States Boost Speed Limits On Major Highways

In article .com>, Old Wolf wrote:
> Mike T. wrote:
>>
>> Actually, higher limits could reduce or delay the start of gridlock.
>> Consider thousands of cars entering a freeway (not all at once), and all of
>> them going 65MPH. For each car, if they go exactly 65MPH, it will take X
>> amount of time to reach their exit. For each car, if their speed increases
>> to 80MPH, it will take something <X amount of time to reach their exit.
>> Basically, this means that the average number of cars on the road is
>> greater, at any one moment, if the average speed is lower.

> True, but not relevant. The number of cars that pass any given point
> in any given time period stays the same -- assuming that the cars
> maintain a fixed following time (eg. 2 seconds).

Only if the road is full. The idea is not to let the road get full, or
worse overfilled.

>> So if it takes 40,000 cars (for example) to clog the freeway,

> I think freeway clogging is more complicated than that.

Actually it's not if we are not considering special cases. It's the storage
term that indicates congestion provided there is no special event. The
number of vehicles built up in the system.

> Although a given LENGTH of freeway may have more cars on
> it if the cars are going slower, each POINT of freeway still has
> cars passing it at the same rate (as measured in cars/time),
> assuming people maintain a fixed time for their following distance.

Doesn't really mean anything. eventually too many vehicles are in the
system and there aren't enough lanes and not enough compression of
following distance is possible to keep that rate of vehicles passing a
single point constant.

> We've all seen traffic flow freely at a variety of speeds. It seems
> logical that clogging begins when somebody suddenly reduces
> the throughput of the point of freeway they are at (eg. they
> brake heavily). This quickly has a cascading effect and it all
> goes to hell.

Yes that is cause. this becomes ever more likely as vehicles build up in the
system. However, the road can only hold so many vehicles at a given
following distance. When that number is exceeded following distance is
compressed, the above becomes more likely, speeds drop. As more vehicles
enter the system the following distance is compressed to nearly zero. Now
the system crawls as people have to wedge their way in.

The concept is to keep the system from filling. Advocates of low speed
limits are all too eger to believe in this concept when a low speed limit
is used to reduce the rate of vehicles reaching a bottle neck. To prevent
vehicles from building up in that part of the system. Since it is a given
that this works, the other side is increasing the speed limit where
possible to get vehicles _out_ of an area at an increased rate to prevent
a build up.

> What's more, the effect of on and off ramps and the amount of
> traffic leaving or entering at each, and the ease of merging of
> the ramp design, is also a big factor. It really does seem like
> a can of worms to try and analyse, without a big computer
> simulation and accurate observational data.

Bone headed road design plays a big part. See bottle necks above. However
it doesn't change the basic fact that the highest qout that is safely
possible will reduce congestion. The whole idea of correcting such bone
headed road design is to increase qout.

> I think the advantage of higher speed limits is that it counters
> the effect of LLBs. When you have LLBs you may notice
> that traffic ends up driving in clumps. There will be a bunch of
> say 100 cars over a 1km stretch, and then only a handful
> of cars in the 1km stretch ahead of the LLB. This effectively
> means that the road is only getting half the throughput that
> it would be if the traffic was spread out and taking up the
> whole road equally. In other words, it's the same average
> throughput as if everyone were spaced out equally and
> driving half the speed.

Correct. Also, it is these clumps that grow into one another at the onset
of congestion.

> People often say 'traffic would be ideal if everyone drove the
> same speed' but in fact that is the worst situation: it leads to
> big clumps and the maximum throughput of the road is nowhere
> near reached.

Yep. The ideal flow is like that of half a pipe. Those at the outside
flowing slower those on the inside flowing faster.

> With no LLBing, people can generally drive at whatever speed
> they want and not be held up by other traffic. This means that
> there is never any 'artificial' restriction to throughput. Most of the
> tarmac is in use at any point in time.

And holds to the live and let live concepts upon which the USA was founded.

> Underposted speed limits mean that you get LLBs who justify
> their behaviour by saying they are following the limit. Even
> a single LLB on a 3-lane freeway can turn a free flow into a
> crawling mess, if traffic volumes are heavy.

