at a red light with no traffic as far as the eye can see, only for it to wait until traffic to approach if from the other directions to turn red for them, and green for me. With as heavily instrumented as intersections and lights are, why can't they be networked together with better predictive features to improve travel efficiency?
grover fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Feb 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
grover posted:I can't tell you how many times I've wanted at a red light with no traffic as far as the eye can see, only for it to wait until traffic to approach if from the other directions to turn red for them, and green for me. With as heavily instrumented as intersections and lights are, why can't they be networked together with better predictive features to improve travel efficiency?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
There's also vehicles that loop detectors don't work as well on in general.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 17:49
|
|
|
grover posted:I can't tell you how many times I've waited at a red light with no traffic as far as the eye can see, only for it to wait until traffic to approach if from the other directions to turn red for them, and green for me. With as heavily instrumented as intersections and lights are, why can't they be networked together with better predictive features to improve travel efficiency? I occasional think about getting out and pressing the pedestrian walk button.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
Is there a description for that in English somewhere, or do you all speak Dutch? It just looks like it's a signal with 0 all-red time, which is perfectly fine when the intersection is wide enough.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 13:20
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:or do you all speak Dutch? That's been a bit of a problem in this thread IMO  Can't find anything in English right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 14:35
|
|
|
Another Dutch thing! Belgium's going to get rid of roundabouts with multiple lane. Why? A majority of drivers exclusively take the outer lane. I'll be honest, I'm one of those drivers. The few multi-lane roundabouts that are staying will get improved markings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 14:26
|
|
|
V. good & cool, multilane roundabouts are unnecessarily dangerous. If you need extra capacity either a turbo, a signaled intersection, or grade separation is the way to go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 19:10
|
|
|
http://www.access-board.gov/guideli...treet-crossings That access board guidance means new roundabouts that allow for pedestrian crossings of the multi-lane movement are required to have Hawk signals. Which add a lot of cost. Delaware decided that as a result they're just not going to make any more multi-lane roundabouts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
We have a couple cool single lane roundabouts in my area of Minnesota, US. I like them a lot and have no trouble using them. That being said, without some research or something I would be a little nervous about a multilane roundabout. I just don't have an intrinsic understanding about how they'd work like I do for single lane ones. Go America, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
They're not voodoo, you just follow the pavement markings/signs https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1477923,-76.909913,219m/data=!3m1!1e3 Edit: People in the roundabout always have right of way
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
crestfallen posted:We have a couple cool single lane roundabouts in my area of Minnesota, US. I like them a lot and have no trouble using them. There's one near where I live, and really the only confusing thing is that the connecting roads and exits aren't consistent. Some roads are dual-lane coming up to the roundabout, others are single lane (or wide enough for two lanes, but with no lines painted), and it's not immediately clear which lanes force you into leaving the roundabout and when. The lines aren't well painted, either. Everything seems wide enough for two lanes of traffic, but there's no line dividing them, so it really depends on what people feel like doing. If I had to guess, I'd say the right lane of a multi-lane roundabout entry is a must-exit for the next outlet of the roundabout, and the left lane would enter into the rightmost lane that continues through the roundabout, but I'm not entirely sure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Roundabouts? We LOVE roundabouts! Roundabouts EVERYWHERE! Even where they don't make sense! Yes, that roundabout only has two exits. They're probably planning to extend a third road from it some time in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
PT6A posted:There's one near where I live, and really the only confusing thing is that the connecting roads and exits aren't consistent. Some roads are dual-lane coming up to the roundabout, others are single lane (or wide enough for two lanes, but with no lines painted), and it's not immediately clear which lanes force you into leaving the roundabout and when. The lines aren't well painted, either. Everything seems wide enough for two lanes of traffic, but there's no line dividing them, so it really depends on what people feel like doing. Alberta rules are pretty straightforward. Yield to whoever is in the circle, when in the circle, outer right lane yields to inner left lane. You must signal when exiting. Right lane must exit into the right lane, left lane must exit into left. Even if lane markings aren't painted, each exit has two lanes and you have to leave in the one you came in on. At no point is any lane forced to exit the circle. http://www.calgary.ca/Transportation/TP/Pages/Safety/Roundabout-Safety/Driving-straight-through-a-roundabout.aspx http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/1994.htm They once tried to paint our 5 exit traffic circle into a turbo-roundabout, but the paint immediately got scraped off, the signage was clearly not intended for a 5 exit traffic circle, and everyone got furious, so they just returned to the old status quo. nielsm posted:Roundabouts? We LOVE roundabouts! Roundabouts EVERYWHERE! Even where they don't make sense! We definitely have one of those here as well. Although where the future exit is going to go is a mystery to me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 03:52
