|
Yeah, cyclists on the sidewalk is just a hazard for everyone. I don't know how many times I've seen a cyclist do a sudden turn and cross a street on pedestrian crossings (illegal), without even looking for cars.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 09:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
"Them upside-down yellow triangles with red borders don't apply to me börkbörkböööörk" - Swedish cyclists on Swedish stop-signs "A nitwit on a bicycle was struck and killed when pedalling out in front of a big and slow vehicle visible from miles away" - The news every other day :/ I've received comments sounding like tumblr crying "ABLEIST SCUMAG" when (on the local newsboard) wishing for city-wide reminders of how to act on a bicycle. The times I see one looking before crossing, slowing down, ringing bell, taking care around animals and children are terribly rare.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 14:16
|
|
|
MrLonghair posted:"Them upside-down yellow triangles with red borders don't apply to me börkbörkböööörk" - Swedish cyclists on Swedish stop-signs How can one by ableist for insisting the people observe the law and common sense when on a bicycle?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
PT6A posted:How can one by ableist for insisting the people observe the law and common sense when on a bicycle? People who have no common sense, like to pretend they are just as handicapped as that drooling guy who serves coffee at Brownies'n'Downies. Telling them to look where they are going feels the same to them as telling a kid with Downs to go back to school and loving learn how to do complex math.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
Cross post from the youtube thread: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWMB_tcXO5A
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2015 23:24
|
|
|
leica posted:Cross post from the youtube thread: Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 01:08
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why you don't tailgate. Seriously. I mean, a couple more seconds of following distance might not have let him miss the crash entirely, but it certainly would have made his impact less severe. Wonder what happened to the driver of the Jeep? Don't see how they could have walked away from that without serious injuries, but I can't find any news articles on it, so maybe they lived.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Krakkles posted:And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why you don't tailgate. It scares me when I see 4-5 cars all driving along within feet of one another (at 70-80 mph no less). If the car in front has to break suddenly then they're all hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
PaganGoatPants posted:It scares me when I see 4-5 cars all driving along within feet of one another (at 70-80 mph no less). If the car in front has to break suddenly then they're all hosed. What do you mean increase following distance with speed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 02:19
|
|
|
dennyk posted:Seriously. I mean, a couple more seconds of following distance might not have let him miss the crash entirely, but it certainly would have made his impact less severe. The guy that posted the video said he was alive but in ICU. It's in Tampa right at the beginning of a huge freeway project they are working on now, you have to be paying attention 110% driving through it and obviously the jeep driver wasn't, probably on his phone I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
leica posted:The guy that posted the video said he was alive but in ICU. Yeah, even with a proper following distance, there's not much you can do when the car in front of you decelerates to 0 instantly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Yeah, even with a proper following distance, there's not much you can do when the car in front of you decelerates to 0 instantly. That's the definition of proper following distance
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:11
|
|
|
Maybe in pedantic world, but in the real world tailing a car by 500 feet or however long it takes to go from 70 to 0 under control just ain't gonna happen. If there's any traffic it's impossible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
xzzy posted:Maybe in pedantic world, but in the real world tailing a car by 500 feet or however long it takes to go from 70 to 0 under control just ain't gonna happen. If there's any traffic it's impossible. The definition doesn't change. Maintain proper following distance when you can, maintain the longest possible distance when you can't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
PINING 4 PORKINS posted:The definition doesn't change. Maintain proper following distance when you can, maintain the longest possible distance when you can't. What you're proposing is essentially stopping on the side of the road and waiting for traffic to thin out to next to nothing, because if you try to leave a quarter mile gap between yourself and the next car other assholes are just going to pull into it and you become a hazard to people behind you by constantly slowing down to maintain whatever arbitrary following distance you think will prevent any collision from ever happening.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
I like how several car lengths has now grown to a quarter of a mile
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
ohgodwhat posted:I like how several car lengths has now grown to a quarter of a mile And you think people aren't going to constantly cut in front of you if you leave "several car lengths"? Have you ever driven on the highway in a moderately populated area at any time of the day besides midnight to 6 AM?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
xzzy posted:If there's any traffic it's impossible. Pretty much. The gap it would take to stop in time for something like that would instantly be filled by five cars and you would get nowhere. [e] Sounds like some people live out in BFE and don't know what traffic is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
Geoj posted:And you think people aren't going to constantly cut in front of you if you leave "several car lengths"? Have you ever driven on the highway in a moderately populated area at any time of the day besides midnight to 6 AM? No, never 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Geoj posted:What you're proposing is essentially stopping on the side of the road and waiting for traffic to thin out to next to nothing, because if you try to leave a quarter mile gap between yourself and the next car other assholes are just going to pull into it and you become a hazard to people behind you by constantly slowing down to maintain whatever arbitrary following distance you think will prevent any collision from ever happening. Oh word, is that what I proposed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Lol you armchair warriors are delusional if you thought that was tailgating