Yep.

laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
> On 20 Jul 2006 07:53:06 -0700, "gpsman" >
> wrote:
>
> >The Wall Street Journal
> >Moves Come Despite Concerns
> >Over Safety, High Gas Prices;
> >80 Miles Per Hour in Texas
> >By STEPHANIE CHEN
> >July 20, 2006; Page D1
> >
> >With gasoline prices approaching an average of $3 a gallon and Middle
> >East strife escalating, it might seem like a bad time to encourage
> >drivers to burn even more fuel. But speed limits on stretches of
> >freeways around the country are rising -- just in time for summer road
> >trips.
> >
> >States around the country, including Texas and Michigan, have recently
> >increased speed limits on hundreds of miles of interstate highways and
> >freeways. Other states are expected to follow soon.
> >
> >Near Detroit, drivers long confronted by signs telling them to go no
> >more than 55 miles per hour or 65 mph are seeing new signs with 70 mph
> >speed limits. By November, cruising at 70 mph will be allowed on nearly
> >200 miles of road, including parts of Interstate 75 and M-59, a major
> >suburban route. Texas has begun erecting 80 mph signs along 521 miles
> >of I-10 and I-20 in 10 rural western counties, giving them the highest
> >speed limit in the U.S. In September, Virginia is likely to boost the
> >speed limit on I-85 near the North Carolina border to 70 mph from 65
> >mph.
> >
> >Driving faster may get people to their destinations more quickly, but
> >it can also add to the rising cost of owning a car. The Department of
> >Energy estimates that every five miles per hour a person drives above
> >60 mph costs an extra 20 cents a gallon, for a fuel-efficiency loss of
> >7% to 23%, depending on the type of car and gas. That's because higher
> >speeds increase aerodynamic drag on a car, requiring more horsepower.
> >Over a year, it costs roughly an additional $180 in gas to drive 75 mph
> >instead of 60 mph, according to the Environmental and Energy Study
> >Institute, which promotes energy efficiency and renewable energy.
> >
> >Bruce Jones, director of the Minnesota Center for Automotive Research
> >at Minnesota State University in Mankato, calculates from federal data
> >that driving 75 mph, rather than 65, would increase gas expenses by
> >about $121 a year for a 2006 Pontiac G6 sedan and $217 for a Hummer.
> >
> >But lawmakers in Texas, Michigan and other states say that raising
> >speed limits will make roads safer by restoring credibility to
> >speed-limit signs and making driving speeds more uniform. While
> >transportation engineers acknowledge that raising speed limits hurts
> >fuel efficiency, they contend that careful studies of traffic flow and
> >driver behavior show that many speed limits are actually too low. Most
> >drivers who exceed these low speed limits are doing it safely. "In
> >Texas, they are already going [80 mph] anyway," says Carlos Lopez,
> >director of traffic operations at the Texas Department of
> >Transportation. "People are driving where they feel comfortable."
> >
> >John Stinson, a home remodeler who lives in Mount Clemens, Mich., says
> >the new 70 mph speed limit on the Van Dyke Expressway gives him an
> >extra "cushion" during his commutes of as much as 200 miles throughout
> >southeastern Michigan. "There won't be the slow people holding everyone
> >up and the fast people weaving in and out," he says.
> >
> >It has long been thought that higher speed limits lead to more road
> >fatalities. But the link has been disputed. Many modern roads are built
> >to accommodate vehicles moving at faster speeds, and many drivers are
> >now protected by front and side airbags.
> >
> >In 2005, the number of injuries per mile on the U.S. interstate-highway
> >system fell to the lowest level since it was established by President
> >Eisenhower in 1956, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety
> >Administration. But Russ Retting, a senior transportation engineer at
> >the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a research group funded by
> >auto insurers, says fatality rates were 17% higher in states that
> >raised speed limits from 1995 to 1999 than in states that didn't.
> >
> >"It's difficult to generalize information out of all the noise," says
> >Karl Zimmerman, an assistant research engineer at Texas Transportation
> >Institute, part of Texas A&M University, adding that many crashes are
> >caused by weather, driver inattentiveness and road conditions that
> >aren't connected to speed limits.
> >
> >Recent speed-limit increases in Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Texas are
> >the latest in a string of jumps dating back to the 1995 repeal of the
> >nationwide 55 mph speed limit, mandated by Congress in 1974. More than
> >a dozen states quickly gave drivers the freedom to push the pedal
> >closer to the metal, especially in Western and Midwestern states with
> >less congestion, scattered populations and wide, straight interstates.
> >A total of 31 states now have a maximum speed limit of at least 70 mph,
> >according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
> >
> >Shaunee Lynch, spokeswoman for the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet,
> >says the state agency hopes that lawmakers will agree early next year
> >to raise the speed limit to 70 mph from the current 65 mph to keep up
> >with surrounding states that already let drivers go that fast. Drivers
> >aren't happy when signs at the border warn them to slow down, she says.
> >
> >In Louisiana, state Sen. Joe McPherson says he plans to revive his
> >unsuccessful bill that would have raised the speed limit on Louisiana
> >interstates to 75 mph from 70 mph and on limited-access freeways to 70
> >mph from 65 mph. "If 35 mph is more fuel-efficient than 55 mph, then
> >why don't we all just drive 35 mph?" he says in response to
> >fuel-efficiency critics.
> >
> >State lawmakers typically set statewide speed limits, with
> >transportation officials determining which stretches of roads can
> >safely handle faster-moving traffic. It isn't clear if the urge to
> >increase speed limits on interstates will trickle down to smaller roads
> >and streets, usually controlled by local officials.
> >
> >Speed limits for cars and trucks can vary, with Illinois restricting
> >truck drivers to no more than 55 mph -- or 10 mph slower than the
> >maximum interstate-highway speed for cars. A bid to increase the speed
> >limit for trucks to 65 mph was vetoed by the Illinois governor in 2004.
> >In Michigan, the speed limit for trucks will be raised to 65 mph by
> >November -- but that still keeps them slower than cars.
> >
> >It is too soon to tell whether some speed demons will see rising speed
> >limits as an excuse to go even faster. But Michigan transportation
> >officials are encouraged by the results of boosting the speed limit on
> >Interstate 69 near Flint to 70 mph last August. When the speed limit
> >was 55 mph, about 1.8% of all vehicles zipped along at more than 80
> >mph. That fell to 1% after the change. http://tinyurl.com/fpx2r
> > -----
> >
> >- gpsman
>
> Total insanity. Here we are invading defenseless countries and killing
> thousands of innocent people over oil and the govt encourages people
> to drive faster and thus waste more oil.

