Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition
-
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Drivers are required to have a licence which means they know how to react
They should know, but this is one of the cases in which "what should be" and "what is" differ enormously.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
But they're perfectly entitled to assume that everyone follows the law.
I know it's already been said, but no. It's called defensive driving.
If you watch even a single "stupid drivers" video on YT, you'll see at least one crash where driver A was legally at fault but driver B could have avoided the accident by paying attention, using a microgram of common sense, and not being a jerk. Two of the most common:
- Light turns green for driver B, who proceeds into the intersection. Driver A runs red light and hits B. A is totally at fault, but B could have avoided the crash by not assuming the intersection is clear and actually looking for any cars that might be approaching the intersection are not stopping.
- Driver A changes lanes without checking whether the lane is clear and sideswipes B. In some cases, B could have avoided the accident by slowing down and letting A merge, but instead insists on maintaining his/her legal right to occupy that space, even at the cost of a collision; must never let enemy drivers win. At highway speeds, even a gentle tap can cause one or both drivers to lose control, spin out, roll over, and be run into by other vehicles whose lanes they encroach on when they lose control.
-
@PleegWat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
. I'd prefer that cycling required a license just like driving, since not following the rules gets people killed
In any collision between a 100kg person+bike doing 10mph and a 1 tonne metal box doing 30mph+, it is not the bike that gets anyone killed, it is the motor vehicle.
Nope. If the cyclist ignored a stop-sign or darts across the road in a random location, and gets run over, he pretty much killed himself. And lucky for me, police tend to agree with me on this.
Drivers are required to have a licence which means they know how to react to hazards on the road because they're in charge of a lethal piece of machinery.
Expected hazards, yes. But they're perfectly entitled to assume that everyone follows the law. Including laws regulating road traffic.
A cyclist isn't even an unexpected hazard on a road. Motor vehicle operators should certainly be able to deal with that hazard without colliding with it.
Depends on how the cyclist is driving. If they flaunt traffic rules, then they may very well be a literally unexpected hazard. After all, such things as stop-signs are placed where they are to prevent crossing and merging traffic from popping unexpectedly in front of another car.
I recommend you do not move to The Netherlands.
Good recommendation, for many reasons besides bicycles.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
I think there's one city that uses them.
-
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
the real impact is in simulator.
If they're using the simulator for training on hazards and how to avoid them, yes, there may be an impact if you don't do it perfectly on the first try. But it's still a simulator; the impact will be virtual, not real.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Which is why I also have a dashcam.
That's on my shopping list. You see a lot of those crash videos where one driver would have been ruled at fault were it not for the dashcam video that shows the other driver at fault. (Sometimes the insurance declares shared fault, even when the video shows otherwise, but that's just being cheapskates who don't want to pay even legitimate claims.)
-
@HardwareGeek I'm aware. Look at the thread we're in.
The conversation earlier was about the mingling of bicycles and cars. Unfortunately, I live in a country where singularly bad traffic design sometimes makes it impossible to concentrate on anything but the cars in front of you. Tight timings, tight lanes, and mind-bogglingly complicated intersections are a bad combination, and need your full attention. If something comes in from the side, it'll go unspotted until it hits you. Or you hit it. Either way.
So in that sense, you have to trust that everyone follows the rules.Also, again, I'm well aware of defensive driving. And everybody here tries to avoid the crash. But because of the aforementioned traffic design, I'm resigned to the fact that all the preparedness in the world may not prevent me from being part of a crash. When the system does not have safety rails or margins (and doesn't allow for any), accidents are inevitable. I've done my best, and it's just going to have to be enough.
-
@Rhywden said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
No no no. This is not how you should drive. At any time, someone could not follow the rules, and if you're assuming they will, you will have a collision (and potentially injure or kill someone) which you could have avoided.
Indeed. I was taught to assume that everyone else around me was a potential moron of the highest order
when driving or, indeed, merely being in the vicinity of public roads.This need not be restricted to any particular category of life.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
the real impact is in simulator.
If they're using the simulator for training on hazards and how to avoid them, yes, there may be an impact if you don't do it perfectly on the first try. But it's still a simulator; the impact will be virtual, not real.
