Rule in Australia is that you have to stop before the stop line, but if you can't do that, but can stop before reaching the edge of the junction itself (ie, before you actually conflict with other traffic) then you must stop there instead - even if by doing so you'll obstruct a pedestrian crossing area, risking them walking in front of your car and into the conflicting traffic.
But Australian traffic authorities never did believe in keeping is simple - or sane.
Sylvia.
Only if you aren't a brain dead redneck who asks too many stupid question. They have to get out and push their vehicle wherever they were going.
We are trying to get the sam law passed for all snowbirds, with the exception they have to get out at the state border and siphon the gas out of their tanks before pushing it to Miami, or some other geezer conclave.
-- You can\'t have a sense of humor, if you have no sense!
Well, the Arizona Driving Licence manual gives a graph of average stopping distances for different speeds. It doesn't give a distance for
55mph, but interpolating betwee 50 and 60, gives an average stopping distance of 304 feet.You travel that distance in 3.77 seconds at 55 mph.
Giving a 0.5 second leeway - in good conditions, and for a driver with average reaction times, and provided you're willing to do what amounts to an emergency stop when needed.
It does seem to be cutting things rather fine, and I doubt you could always be sure of not running the light in wet weather.
Sylvia.
The standard thinking/braking/stopping distances assume 1 second prior to hitting the brakes then constant 4.23 m/s/s deceleration.
55mph is 24.6 m/s, which works out at 5.8s + 1s = 6.8s. 4.3 seconds works out at (4.3-1)/4.2 = 13.86 m/s = 31mph before you have to either think/brake quicker than assumed for the standard stopping distances or jump the red light.Stopping distances as supposed to correspond to an emergency stop with "adequate" brakes, tyres, road conditions and driver. One would hope that traffic lights aren't timed for an emergency stop.
intersection on red
weather conditions..
As far as running red lights, i have seen a traaail of cars (3-5) where the first one just "squeeked" thru.
But most of the time there is someone determined to push the boundary and go through on red. But I think shortening the yellow delay to make money is ridiculous and I am surprised that it is permitted. What do the US national standards say?
Most of the UK red light cameras tend to be on junctions where there have been serious smashes. I don't really object to them - they enforce discipline on the roads. Speed cameras are much more about raising money.
That seems excessively long. UK driving code gives 315 feet as the typical emergency stopping distance for a car at 70mph. And in practice modern vehicles with disk brakes and ABS can beat that number easily.
I presume the US stopping distances are based on bald cross ply tyres, sloppy suspension and drum brakes.
If the weather conditions are hostile you should not be going so fast that you cannot stop under control. Cars can aquaplane at 50+mph if they try to stop too suddenly.
Regards, Martin Brown
Robert Baer wrote in news:taqdnWrbhNrG5nDUnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@posted.localnet:
In the Orlando area,I OFTEN see more than one car run a single RL. University and SR436,several cars go thru on the red,in a stream. They don't stop until cars from the opposite direction begin pulling out into the intersection.
-- Jim Yanik jyanik at kua.net
Popular Science did a pretty good work-up on red light cameras a few years ago, and Parade Magazine more recently.
Using Sylvia's calculations, if the yellow is shortened to 3.75 seconds and you are 300 feet from the light when it changes, you are getting a ticket. Assuming you have the reaction time of a kid that can play "Doom" for 5 hours, a clean dry road, tires that are not too old or too new and a functioning 4-wheel ABS system. Anything less than that, or if the guy behind you has less than that, you're having an accident. That could be why so many states are now charging the victims for the clean-up costs associated with an accident. Double your fun, double your money.
"Nobody", Could there actually be a "sweet spot" as "att" alludes to, where you are certain to get ticketed? If that could be proved I'd have a heyday with a newspaper article ;-)
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC\'s and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
I love to cook with wine Sometimes I even put it in the food
Handy-dandy spreadsheet:
If it's posted at 45 but someone's zipping along at 55+, and can't (or won't) stop before the intersection, and then gets dinged with running the red, well boo-fscking-hoo.
And, oh yeah, you kids get off my lawn!
-- Rich Webb Norfolk, VA
[snip]
No. Some of us still have to get out and light the wicks manually.
-- Paul Hovnanian mailto: snipped-for-privacy@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------ The blinking cursor writes; and having writ, blinks on.
[snip]
I don't know how your traffic standards are written down under. But here in the USA, every petty little local city council or police department gets to fiddle with their own traffic controls.
What really bothers me about this is that many of these municipalities asked for and received some pretty substantial federal subsidies to put state of the art equipment in. And then when the feds leave, they whip out the screwdrivers and bugger up the timing, just like it was before the upgrade.
One of my favorite examples is the traffic control through the middle of the Microsoft campus (a public street). For years, Redmond used short pedestrian crossing signals for 'traffic calming'. Together with mis-timing, having to slam on the brakes because some overweight s/w geek can't waddle across the street fast enough was funny (if you have a sick sense of humor). Then, the city undertook a major signal automation project, including big signs indicating how many millions of dollars of federal funds were being used. After it was all completed, the city just switched the new, high tech lights over to the same timing patterns that the old ones had.
I think the feds should audit this stuff and demand their money back if the locals don't manage the systems properly.
-- Paul Hovnanian mailto:Paul@Hovnanian.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ Bloody typical, they've gone back to metric without telling us.
That's why there haven't been any "terrorist" attacks in the US since the 9/11 super-vandalism; Al Q. and his friends have been rolling on the floor laughing, watching Washington, DC do more damage to America than any number of "terrorists" could even DREAM of doing.
Thanks, Rich
The last time I ran a red light, they didn't _need_ any cameras - I T-boned some guy and my car was totaled. It was still drivable, during the daytime (no headlights); the cost of the body work would have been more than the car's bluebook.
Thanks, Rich
...
Please don't post in HTML. USENET is a textual medium.
Thanks, Rich
Was it on a metered on-ramp? >:->
Cheers! Rich
In California traffic school about twenty years ago, they said that if your front bumper is over the limit line or into the crosswalk when the light turns yellow, you are _required_ to go through the intersection.
Presumably, this is to minimize "gridlock".
Cheers! Rich
You should have seen the roads (and ditches) in South Carolina after about a 2" snowfall.
Cheers! Rich
This is almost de rigeur at metered left-turn lanes.
Cheers! Rich
I've seen several "walk" lights here in So. Cal that actually give you a "don't walk" countdown: It says "Walk" (or has that little walking guy), for a very few seconds, then in orange, it counts, "15, 14, 13,..." and when it reaches zero, you get the orange hand.
I rather like it. :-)
Cheers! Rich
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.