So you think speed limits are too high? If you don't want to drive
that fast, don't...it's your call, no problem. The rest of us can pass
you in the proper spots.

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 00:59:44 -0700, A Beautiful Mind
> wrote:

>
>>
>> Total insanity. Here we are invading defenseless countries and killing
>> thousands of innocent people over oil and the govt encourages people
>> to drive faster and thus waste more oil.
>>
>Oh, Boo Hoo, I'm so upset over the oil use. If every liberal wacko and
>tree hugger would sell their car for scrap, there would be plenty of oil
>for those of us who like to drive.

I'm doing my part. I don't drive much and when i do i drive slowly.

PS - only a psychopath like you LIKES to drive.

"laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 00:59:44 -0700, A Beautiful Mind
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> Total insanity. Here we are invading defenseless countries and killing
>>> thousands of innocent people over oil and the govt encourages people
>>> to drive faster and thus waste more oil.
>>>
>>Oh, Boo Hoo, I'm so upset over the oil use. If every liberal wacko and
>>tree hugger would sell their car for scrap, there would be plenty of oil
>>for those of us who like to drive.
>
> I'm doing my part. I don't drive much and when i do i drive slowly.
>
> PS - only a psychopath like you LIKES to drive.
>

I love getting the Armada up to MY speed as fast as possible. I do my share
to use the gas and spew the toxins into the air. The sooner the world chokes
to death the better.