My driving teacher had a method for teaching caution when driving at night:
In the countryside, on a farm road with no lights or other traffic, she sent an assistant "to pose as a pedestrian" along the dark road. She then told the student to drive along the road at the pace they felt comfortable with. And told them to keep an eye out for the assistant, so as to not run them over.
Unbeknownst to the student, the assistant would put their (dark colored) coat on a plastic chair (kinda man-sized), and place it in the middle of the road. The students invariably crashed into the chair. It really gave them a scare, as they thought that they'd driven over the assistant. And learned from this experience that a person in the middle of a road may not be so visible after all, even in car headlights. And that maybe they should have driven slower after all.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Which is why I also have a dashcam.
That's on my shopping list.
If you'll take my advice, prioritize small size over fancy screen. If it's just for recording accidents, you won't need the UI ever. Just about all have one-button saving and a crash-sensor.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Which is why I also have a dashcam.
That's on my shopping list.
If you'll take my advice, prioritize small size over fancy screen. If it's just for recording accidents, you won't need the UI ever. Just about all have one-button saving and a crash-sensor.
Yup, exactly this.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Drivers are required to have a licence which means they know how to react
They should know, but this is one of the cases in which "what should be" and "what is" differ enormously.
It also doesn't mean they will have a license.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Which is why I also have a dashcam.
That's on my shopping list. You see a lot of those crash videos where one driver would have been ruled at fault were it not for the dashcam video that shows the other driver at fault. (Sometimes the insurance declares shared fault, even when the video shows otherwise, but that's just being cheapskates who don't want to pay even legitimate claims.)
I got one because I've found the stupidity factor around you increases exponentially when you tow a trailer.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Which is why I also have a dashcam.
That's on my shopping list.
If you'll take my advice, prioritize small size over fancy screen. If it's just for recording accidents, you won't need the UI ever. Just about all have one-button saving and a crash-sensor.
This is what I got:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00X528FNE/(edit: I also bought a 64G memory card and a window suction cup: those didn't come with it)
-
@dcon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Drivers are required to have a licence which means they know how to react
They should know, but this is one of the cases in which "what should be" and "what is" differ enormously.
It also doesn't mean they will have a license.
Or that they even could have a license.
I think the record was some guy getting stopped for drunk driving 8 times in a single day. They'd taken his license away from him already, but confiscating the car was not possible under Finnish law.
-
-
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
It's called defensive driving.
-
@acrow round these parts, you get pulled over once for drunk driving and you're going to jail...
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
My driving teacher had a method for teaching caution when driving at night:
In the countryside, on a farm road with no lights or other traffic, she sent an assistant "to pose as a pedestrian" along the dark road. She then told the student to drive along the road at the pace they felt comfortable with. And told them to keep an eye out for the assistant, so as to not run them over.Reminded me of that time I was driving home late at night. It was a primary route, but plain two-lane road, no divider, straightish. I was driving at the speed limit, which is normally 90 km/h here and slowing down for the junctions with lower limit, and was thinking I am rather stretching it—in high beams I think I saw far enough to stop if there was any obstacle, but every minute or two I had to switch to low beams for opposite traffic and then I was relying on scanning the patch their light illuminated because the low beams are absolutely not enough at that speed.
And under this condition, I was the slowest driver on the road. Someone overtook me every couple of minutes, sometimes on the junctions where I slowed down for lower limit posted (70 km/h, usually).
Also on the motorway at night I really wish the divider had high wall or bush, because often the car ahead is far enough that I can't scan the road in their lights, but the opposite direction still has enough cars that I can't use high beams basically ever. And if low beams are inadequate at 90 km/h, they are obviously inadequate at motorway 130 km/h.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Which is why I also have a dashcam.
That's on my shopping list.
If you'll take my advice, prioritize small size over fancy screen. If it's just for recording accidents, you won't need the UI ever. Just about all have one-button saving and a crash-sensor.
