Why highways move more swiftly when you force cars to crawl along at55 mph.

Go Slow To Go Fast
Why highways move more swiftly when you force cars to crawl along at
55 mph.

Slate Magazine
By Tom Vanderbilt | Posted Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2011, at 3:19 PM ET

There is no more common lament voiced by the American driver than of
the one about the “idiot” in the “fast lane” who’s slowing down
traffic. If everyone could just drive faster, the thinking goes—if we
could only cull the weak gazelles in our furiously charging migration—
we could stamp out congestion.

We equate speed in traffic with efficiency. In the U.K., the Tory
government is currently advocating raising the speed limit on certain
motorway sections to 80 MPH, anticipating a massive windfall in
economic productivity and time saved. It’s speed as the health of the
state! (Though not all projections are so rosy.)

But one thing that tends to be lost on the individual driver, who
through the proscenium of his windshield commands what he believes to
be an empirically incontrovertible perspective on the ground truth of
traffic, is that sometimes you have to go slower to go faster.

Full article:
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/t...i_.single.html
-----

- gpsman

"American Association of Surface Highway Transportation Officials"

I guess when a highway is elevated or below grade it comes under different
departments.

On Oct 16, 6:26*am, gpsman > wrote:
> Go Slow To Go Fast
> Why highways move more swiftly when you force cars to crawl along at
> 55 mph.
>
> Slate Magazine
> By Tom Vanderbilt | Posted Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2011, at 3:19 PM ET
>
> There is no more common lament voiced by the American driver than of
> the one about the “idiot” in the “fast lane” who’s slowing down
> traffic. If everyone could just drive faster, the thinking goes—if we
> could only cull the weak gazelles in our furiously charging migration—
> we could stamp out congestion.
>
> We equate speed in traffic with efficiency. In the U.K., the Tory
> government is currently advocating raising the speed limit on certain
> motorway sections to 80 MPH, anticipating a massive windfall in
> economic productivity and time saved. It’s speed as the health of the
> state! (Though not all projections are so rosy.)
>
> But one thing that tends to be lost on the individual driver, who
> through the proscenium of his windshield commands what he believes to
> be an empirically incontrovertible perspective on the ground truth of
> traffic, is that sometimes you have to go slower to go faster.
>
> Full article:http://www.slate.com/articles/life/t...lling_speed_ha...
> *-----
>
> - gpsman

lots of print space used to sum up what has been known since way
back.

"If everyone would just "go with the flow" traffic would move a lot
better".

Harry K

On Oct 16, 9:26*am, gpsman > wrote:
> Go Slow To Go Fast
> Why highways move more swiftly when you force cars to crawl along at
> 55 mph.
>
> Slate Magazine
> By Tom Vanderbilt | Posted Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2011, at 3:19 PM ET
>
> There is no more common lament voiced by the American driver than of
> the one about the “idiot” in the “fast lane” who’s slowing down
> traffic. If everyone could just drive faster, the thinking goes—if we
> could only cull the weak gazelles in our furiously charging migration—
> we could stamp out congestion.
>
> We equate speed in traffic with efficiency. In the U.K., the Tory
> government is currently advocating raising the speed limit on certain
> motorway sections to 80 MPH, anticipating a massive windfall in
> economic productivity and time saved. It’s speed as the health of the
> state! (Though not all projections are so rosy.)
>
> But one thing that tends to be lost on the individual driver, who
> through the proscenium of his windshield commands what he believes to
> be an empirically incontrovertible perspective on the ground truth of
> traffic, is that sometimes you have to go slower to go faster.
>
> Full article:http://www.slate.com/articles/life/t...lling_speed_ha...
> *-----
>
> - gpsman

The only reason this holds is because the road they cited has numerous
engineering problems. Eliminate the merges, and add climbing lanes on
the steep grades, and I'm sure it would be different. They are right
that speed difference is the problem though, but instead of slowing
everyone down, they should just post a minimum speed and ticket
everyone who doesn't follow it (unless conditions require it).

On 10/16/2011 12:44 PM, deanej wrote:

> The only reason this holds is because the road they cited has numerous
> engineering problems. Eliminate the merges, and add climbing lanes on
> the steep grades, and I'm sure it would be different. They are right
> that speed difference is the problem though, but instead of slowing
> everyone down, they should just post a minimum speed and ticket
> everyone who doesn't follow it (unless conditions require it).

Ticketing those who don't maintain minimum speed isn't practical. It's
better to restrict which vehicles are allowed on the highway. If a
given vehicle isn't capable of maintaining the minimum speed, then they
shouldn't be allowed to even enter the highway. Just like bicycles
aren't allowed on interstate highways in the east, you could disallow
vehicles like tractor-trailers that can't maintain speed on upgrades.

On 2011-10-16 13:08, Arif Khokar wrote:
> Ticketing those who don't maintain minimum speed isn't practical. It's better
> to restrict which vehicles are allowed on the highway. If a given vehicle
> isn't capable of maintaining the minimum speed, then they shouldn't be allowed
> to even enter the highway. Just like bicycles aren't allowed on interstate
> highways in the east, you could disallow vehicles like tractor-trailers that
> can't maintain speed on upgrades.

I prefer George Carlin's idea. Give every driver a paintball gun. Then when
somebody accumulates five paint splats, he gets pulled over and written a ticket
for being an asshole.

If you **** off the majority of drivers, then you're doing wrong. Period.

