Just witnessed an accident

Old Wolf wrote:

> Arif Khokar wrote:

>>The problem is that people here don't know the difference between a
>>traffic-circle and a roundabout (traffic circles have the asinine ROW
>>rule where entering traffic has priority over in-circle traffic).

> Wow, that sounds really bad. What is the point of such a construct?

This may help explain the reasoning:
<http://www.alaskaroundabouts.com/history.html>

>>Traffic engineers here are also wary of building multilane versions of
>>them designed for higher speeds because of their preconceptions that
>>drivers here are not capable of handling them. The only roundabout that
>>I have first hand experience with cannot be negotiated at more than 15
>>mph (really tight radius).

> Might be a good way of helping Darwin out. Especially when beater
> Mercs run off the side of it and flip.

Except that such roundabouts cannot be used for major intersections with
higher speed traffic.

>>I have also observed drivers approaching a roundabout and switch on
>>their *left* turn signal (why?).

> They're morons. The correct move is to indicate left once you have
> passed the roundabout exit just before yours (so that traffic entering
> from your exit knows it can go without waiting for you).

Well, it's even worse than what you think considering we drive on the
right side of the road. From your description, it appears that I start
signalling a little late when going through the roundabout. I'll keep
that in mind the next time I drive through there.

> But this is too much for some peoples' mental faculties and they do
> dumb **** like indicating left the whole time, or indicating right as
> they exit the roundabout.

I've yet to observe anyone signalling to exit a roundabout here.

> Yes, there are as many yield-impaired people as there are
> merge-impaired people. At the start of a motorway in my area,
> there is a large 4-way intersection. To cut a long story short,
> the motorway has a very wide left (slow) lane at the start. So it
> is easy for people entering it from the slip lane to merge with
> people coming through from the other side of the intersection
> turning or going straight through onto the motorway.
>
> But all the time, people just stop halfway along the slip lane waiting
> for traffic to clear. Now they've added a traffic light to the slip
> lane that's red when traffic is coming from the other side. Sigh.

Sometimes those types of situations "trick" me into stopping when it's
not necessary when I'm not familiar with the area. This comes from the
fact that a merge lane is not always available. The solution to that
problem IMO is to not post a yield sign.

> If you are the sort to not slow down at the yield sign if there is no
> car to yield to, then you catch people who should yield to you by
> surprise (they enter the roundabout assuming that you're going to
> slow down a bit at least).

That doesn't quite make sense. If I'm in the roundabout, yield signs
don't apply to me. If I'm outside and see no cars are coming, I don't
really slow down more than I need to to negotiate the roundabout. If I
do see a car on the near side of the roundabout, I slow down and try to
get behind him.

>>But, if roundabouts were more widespread, then I suspect that
>>most of these problems will go away.

> They work best at medium traffic volumes. They cause trouble
> if the traffic volume is large and one entry has more traffic coming
> from it than the other entries. Then all the traffic at the entry
> after the main road is stuck until a car happens to come from
> an entry before the main road.

That's true. IIRC, traffic engineers here say a single lane roundabout
handles up to 25,000 vehicles per day (VPD).

Peter Lawrence wrote:

> Harry K wrote:
> > Pooh Bear wrote:
> > > Arif Khokar wrote:
>
> > > > But, if roundabouts were more widespread, then I suspect that most of
> > > > these problems will go away.
> > >
> > > The UK more or less 'pioneered' roundabouts.
> > >
> > > Essential to their working is the 'yield at entry' rule. Traffic already on the
> > > roundabout can continue to its exit.
> > >
> > > They work brilliantly and become intuitive in no time at all. When traffic is quiet
> > > there's no waiting for lights and you can normally proceed without delay. When traffic's
> > > busier, they work well to give everyone equal priority.
> > >
> > > I see they are gradually being adopted by some highways engineers in the US now.
> > >
> > > Graham
> >
> > Indeed they are. Spokane WA just finished one last year to cure the
> > 'high accident' rate at one intersection. Quite a media blitz
> > explaining the rules. Yes it is 'yield before entering'. I haven't
> > heard of one accident there since. They also have at least one other
> > (I think there are more). I am all for them.
>
> I think roundabouts are inherently safer than signal intersections, so
> I would not be surprised by a large reduction of fatal accidents when a
> signal intersection is redesigned as a roundabout.
>
> One problem I do find with roundabouts both in Europe and in the U.S.
> is that while they work well on roads with moderate or light traffic,
> on roads with very heavy traffic, roundabouts tend to cause worse
> congestion and delay than signal intersections would.

Where the traffic is *really * heavy the entrance to the roundabout is
sometimes supplemented by
signals to regulate the flow onto the roundabout.


> Another problem with building new roundabouts in the U.S. is that a
> properly designed roundabout usually takes up more real estate than a
> regular signal intersection, limiting the number of places where a
> properly designed roundabout could be installed.

We also have 'mini-roundabouts' to deal with that scenario.

Graham

223rem wrote:
> To make a long story short: the van (in front of me) and the Ryder (in
> front of the semi)
> reached the intersection close to the moment when the light turned
> yellow. They
> *stopped on yellow* instead of continuing as I (and the semi driver)
> expected. That
> intersection has LONG yellows.
>

I think this is where you and the truck driver went wrong, you
shouldn't assume. The truck driver is clearly in the wrong because he
was expecting to get away with running a yellow light, and was probably
accellerating to make sure it didn't turn red on him, I hope he was
charged.