I have to admit that is a feature I never thought of. After seeing lots of dashcam videos, the features I considered to be important are high resolution, rear camera, and recording GPS info with the video (not necessarily in that order). I didn't think about size or UI as being important. I'll add that to the things to consider.
-
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
It's called defensive driving.
I'm pretty sure that's offensive driving.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
It's called defensive driving.
I'm pretty sure that's offensive driving.
The best defense is a good offense.
And there is no kill like overkill.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
IME bike handlebars are at the same level as car headlights.
you don't have a helmet mounted extra bright blinding beam?
-
@Zerosquare
that's definitely offensive driving as you are clearly preventing other morons from making a mistake
true defensive driving is more like
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
the real impact is in simulator.
If they're using the simulator for training on hazards and how to avoid them, yes, there may be an impact if you don't do it perfectly on the first try. But it's still a simulator; the impact will be virtual, not real.
Ideally, yes, you would do some "real" hazard training on the simulator. But my experience is that you get a much better feeling of things like reaction time/stopping distance when you feel like you're doing it, rather than reading about it. Saying "it takes 50 m to stop" doesn't have the same impact as looking at a road, hitting the brake pedal and still see whatever obstacle was in front of you getting closer and closer.
And that was for me, a person who is by trade very aware of numbers and physical quantities. Many people have no gut feeling at all for what 10 or 50 m (ft, whatever) means.
-
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Saying "it takes 50 m to stop" doesn't have the same impact as looking at a road, hitting the brake pedal and still see whatever obstacle was in front of you getting closer and closer.
You'll be happy to know that, in Finland, driving school curriculum has mandatory 2x3 hours of ice track driving. Everybody gets to experience their car hitting the snowbank. Or the lawn lining the track, if you took the class in the summer. But the important part is losing control of the car due to the slippery surface. And how to recover from that, of course.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
If you'll take my advice, prioritize small size over fancy screen. If it's just for recording accidents, you won't need the UI ever. Just about all have one-button saving and a crash-sensor.
I am annoyed at all modern cars (in particular the high-end ones, but not only) about that. Nowadays they almost all have a camera for stuff like automatic high-beam switching, traffic signs recognition, or even fancy safety features such as pedestrian recognition. At least high-end cars do, and they're often in the right position for a dashcam as well (hidden in the block for the rearview mirror), and I know that for sure because the one in my car failed and I had to get it changed.
I'm also pretty sure that, with all the electronics inside a modern car, those cameras are already entirely setup so that their output can be recorded -- if anything, because developers of all those systems need it!
So I'm annoyed that none of those cars offer an option to actually use those cameras as dashcams. Just plug a memory card (which you can already do in most cars, so nothing more is needed there -- OK, there is a difference between safety/entertainment systems so possibly you would have to use a different card plugged in a different location, but that's still not a huge issue) and add a convenient physical dashboard button to trigger save (and yes, link it to all the already-existing crash detection systems that are on modern cars). No need for any after-market modification, laying of cables etc.
Heck, they could even make it an option that you have to buy, I know I would have probably been OK to pay for that.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Saying "it takes 50 m to stop" doesn't have the same impact as looking at a road, hitting the brake pedal and still see whatever obstacle was in front of you getting closer and closer.
You'll be happy to know that, in Finland, driving school curriculum has mandatory 2x3 hours of ice track driving. Everybody gets to experience their car hitting the snowbank. Or the lawn lining the track, if you took the class in the summer. But the important part is losing control of the car due to the slippery surface. And how to recover from that, of course.
That is indeed a great thing. If I ever get to kill the warthog, I would very much like to do one myself (obviously not ice driving, that's not common-enough here to be either really feasible nor useful, but slippery surface can happen in many other ways).
The instructor in the simulator session I did told us that we should try and make a brake test once in a while on e.g. an empty supermarket parking lot. Pick a very large and unobstructed area, drive forward in a straight line at, say, 30 kph (you don't really need much more than that), and suddenly hit the brakes as hard as you can. There is no loss of control, no danger (well be careful about your passengers and what might be in your car, but that's all), and you get to feel how hard a car can break -- which, in a modern one, is "quite strongly", but you don't really understand it until you've experienced it.