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:Alberta rules are pretty straightforward. Yield to whoever is in the circle, when in the circle, outer right lane yields to inner left lane. You must signal when exiting. Right lane must exit into the right lane, left lane must exit into left. Even if lane markings aren't painted, each exit has two lanes and you have to leave in the one you came in on. At no point is any lane forced to exit the circle. So if you're in the inside lane of the traffic circle, and you want to exit, the person beside you has to yield so you can exit in the left lane of the road you're entering? That seems like it's bound to cause problems. EDIT: I think half the problem is there's so few traffic circles, so drivers don't become familiarized with them. I don't think I've ever had to go through a multi-lane roundabout, even though I know they exist here. EDIT 2: Driving in Cuba, it occurred to me that we don't have double-lane yields here as they do in certain places there, but I guess I was wrong because such a thing appears to exist in traffic circles. Do we have them in any other places that I just haven't seen? PT6A fucked around with this message at 05:11 on Feb 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Devor posted:They're not voodoo, you just follow the pavement markings/signs This one looks somewhat like a Turbo roundabout with the single lanes in some parts. Turbo roundabouts are good and easy, but multiple lane roundabouts without clear markings can be difficult. By the way, there's a difference between a roundabout (relatively small, cars on the circle have priority) and a traffic circle (often very big, can be used to connect a bunch of main roads, traffic is controlled by yield/stop signs or traffic lights (or in horrible cases, completely uncontrolled, see Place Charles de Gaulle in Paris. Those cases are just an accident waiting to happen and hopefully aren't built anymore.) There's often direction signage above the approaching roads so you can start out in the right lane, then you follow the arrows on the traffic lights and the pavement markings and you'll end up at the right exit. Carbon dioxide fucked around with this message at 09:30 on Feb 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
Fragrag posted:Another Dutch thing! Rhode Island's done a pretty good job re-striping their multi-lane rotaries as turbo roundabouts. I've always disliked 2-lane roundabouts, and I feel vindicated! Devor posted:http://www.access-board.gov/guideli...treet-crossings Yeah, this has been a long time coming. I have serious doubts about HAWK signals, and, while I understand enhancing accessibility for disabled peds, I think there are much better ways to do it than installing an $80K device on each multi-lane leg of the roundabout. Hell, given our abysmal compliance rates for ped beacons up here, and the fact that Connecticut's only turbo roundabout is in a completely rural area, I'd wager that putting a HAWK would cause more accidents than it would prevent. Carbon dioxide posted:By the way, there's a difference between a roundabout (relatively small, cars on the circle have priority) and a traffic circle (often very big, can be used to connect a bunch of main roads, traffic is controlled by yield/stop signs or traffic lights (or in horrible cases, completely uncontrolled, see Place Charles de Gaulle in Paris. Those cases are just an accident waiting to happen and hopefully aren't built anymore.) I'm sure there are much better videos out there, but here's one I took while driving with my boss through the Place de l'Etoile. You can see that Parisian drivers have no problem at all navigating. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uov1W4X5tRY
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
PT6A posted:So if you're in the inside lane of the traffic circle, and you want to exit, the person beside you has to yield so you can exit in the left lane of the road you're entering? That seems like it's bound to cause problems. Yep. Thems the rules apparently. We've got one in our community, works pretty well, I've only ever seen one accident in it, and that looked to be someone in the left lane rear-ending someone else in the left lane. And indeed, they freak the hell out of people who've never seen them before, just because they have no idea what they're supposed to do. But really the only way you can really gently caress up is to be in the right lane and not yield, or use the left lane and then exit at the first exit, because nobody would be expecting it. I'm given to understanding that European traffic circles and roundabouts might play by different rules, but I don't know for sure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 09:15
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I'm given to understanding that European traffic circles and roundabouts might play by different rules, but I don't know for sure. Moving to a different lane on a roundabout (for example, from the inner to the outer lane) counts as a regular lane change, and you'd have to give way to all traffic in the lane you're moving into.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 09:45
|
|
|
John Dough posted:Moving to a different lane on a roundabout (for example, from the inner to the outer lane) counts as a regular lane change, and you'd have to give way to all traffic in the lane you're moving into. See, this is what I would personally expect and what I've seen in other countries. The idea that you can just cut through the right lane to exit and they have to give way seems a little odd, to say the least.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