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:39
|
|
|
I think...... ......nevermind
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
A 2011 suburban would need ~145 feet to go from 0-60. Add in the fact that traffic was almost certainly moving closer to 70 andyou get an absolutely impossible following distance for a freeway in a large city's downtown area. So no, you aren't dodging an accident where the car in front of you goes from 70-0, no matter what bullshit you've fed yourself about your ~super safe following distance~.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
Vehicles in dense traffic aren't going to instantly stop, barring some kind of catastrophe; metal on pavement should have a lower coefficient of friction than your tires, so even if someone has a massive mechanical failure ahead of you, you should be able to avoid a collision in most instances by braking if you are paying attention and start braking as soon as your little gap closes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 03:53
|
|
|
That Jeep didn't just insta-stop, it actually bounced backwards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Vehicles in dense traffic aren't going to instantly stop, barring some kind of catastrophe; metal on pavement should have a lower coefficient of friction than your tires, so even if someone has a massive mechanical failure ahead of you, you should be able to avoid a collision in most instances by braking if you are paying attention and start braking as soon as your little gap closes. Did you watch the video clip that spurred this conversation? E:FB
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Can we please not play word games over what "proper distance" means? Some people are using it to mean "the ideal distance when everybody behaves reasonably." Other people are using it to mean "what you should actually shoot for in everyday driving to maximize stopping distance while minimizing chance of people janking in front of you and defeating the purpose of maintaining distance." Neither group presumably has tablets handed down by God giving the one true definition; language doesn't work that way. Argue about what those two values are all you want, but don't waste time arguing over which is the platonic true meaning of a sentence somebody else wrote.
Blue Footed Booby fucked around with this message at 05:06 on Jul 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
SlapActionJackson posted:That Jeep didn't just insta-stop, it actually bounced backwards. Jesus, I didn't even notice that the first time. Yeah, the following distance you'd need to avoid that accident would be completely impractical if there were basically any other traffic on the freeway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
SlapActionJackson posted:That Jeep didn't just insta-stop, it actually bounced backwards. I wonder how many Gs the driver felt when it hit. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
SperginMcBadposter posted:I wonder how many Gs the driver felt when it hit. Maybe if he hadn't been following the solid thingy so closely he could've avoided it 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Maybe if he hadn't been following the solid thingy so closely he could've avoided it Remember to follow 1km away from all objects while driving
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
This is what he hit: https://www.google.com/maps/@27.950193,-82.524138,3a,75y,58.66h,62.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3-n7V2kkW0W4duOP69M8TQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
I am constantly surprised that there are people on here who haven't realized PINING 4 PORKINS/GENDERWEIRD GREEDO is not to be taken seriously. Also, I got nearly sideswiped by 3 different people today who all thought mirrors were for plebs. The last one I had to brake hard and make an unplanned lane change because they completely ignored my high beam flash and horn and just kept coming over regardless of the fact that I was already loving there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 06:38
|
|
|
SperginMcBadposter posted:I wonder how many Gs the driver felt when it hit. I watched it a couple times, and I wonder if the g force was strong enough it actually caused the brake pedal to depress by itself, cause the only time the brakes are lit is the moment of impact. I suppose in reality it was likely just his foot/leg hitting the brake pedal during the accident that caused them to light up. Testament to the design of those compressible barricade endcaps that the guy survived at all. If that had been into the end of a concrete barrier I'd imagine there would not be much recognizable of the car or driver afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 08:28
|
|
|
SlapActionJackson posted:That Jeep didn't just insta-stop, it actually bounced backwards. I think when the vehicle in front instantly goes from 70mph to -30mph and causes a gameover, it is acceptale to throw the controller on the ground and complain about the game's buggy physics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 08:29
|
|
|
...is that a regular bit of road design over there in the US? I suppose a bit of metal is slightly more forgiving than a concrete block but still, that was a heavy hit. *edit: looked more at the googlemaps link, and it's roadworks related. Ignore the question. Olympic Mathlete fucked around with this message at 08:54 on Jul 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 08:51
|
|
|
'gaters gonna 'gate
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 12:31
|
|
|
I have been in Rome since Thursday. Holy crap, are the drivers terrifying. My friend just drove down here from Germany, and apparently his trip in was the automotive equivalent of descending into Hell.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
88h88 posted:...is that a regular bit of road design over there in the US? I suppose a bit of metal is slightly more forgiving than a concrete block but still, that was a heavy hit. You'll see things like that (usually wider and more permanent) ahead of a bridge support column at exit ramps/interchanges. If you look closely it collapses in sections and usually has a spring or rubber (etc) to absorb the shock. Granted you wouldn't want to run into one, but it's better than smacking into an immovable support column or as in this case, a line of jersey barriers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 14:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
Piss in my gas tank if I'm wrong, but shouldn't safe following distance be a function of time rather than distance once you get out of town and on the highway? A buffer of X seconds will increase following distance with increased speed so it makes sense to me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2015 15:20
|
|