Depending on the conditions you might also get to experience what ABS feels/sounds like, which is also a good idea: the very first time (years and years ago...) I triggered ABS (in a real emergency!), I was so surprised by it that I almost stopped braking as it felt like something very wrong was happening! Thankfully I didn't, and the emergency didn't turn into an accident, but this shows that having read and heard a lot about something doesn't replace a direct experience of it.
-
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
If you'll take my advice, prioritize small size over fancy screen. If it's just for recording accidents, you won't need the UI ever. Just about all have one-button saving and a crash-sensor.
I am annoyed at all modern cars (in particular the high-end ones, but not only) about that. Nowadays they almost all have a camera for stuff like automatic high-beam switching, traffic signs recognition, or even fancy safety features such as pedestrian recognition. At least high-end cars do, and they're often in the right position for a dashcam as well (hidden in the block for the rearview mirror), and I know that for sure because the one in my car failed and I had to get it changed.
I'm also pretty sure that, with all the electronics inside a modern car, those cameras are already entirely setup so that their output can be recorded -- if anything, because developers of all those systems need it!
So I'm annoyed that none of those cars offer an option to actually use those cameras as dashcams. Just plug a memory card (which you can already do in most cars, so nothing more is needed there -- OK, there is a difference between safety/entertainment systems so possibly you would have to use a different card plugged in a different location, but that's still not a huge issue) and add a convenient physical dashboard button to trigger save (and yes, link it to all the already-existing crash detection systems that are on modern cars). No need for any after-market modification, laying of cables etc.
Heck, they could even make it an option that you have to buy, I know I would have probably been OK to pay for that.
Having a fixed camera capable of recording is illegal in a lot of places, I'd guess that's the only reason that dashcams aren't in most cars from the factory already.
-
@Carnage Damn states and privacy laws!
ETA: after a quick search, in e.g. Austria it's apparently even illegal to own one, let alone use it! Most other EU countries seem to have more reasonable rules, basically "it's OK to have one but don't upload random stuff on the internet and if you are in an accident you must tell the other party and/or give footage to police", which seems fair enough (at least the last part).
-
@Luhmann said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
IME bike handlebars are at the same level as car headlights.
you don't have a helmet mounted extra bright blinding beam?
What innovative intention is this??? It looks like it could be perfect for spelunking!
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
If it's just for recording accidents, you won't need the UI ever.
Mine has a web-based UI. Just connect to its wifi point with your phone (no, it's not on the internet and it does have a password I specified when I set it up) and you can grab the videos you want. It's also really small; small enough to hide behind a standard driver's mirror.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Saying "it takes 50 m to stop" doesn't have the same impact as looking at a road, hitting the brake pedal and still see whatever obstacle was in front of you getting closer and closer.
You'll be happy to know that, in Finland, driving school curriculum has mandatory 2x3 hours of ice track driving. Everybody gets to experience their car hitting the snowbank. Or the lawn lining the track, if you took the class in the summer. But the important part is losing control of the car due to the slippery surface. And how to recover from that, of course.
That sounds like fun!
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Luhmann said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
IME bike handlebars are at the same level as car headlights.
you don't have a helmet mounted extra bright blinding beam?
What innovative intention is this??? It looks like it could be perfect for spelunking!
-
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Luhmann said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
IME bike handlebars are at the same level as car headlights.
you don't have a helmet mounted extra bright blinding beam?
What innovative intention is this??? It looks like it could be perfect for spelunking!
Ewww,Wish? Clearly it's a fake and over promising... 😜
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Luhmann said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
IME bike handlebars are at the same level as car headlights.
you don't have a helmet mounted extra bright blinding beam?
What innovative intention is this??? It looks like it could be perfect for spelunking!
Ewww,Wish? Clearly it's a fake and over promising... 😜
There are a lot of them around, one guy I worked with had a helmet led light of several thousand lumen.
-
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Luhmann said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
IME bike handlebars are at the same level as car headlights.
you don't have a helmet mounted extra bright blinding beam?
What innovative intention is this??? It looks like it could be perfect for spelunking!