"morticide" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE wrote:
>> On 20 Jul 2006 07:53:06 -0700, "gpsman" >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The Wall Street Journal
>> >Moves Come Despite Concerns
>> >Over Safety, High Gas Prices;
>> >80 Miles Per Hour in Texas
>> >By STEPHANIE CHEN
>> >July 20, 2006; Page D1
>> >
>> >With gasoline prices approaching an average of $3 a gallon and Middle
>> >East strife escalating, it might seem like a bad time to encourage
>> >drivers to burn even more fuel. But speed limits on stretches of
>> >freeways around the country are rising -- just in time for summer road
>> >trips.
>> >
>> >States around the country, including Texas and Michigan, have recently
>> >increased speed limits on hundreds of miles of interstate highways and
>> >freeways. Other states are expected to follow soon.
>> >
>> >Near Detroit, drivers long confronted by signs telling them to go no
>> >more than 55 miles per hour or 65 mph are seeing new signs with 70 mph
>> >speed limits. By November, cruising at 70 mph will be allowed on nearly
>> >200 miles of road, including parts of Interstate 75 and M-59, a major
>> >suburban route. Texas has begun erecting 80 mph signs along 521 miles
>> >of I-10 and I-20 in 10 rural western counties, giving them the highest
>> >speed limit in the U.S. In September, Virginia is likely to boost the
>> >speed limit on I-85 near the North Carolina border to 70 mph from 65
>> >mph.
>> >
>> >Driving faster may get people to their destinations more quickly, but
>> >it can also add to the rising cost of owning a car. The Department of
>> >Energy estimates that every five miles per hour a person drives above
>> >60 mph costs an extra 20 cents a gallon, for a fuel-efficiency loss of
>> >7% to 23%, depending on the type of car and gas. That's because higher
>> >speeds increase aerodynamic drag on a car, requiring more horsepower.
>> >Over a year, it costs roughly an additional $180 in gas to drive 75 mph
>> >instead of 60 mph, according to the Environmental and Energy Study
>> >Institute, which promotes energy efficiency and renewable energy.
>> >
>> >Bruce Jones, director of the Minnesota Center for Automotive Research
>> >at Minnesota State University in Mankato, calculates from federal data
>> >that driving 75 mph, rather than 65, would increase gas expenses by
>> >about $121 a year for a 2006 Pontiac G6 sedan and $217 for a Hummer.
>> >
>> >But lawmakers in Texas, Michigan and other states say that raising
>> >speed limits will make roads safer by restoring credibility to
>> >speed-limit signs and making driving speeds more uniform. While
>> >transportation engineers acknowledge that raising speed limits hurts
>> >fuel efficiency, they contend that careful studies of traffic flow and
>> >driver behavior show that many speed limits are actually too low. Most
>> >drivers who exceed these low speed limits are doing it safely. "In
>> >Texas, they are already going [80 mph] anyway," says Carlos Lopez,
>> >director of traffic operations at the Texas Department of
>> >Transportation. "People are driving where they feel comfortable."
>> >
>> >John Stinson, a home remodeler who lives in Mount Clemens, Mich., says
>> >the new 70 mph speed limit on the Van Dyke Expressway gives him an
>> >extra "cushion" during his commutes of as much as 200 miles throughout
>> >southeastern Michigan. "There won't be the slow people holding everyone
>> >up and the fast people weaving in and out," he says.
>> >
>> >It has long been thought that higher speed limits lead to more road
>> >fatalities. But the link has been disputed. Many modern roads are built
>> >to accommodate vehicles moving at faster speeds, and many drivers are
>> >now protected by front and side airbags.
>> >
>> >In 2005, the number of injuries per mile on the U.S. interstate-highway