Arif Khokar > wrote:

> On 10/16/2011 12:44 PM, deanej wrote:
>
>> The only reason this holds is because the road they cited has numerous
>> engineering problems. Eliminate the merges, and add climbing lanes on
>> the steep grades, and I'm sure it would be different. They are right
>> that speed difference is the problem though, but instead of slowing
>> everyone down, they should just post a minimum speed and ticket
>> everyone who doesn't follow it (unless conditions require it).
>
> Ticketing those who don't maintain minimum speed isn't practical. It's
> better to restrict which vehicles are allowed on the highway. If a
> given vehicle isn't capable of maintaining the minimum speed, then they
> shouldn't be allowed to even enter the highway. Just like bicycles
> aren't allowed on interstate highways in the east, you could disallow
> vehicles like tractor-trailers that can't maintain speed on upgrades.

Considering that the article was about I70 in the Colorado mountains,
none of the above suggestions are really practical. The
Eisenhower/Johnson tunnels are only two lanes each way, and it is
unlikely that they will be enlarged in our lifetimes. Climbing lanes
already exist on the steeper sections, but the CDOT often stops traffic
completely at the tunnels when traffic gets backed up to control the
flow. The stops can be up to 20 minutes to allow the tunnels to clear.

The gradients on the highway are 6 to 7 percent in places, which limit
the speeds of heavy trucks to 25 or 30 mph in both the uphill and
downhill directions. Putting a minimum speed on the route would simply
add costs to support the communities along the highway. Alternate
routes, like Loveland Pass, and regularly closed because of the weather.
Longer distance trucks already use the Interstates through New Mexico or
Wyoming.

"deanej" > wrote in message
...
On Oct 16, 9:26 am, gpsman > wrote:
> Go Slow To Go Fast
> Why highways move more swiftly when you force cars to crawl along at
> 55 mph.
>
> Slate Magazine
> By Tom Vanderbilt | Posted Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2011, at 3:19 PM ET
>
> There is no more common lament voiced by the American driver than of
> the one about the “idiot” in the “fast lane” who’s slowing down
> traffic. If everyone could just drive faster, the thinking goes—if we
> could only cull the weak gazelles in our furiously charging migration—
> we could stamp out congestion.
>
> We equate speed in traffic with efficiency. In the U.K., the Tory
> government is currently advocating raising the speed limit on certain
> motorway sections to 80 MPH, anticipating a massive windfall in
> economic productivity and time saved. It’s speed as the health of the
> state! (Though not all projections are so rosy.)
>
> But one thing that tends to be lost on the individual driver, who
> through the proscenium of his windshield commands what he believes to
> be an empirically incontrovertible perspective on the ground truth of
> traffic, is that sometimes you have to go slower to go faster.
>
> Full
> article:http://www.slate.com/articles/life/t...lling_speed_ha...
> -----
>
> - gpsman

The only reason this holds is because the road they cited has numerous
engineering problems. Eliminate the merges, and add climbing lanes on
the steep grades, and I'm sure it would be different. They are right
that speed difference is the problem though, but instead of slowing
everyone down, they should just post a minimum speed and ticket
everyone who doesn't follow it (unless conditions require it).

============

Based on that article, traffic would be even better at 25 mph.

>aren't allowed on interstate highways in the east, you could disallow
>vehicles like tractor-trailers that can't maintain speed on upgrades.

Take a look at a map of Colorado. There's no plausible alternate
route for trucks than I-70 unless you're going to force them to go
hundreds of miles out of their way via I-80 in Wyoming. I suppose
they could ban trucks during peak traffic times, but even that would
be a hard sell.

By the way, note the place in the article where they say that the
highway can handle more vehicles at 55 than at 80 because the cars can
travel closer together. The marginal quality of the highway (which
was pretty much unavoidable due to the terrain) is part of the
problem, but even on an entirely unchallenging highway, the capacity
is greater when everyone's going 55, much though speed demons might
wish otherwise.

R's,
John

On 10/16/2011 9:26 AM, gpsman wrote:
> Go Slow To Go Fast
> Why highways move more swiftly when you force cars to crawl along at
> 55 mph.
>
> Slate Magazine
> By Tom Vanderbilt | Posted Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2011, at 3:19 PM ET
>
> There is no more common lament voiced by the American driver than of
> the one about the “idiot” in the “fast lane” who’s slowing down
> traffic. If everyone could just drive faster, the thinking goes—if we
> could only cull the weak gazelles in our furiously charging migration—
> we could stamp out congestion.
>
> We equate speed in traffic with efficiency. In the U.K., the Tory
> government is currently advocating raising the speed limit on certain
> motorway sections to 80 MPH, anticipating a massive windfall in
> economic productivity and time saved. It’s speed as the health of the
> state! (Though not all projections are so rosy.)
>
> But one thing that tends to be lost on the individual driver, who
> through the proscenium of his windshield commands what he believes to
> be an empirically incontrovertible perspective on the ground truth of
> traffic, is that sometimes you have to go slower to go faster.
>
> Full article:
> http://www.slate.com/articles/life/t...i_.single.html
> -----
>
> - gpsman
Total BS.
There are a lot of contributing factors to congestion but higher speed
isn't one of them.
The problem is business and short sighted design criteria. They need to
keep businesses a lot further from exits of Interstates. They need to
place more emphasis on exit deigns and getting traffic off the
Interstates. No traffic signals or impediments at exits farther from the
Interstates or other roadways.
More exits also. It seems, a lot of times you can get on the road but
you can't get off.
Improve the exit capability and raise the speeds. the roadways can then
handle a lot higher load.