Ewww,Wish? Clearly it's a fake and over promising... 😜
There are a lot of them around, one guy I worked with had a helmet led light of several thousand lumen.
That sounds illegal.... 🤔
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Luhmann said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
IME bike handlebars are at the same level as car headlights.
you don't have a helmet mounted extra bright blinding beam?
What innovative intention is this??? It looks like it could be perfect for spelunking!
Ewww,Wish? Clearly it's a fake and over promising... 😜
There are a lot of them around, one guy I worked with had a helmet led light of several thousand lumen.
That sounds illegal.... 🤔
I haven't looked into it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a case of technology running ahead of the law, so that it's not illegal for legal technical reasons.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Saying "it takes 50 m to stop" doesn't have the same impact as looking at a road, hitting the brake pedal and still see whatever obstacle was in front of you getting closer and closer.
You'll be happy to know that, in Finland, driving school curriculum has mandatory 2x3 hours of ice track driving. Everybody gets to experience their car hitting the snowbank. Or the lawn lining the track, if you took the class in the summer. But the important part is losing control of the car due to the slippery surface. And how to recover from that, of course.
That sounds like fun!
At the time, I mostly felt embarrassed. This instructor also took the approach of first letting his students try to take the corner at a speed they thought was safe. I guess it's a common way to get the students to realize that they don't really know jack yet.
And predictably all but one found themselves in the snowbank. The one who didn't was a girl who drove it at like 2km/h, and the instructor had to tell her to do again a bit faster.
-
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
I haven't looked into it, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a case of technology running ahead of the law, so that it's not illegal for legal technical reasons.
It might be illegal on more general grounds, such as “creating a hazard on the road” (by dazzling everyone else) and so on. Those laws are often relatively hard to prove in court so prosecutions aren't so common, but tend to eventually get encoded as regulations on the brightness of lights being shown. The regulations derive their power from the law, but handle much more detail than it is proper for legislators to bother with.
-
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
over promising
only if it states that it won't explode or catch fire
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Saying "it takes 50 m to stop" doesn't have the same impact as looking at a road, hitting the brake pedal and still see whatever obstacle was in front of you getting closer and closer.
You'll be happy to know that, in Finland, driving school curriculum has mandatory 2x3 hours of ice track driving. Everybody gets to experience their car hitting the snowbank. Or the lawn lining the track, if you took the class in the summer. But the important part is losing control of the car due to the slippery surface. And how to recover from that, of course.
That sounds like fun!
Around when I finished driving school, I did a traction/slip course. One item I remembered was where they had a car with external speed sensor, and asked everyone "How far do you think it will take the car to stop from 40 km/h.". I think the answers were 60-80 meters. They did the demonstration, I think it was 40m. Then they asked, "How far will it take from 80 km/h". Almost everyone said 80m. It was, of course, 160m.
-
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Also on the motorway at night I really wish the divider had high wall or bush, because often the car ahead is far enough that I can't scan the road in their lights, but the opposite direction still has enough cars that I can't use high beams basically ever. And if low beams are inadequate at 90 km/h, they are obviously inadequate at motorway 130 km/h.
Yeah I totally agree with this. Driving on a low (but not zero) traffic dual carriageway at night, you're driving on dip and trusting that there's nothing bad in your lane. It feels pretty sketchy.
-
@PleegWat In my driving school they made a big deal of braking distances growing quadratically.
It was one of those things they kept telling us repeatedly and which they told us to expect being questioned about on the exam.
-
Were they careful enough to ask "does anybody here know what quadratically means" beforehand?
-
@Zerosquare No.
-
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Were they careful enough to ask "does anybody here know what quadratically means" beforehand?
Does braking actually cause the car to move backwards if x is negative?
-
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Yeah I totally agree with this. Driving on a low (but not zero) traffic dual carriageway at night, you're driving on dip and trusting that there's nothing bad in your lane. It feels pretty sketchy.
My main car has the LED matrix headlights that can switch individual LEDs off in the main beam to avoid dazzling other vehicles while leaving the surroundings more illuminated. Works really well.
-
@loopback0 Does it also detect motorcycles properly?