PT6A posted:EDIT 2: Driving in Cuba, it occurred to me that we don't have double-lane yields here as they do in certain places there, but I guess I was wrong because such a thing appears to exist in traffic circles. Do we have them in any other places that I just haven't seen? I heard that Russian roundabouts also often have yields in the circle (where you have to give way to people entering). Seems backwards, I'd think the roundabout would quickly fill up when cars leaving don't have priority. Cuba seems to have some weird-rear end stuff though. I took this this morning. If I remember previous discussions correctly, this must indicate that they don't have any pre-emption for emergency services. http://imgur.com/7NtRWwO Hippie Hedgehog fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Feb 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:I heard that Russian roundabouts also often have yields in the circle (where you have to give way to people entering). Seems backwards, I'd think the roundabout would quickly fill up when cars leaving don't have priority. Cuban roundabouts work the same way; you'll occasionally have traffic in the circle yield to traffic entering the circle. Basically, you just have to look for the yield sign and follow it. I think it's not a bad idea if it's a large enough circle, and it's connecting a large road with a smaller road, to prevent backups on the larger road (presumably, a lot of traffic is going to go straight through on the larger road). EDIT: Also, your picture link is broken, so I don't know what you're talking about. One thing I do like about Cuban traffic is the "via libre" at T-intersections. Basically, if the terminating road has a green light to turn left, but there are more lanes on the straight-through than there are lanes of traffic turning, then those extra lanes can proceed through on the red light. It threw me for a loop the first time I was in a taxi and I thought the taxi driver had just blown through a red light. They also have countdown timers for both red and green on most traffic lights, which I think is wonderful. PT6A fucked around with this message at 22:24 on Feb 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 22:21
|
|
|
PT6A posted:They also have countdown timers for both red and green on most traffic lights, which I think is wonderful. Cichlidae has posted before about why he thinks this isn't good practice, but I've forgotten his argument. It was something to do with information asymmetry, I think.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
Grundulum posted:Cichlidae has posted before about why he thinks this isn't good practice, but I've forgotten his argument. It was something to do with information asymmetry, I think. The obvious reason it's a bad idea is because people in North America would just gun it as soon as they saw the green countdown getting too low, just like a lot of people use the crosswalk timers to do the same thing currently. It would be nice if reds had a way to indicate they're about to switch, so you could get your car in gear at the right time. I tend to use the crossing direction's countdown timer for that purpose, but it obviously doesn't work at every intersection.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
A countdown also implies a fixed pattern, which means that you can't preempt the light.PT6A posted:It would be nice if reds had a way to indicate they're about to switch, so you could get your car in gear at the right time. I tend to use the crossing direction's countdown timer for that purpose, but it obviously doesn't work at every intersection. Here, and in the rest of Europe I believe, the yellow light comes on for a second or two together with the red light before they switch. Don't they do that elsewhere? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6MSt46DCmU&t=0m11s
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
NFX posted:Here, and in the rest of Europe I believe, the yellow light comes on for a second or two together with the red light before they switch. Don't they do that elsewhere? That's not allowed in the US in normal use: "10 The following combinations of signal indications shall not be simultaneously displayed on any one signal face: A. CIRCULAR RED with CIRCULAR YELLOW; B. CIRCULAR GREEN with CIRCULAR RED; or C. Straight-through GREEN ARROW with CIRCULAR RED;"
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2014 23:29
|
|
|
NFX posted:A countdown also implies a fixed pattern, which means that you can't preempt the light. The lack of pre-emption makes sense, but presumably couldn't you just turn off the counter in the event of pre-emption? The light is still the thing that you must legally pay attention to; the counter is just a way to let you know to get your car in gear, or slow to a stop if you aren't going to make the light without having to put the brakes on too hard (especially important in places where car maintenance can tend to be overlooked). And, no, the lights in North America do not indicate they're about to turn green in any way. It probably has something to do with the fact that not many people drive manual transmissions, so there's less reason to do it, along with the illegality Install Windows describes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:That's not allowed in the US in normal use: I get the no-countdowns thing, but this one is really stupid. Having seen this in action in Europe, I really wish it was a thing in North America.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I get the no-countdowns thing, but this one is really stupid. Having seen this in action in Europe, I really wish it was a thing in North America. I believe it was allowable in the past and led to problems? Something else that could indicate the red is about to end can be allowable, but the indication cannot be the yellow lamp or the green lamp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
A few old-timey traffic signals in Massachusetts used to use circular red + circular yellow to mean an all-pedestrian phase. The last one that I knew of was replaced with a normal ped signal a few years back, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 02:50
|
|
|