I was always told that a yellow means stop if you can safely do that,
and was taught to pick a spot of "no return" where I had to commit to
going through an intersection or not, if the yellow comes before the
spot, then stop, if not, then go through.. But I hate it when people
follow me through a yellow, when they easily could have stopped for it.
and I don't mean the guy directly behind me, theres sometimes two or
three that will follow through, just because they can.

> I probably wasnt doing 60 mph anymore at that point, more like 50 mph
> and was far enough from the
> van to have no problem stopping (my car has excellent brakes and I
> have new tires).
> The semi couldnt stop.

which is why he should be charged, he was not driving safely.

Old Wolf wrote:
> Pooh Bear wrote:
> > Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> >> Pooh Bear wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Are you saying that you're supposed to drive through a yellow as if it
> >>> were green ?
> >>
> >> And why not? The amber light means "proceed with caution".
> >
> > I've never heard the amber described as meaning "proceed with caution"
> > before. Sounds like bad advice to me.
>
> Did you get your licence off the back of a cereal box?

Perfect! I got nothin'. =:^|
--
C.R. Krieger
(Been there; done that)

Pooh Bear wrote:
>
> No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're
> all driving aggressively and competitively.

You ever drive in Rome? Mexico City? Oh, wait; those aren't inside
the Hundred Acre Wood, are they? Never mind. Go suck down some
'hunny'.
--
C.R. Krieger
(Been there; done that)

Motorhead Lawyer wrote:

> Pooh Bear wrote:
> >
> > No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're
> > all driving aggressively and competitively.
>
> You ever drive in Rome? Mexico City? Oh, wait; those aren't inside
> the Hundred Acre Wood, are they? Never mind. Go suck down some
> 'hunny'.

Your suggestion is that because some other countries also exhibit aggressive
driving makes it a good idea ?

Graham

Pooh Bear wrote:
> Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
>
> > Pooh Bear wrote:
> > >
> > > No surprise that US road 'accident' rates are as high as they are if you're
> > > all driving aggressively and competitively.
> >
> > You ever drive in Rome? Mexico City? Oh, wait; those aren't inside
> > the Hundred Acre Wood, are they? Never mind. Go suck down some
> > 'hunny'.
>
> Your suggestion is that because some other countries also exhibit aggressive
> driving makes it a good idea ?

No; my suggestion is that you don't have a clue what you're talking
about. You have yet to suggest facts indicating otherwise.
--
C.R. Krieger
(Been there; done that)

Arif Khokar wrote:
> Old Wolf wrote:
>>>I have also observed drivers approaching a roundabout and switch on
>>>their *left* turn signal (why?).
>
>> They're morons. The correct move is to indicate left once you have
>> passed the roundabout exit just before yours (so that traffic entering
>> from your exit knows it can go without waiting for you).
>
> Well, it's even worse than what you think considering we drive on the
> right side of the road.

Sorry, forgot for a moment that you drive on the wrong side of
the road Here's the rules in NZ where we drive on the left and
go clockwise around roundabouts:

- Signal right when entering the roundabout if you're going to
take an exit further than 180 degrees around from where
you entered.
- Signal left when you pass the last exit before yours.
- If you are not on the roundabout, you must yield to traffic
already on it, AND traffic entering from the next entry
before yours.

The idea is to maximise traffic flow by letting other people waiting
to enter the roundabout, know whether or not you are going to
get in their way.

Actually I think the first rule is "signal right if you aren't taking
the first exit" in the lawbook, but most people do it as I
described because it's a bit weird to signal right when you are
going straight on a small roundabout.

On large roundabouts, signalling is important. I used to live near
a monster one (it had 3 lanes and 6 exits), it was very difficult
to navigate safely

>
>> Yes, there are as many yield-impaired people as there are
>> merge-impaired people. At the start of a motorway in my area,
>> there is a large 4-way intersection. To cut a long story short,
>> the motorway has a very wide left (slow) lane at the start. So it
>> is easy for people entering it from the slip lane to merge with
>> people coming through from the other side of the intersection
>> turning or going straight through onto the motorway.
>>
>> But all the time, people just stop halfway along the slip lane waiting
>> for traffic to clear. Now they've added a traffic light to the slip
>> lane that's red when traffic is coming from the other side. Sigh.
>
> Sometimes those types of situations "trick" me into stopping when it's
> not necessary when I'm not familiar with the area. This comes from the
> fact that a merge lane is not always available. The solution to that
> problem IMO is to not post a yield sign.

I should have been more clear; there was no yield sign there.
People would just stop partway through the lane where they
expected the yield sign to be (or usually, a few metres further
on).

>
>> If you are the sort to not slow down at the yield sign if there is no
>> car to yield to, then you catch people who should yield to you by
>> surprise (they enter the roundabout assuming that you're going to
>> slow down a bit at least).
>
> That doesn't quite make sense. If I'm in the roundabout, yield signs
> don't apply to me. If I'm outside and see no cars are coming, I don't
> really slow down more than I need to to negotiate the roundabout.

I'm talking about when you are approaching a roundabout, and there's
a guy who is also approaching the next entry around. Often he will see
you coming but enter the roundabout anyway, because he assumes
you're going to slow down and check for traffic.

Also I see a lot of timidity. Suppose two people are both stopped
at the yield signs. Now, the person on the later entry knows he
must yield to the other guy. But, if they both went then they would
miss each other by a long way so it isn't even a yield situation.
Nevertheless, the later entry guy often enables.