>> >system fell to the lowest level since it was established by President
>> >Eisenhower in 1956, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety
>> >Administration. But Russ Retting, a senior transportation engineer at
>> >the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a research group funded by
>> >auto insurers, says fatality rates were 17% higher in states that
>> >raised speed limits from 1995 to 1999 than in states that didn't.
>> >
>> >"It's difficult to generalize information out of all the noise," says
>> >Karl Zimmerman, an assistant research engineer at Texas Transportation
>> >Institute, part of Texas A&M University, adding that many crashes are
>> >caused by weather, driver inattentiveness and road conditions that
>> >aren't connected to speed limits.
>> >
>> >Recent speed-limit increases in Indiana, Iowa, Michigan and Texas are
>> >the latest in a string of jumps dating back to the 1995 repeal of the
>> >nationwide 55 mph speed limit, mandated by Congress in 1974. More than
>> >a dozen states quickly gave drivers the freedom to push the pedal
>> >closer to the metal, especially in Western and Midwestern states with
>> >less congestion, scattered populations and wide, straight interstates.
>> >A total of 31 states now have a maximum speed limit of at least 70 mph,
>> >according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
>> >
>> >Shaunee Lynch, spokeswoman for the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet,
>> >says the state agency hopes that lawmakers will agree early next year
>> >to raise the speed limit to 70 mph from the current 65 mph to keep up
>> >with surrounding states that already let drivers go that fast. Drivers
>> >aren't happy when signs at the border warn them to slow down, she says.
>> >
>> >In Louisiana, state Sen. Joe McPherson says he plans to revive his
>> >unsuccessful bill that would have raised the speed limit on Louisiana
>> >interstates to 75 mph from 70 mph and on limited-access freeways to 70
>> >mph from 65 mph. "If 35 mph is more fuel-efficient than 55 mph, then
>> >why don't we all just drive 35 mph?" he says in response to
>> >fuel-efficiency critics.
>> >
>> >State lawmakers typically set statewide speed limits, with
>> >transportation officials determining which stretches of roads can
>> >safely handle faster-moving traffic. It isn't clear if the urge to
>> >increase speed limits on interstates will trickle down to smaller roads
>> >and streets, usually controlled by local officials.
>> >
>> >Speed limits for cars and trucks can vary, with Illinois restricting
>> >truck drivers to no more than 55 mph -- or 10 mph slower than the
>> >maximum interstate-highway speed for cars. A bid to increase the speed
>> >limit for trucks to 65 mph was vetoed by the Illinois governor in 2004.
>> >In Michigan, the speed limit for trucks will be raised to 65 mph by
>> >November -- but that still keeps them slower than cars.
>> >
>> >It is too soon to tell whether some speed demons will see rising speed
>> >limits as an excuse to go even faster. But Michigan transportation
>> >officials are encouraged by the results of boosting the speed limit on
>> >Interstate 69 near Flint to 70 mph last August. When the speed limit
>> >was 55 mph, about 1.8% of all vehicles zipped along at more than 80
>> >mph. That fell to 1% after the change. http://tinyurl.com/fpx2r
>> > -----
>> >
>> >- gpsman
>>
>> Total insanity. Here we are invading defenseless countries and killing
>> thousands of innocent people over oil and the govt encourages people
>> to drive faster and thus waste more oil.
>
> So you think speed limits are too high? If you don't want to drive
> that fast, don't...it's your call, no problem. The rest of us can pass
> you in the proper spots.
>