PT6A posted:One thing I do like about Cuban traffic is the "via libre" at T-intersections. Basically, if the terminating road has a green light to turn left, but there are more lanes on the straight-through than there are lanes of traffic turning, then those extra lanes can proceed through on the red light. It threw me for a loop the first time I was in a taxi and I thought the taxi driver had just blown through a red light. They also have countdown timers for both red and green on most traffic lights, which I think is wonderful. China allowed this until recently, when they figured out that it caused a ridiculous number of accidents. Do Cubans always turn into the appropriate lane? Folks around here usually swing as wide as possible when they turn. PT6A posted:The lack of pre-emption makes sense, but presumably couldn't you just turn off the counter in the event of pre-emption? The light is still the thing that you must legally pay attention to; the counter is just a way to let you know to get your car in gear, or slow to a stop if you aren't going to make the light without having to put the brakes on too hard (especially important in places where car maintenance can tend to be overlooked). You need to think like a lawyer. The average driver doesn't know that a countdown isn't an official traffic control device. If they see they have 30 seconds left, and they divert their attention and T-bone an ambulance, it's the engineer's fault. You can have 1000 signs telling people not to drive the wrong way down the highway, but you turn a single "Do Not Enter" sign the wrong angle, and your rear end is getting sued. PittTheElder posted:I get the no-countdowns thing, but this one is really stupid. Having seen this in action in Europe, I really wish it was a thing in North America. It's definitely an information asymmetry thing. Anyone who knows a decent amount about signals can predict what phase is coming next by peeking at adjacent approaches, but lately we've been putting louvers and hoods over more and more signal heads to keep you from seeing anything but your own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:China allowed this until recently, when they figured out that it caused a ridiculous number of accidents. Do Cubans always turn into the appropriate lane? Folks around here usually swing as wide as possible when they turn. As far as I can tell, yes. The fact that cars are really goddamn expensive and all traffic accidents causing any injury are considered criminal matters probably motivates people to exercise caution. I've seen a few accidents, but they generally are caused by missing traffic control devices, retarded pedestrians (no, really, like walking across against the right of way without looking for traffic -- and not quickly, either), or mechanical failures. In general, I would say the ability of the average Cuban driver to operate their vehicle is above the standard of the average North American driver, and most of the danger on the road comes from other matters. Like the fact almost all cars are manual, and yet it's an acceptable and common practice to light a cigarette and talk on a mobile at the same time. Or the massive speed disparities between Hansom cabs/ox carts, bicitaxis, lovely motorcycles, average cars, and diplomatic cars. The actual act of driving the car is the least of their worries. Calgarians, on the other hand, have no idea how to turn into anything but the furthest lane if they're on the outside of a turn, so I understand very well why this couldn't ever work in North America. I once saw a situation where someone in the outside turning lane was upset because they couldn't shoot directly into the furthest lane, because an equally retarded driver had decided that the intersection should actually have a three-lane turn (does this exist anywhere?) and was already occupying the outer lane. PT6A fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Feb 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
Are there any places where there's a "stop unless you're going right" sort of sign? I'm thinking of a situation with a shallow fork on the approach (slight left or slight right), the only conflicting pattern is a nearly-U-turn left-turn that no one ever does unless they're lost, and visibility of the approach is good. There's a couple of these near my place and I'm always tempted to breeze through. I've driven through hundreds of times and never once seen someone take the competing left-turn. And if there was someone, I'd easily see them coming.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 06:15
|
|
|
SurgicalOntologist posted:Are there any places where there's a "stop unless you're going right" sort of sign? I'm thinking of a situation with a shallow fork on the approach (slight left or slight right), the only conflicting pattern is a nearly-U-turn left-turn that no one ever does unless they're lost, and visibility of the approach is good. Coincidentally, this is another strangeness I've seen in Cuba (at least I think it is, the words translate the way I would expect for a yield, not a stop). There are signs at some intersections that indicate that you are expected to yield when turning right on a red light (presumably instead of stopping outright). I've never seen one at an intersection not controlled by a light, mind you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:It's definitely an information asymmetry thing. Anyone who knows a decent amount about signals can predict what phase is coming next by peeking at adjacent approaches, but lately we've been putting louvers and hoods over more and more signal heads to keep you from seeing anything but your own. But isn't "This light is going to turn green in 1s" useful information to me? Sure it'll encourage people to try and peel off right as the light turns green, but those people are always going to do that anyway. Definitively telling me when the light is going to turn seems like a better idea than everyone trying to guess and starting rolling early anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:But isn't "This light is going to turn green in 1s" useful information to me? Sure it'll encourage people to try and peel off right as the light turns green, but those people are always going to do that anyway. Definitively telling me when the light is going to turn seems like a better idea than everyone trying to guess and starting rolling early anyway. And if it only gives a second's notice, that's just enough to switch from neutral to first anyway, so you're not sitting at a green light as you put your car in gear. I'm guessing the extremely low prevalence of manual transmissions is why the idea hasn't caught on in North America.
|
|
#
?
Feb 25, 2014 07:06
|
|