It's not about wasting oil. The guy is a wuss and is scared enough already
on the roads. How will he handle drivers going even faster? He will be
soiling himself as soon as he hits the onramp.

>
> I love getting the Armada up to MY speed as fast as possible. I do my
> share to use the gas and spew the toxins into the air. The sooner the
> world chokes to death the better.

There's some truth to that. Nobody seems overly motivated to do anything
about the oil crisis or global warming. Things are going to have to get a
lot worse before people are motivated to make real improvements. So burn it
up like there's no tomorrow. -Dave

"Mike T." > wrote in message
reenews.net...
> >
>> I love getting the Armada up to MY speed as fast as possible. I do my
>> share to use the gas and spew the toxins into the air. The sooner the
>> world chokes to death the better.
>
> There's some truth to that. Nobody seems overly motivated to do anything
> about the oil crisis or global warming. Things are going to have to get a
> lot worse before people are motivated to make real improvements. So burn
> it up like there's no tomorrow. -Dave
>

Exactly. Why conserve when it just prolongs the problem. Lets get this show
on the road and burn this sucker up.

Old Wolf wrote: <brevity snip>

> I think the advantage of higher speed limits is that it counters
> the effect of LLBs. When you have LLBs you may notice
> that traffic ends up driving in clumps.

How would a higher limit, let's call it higher average traffic velocity
since I think that was your intent, counter LLB's? Faster traffic
would reach and "clump" behind the LLB at a greater rate, ISTM.

And traffic routinely develops "clumps" on wide open roads all across
the US west, you can see them for miles. It is common in MT to see
drivers from CA and WA tailgating another vehicle for no reason at all,
and continuing to tailgate for miles when no other traffic is
present... in either direction. My WAG is that they drive as they
always do back home, with little if any thought.

And it clumps in less than wide open conditions as well, as any
competent driver can tell you. I find myself driving in relative
solitude as big clumps of speeding traffic pass and I can see the next
clump way behind that one, sometimes occupied by a lone competent MC
rider seeking to heighten his chances of remaining alive.

> People often say 'traffic would be ideal if everyone drove the
> same speed' but in fact that is the worst situation: it leads to
> big clumps and the maximum throughput of the road is nowhere
> near reached.

Huhwhat?!!! How are clumps going to form if everyone is driving the
same speed? And, if everyone is driving the same speed, how would
clumping detrimentally effect throughput?

I think you're looking for arguments to support your preconceived
misperceptions and accepting the first thing that pops into your head
without examination.

> With no LLBing, people can generally drive at whatever speed
> they want and not be held up by other traffic. This means that
> there is never any 'artificial' restriction to throughput. Most of the
> tarmac is in use at any point in time.

I think I get it now; you're retarded. ISTM you are forwarding the
idea that heavy traffic generally flows smoothly and faster traffic
generally never comes upon slower traffic... unless it's an LLB.

> Underposted speed limits mean that you get LLBs who justify
> their behaviour by saying they are following the limit.

So... you're saying that a higher limit will cause totally clueless
idiots to move from the L lane? It's hard to say but I've never
noticed that where the limit is 75... and I think your assumption of
cause and effect is rather faulty.

I think old people drive in the L lane as a method of protection from
so many faster drivers approaching them from both sides when they drive
in a middle lane. Driving in the R lane exposes them to hundreds, if
not thousands of feet of accelerating vehicles attempting to merge onto
the highway at once while failing to leave adequate space between their
vehicles. As long as morons continue that practice old folks are going
to continue to risk being cited for KRETP without regard to the SL.

LLB's are not much of a problem for drivers who look far enough ahead
of their vehicle and make their move early and demonstrate a little
patience. I encountered one yesterday and she posed no delay for me.
The traffic that remained lined up behind her was delayed, but not by
any significant amount.
-----

- gpsman

Loco laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE proud graduate of the South Hampton
Institute of Technology relaxed its anal sphincter muscle and spewed
this bull**** all over in rec.autos.driving:

> I'm doing my part.

No you're not, you selfish prick.

> I don't drive much and when i do i drive slowly.

Then do the world a favor, send your POS beater to the shredder and
don't drive at all, you killer. Or better yet, send your POS to the
shredder with you still in the drivers seat.

> PS - only a psychopath like you LIKES to drive.

I love being a psychopath.

--
--
"> Have you ever driven a car faster than the legal speed limit?

Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5
years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in
cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open
stretch could be 25, i thought."

Pride of America (c.k.a. "laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMOCIDE), 10/3/2002
Message-ID: >
http://tinyurl.com/5u4wg

Connecting POA to LBMHB/lbVH:
See the following: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj

A Beautiful Mind wrote:
>
> Oh, Boo Hoo, I'm so upset over the oil use. If every liberal wacko and
> tree hugger would sell their car for scrap, there would be plenty of oil
> for those of us who like to drive.

Ummm, this particular liberal wacko prefers watching the reflection of
your car get much smaller very quickly in my mirrors. ~~~~ =:^D
--
C.R. Krieger
'88 BMW 535is