Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @anotherusername Remind us of why you want to be on that specific bit of road surface at exactly the same time as another vehicle in the first place? That's generally considered a losing proposition by all concerned, even before the pain of dealing with insurance and the law is taken into account…



  • @anotherusername If your point is that roundabouts are not a perfect solution to when there is heavy traffic, well, duh. Nothing is a perfect solution when there is heavy traffic.

    Still, if you enter any intersection with a yield sign without actually making sure that no one is coming, it's your fault. Roundabout or normal intersection. Don't blame the intersection, blame the guy behind the wheel (you).



  • @pleegwat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    French drivers do love their blinkers.

    Like on the highway, on the middle lane, with their left blinker on, while the left lane is empty, and not moving sideways.

    Yes... I still cannot understand how anyone can bear to have their blinkers on for minutes on end, I find that noise annoying after a few seconds. Still they can go on for ever like this. I also hate those who come up behind you on the left (fast) lane, and put on their blinkers (to the left) in an attempt to tell you to move away. When you are driving as fast as you can (i.e. as fast as the car before you), and all other lanes are busy. What the hell do they expect me to do? Submit to their mighty blinker and magically disappear from their view?

    Middle-lane huggers are a different breed of stupidity, blinkers or not. There is nothing you can do to make them understand that they are impending the whole traffic and actually making things more dangerous for them (and the other around them). I never understood why they do that.



  • @remi There must be a superstition that the outer lane is exclusively for slowpokes.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Middle-lane huggers are a different breed of stupidity, blinkers or not. There is nothing you can do to make them understand that they are impending the whole traffic and actually making things more dangerous for them (and the other around them). I never understood why they do that.

    Usually round here, the slow lane is full of heavy vehicles that mostly can't go very fast, so people in cars tend to try to stay out of it.


  • Fake News

    @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    I still cannot understand how anyone can bear to have their blinkers on for minutes on end

    They're actually rather quiet in some cars. Of course, sometimes the driver is deaf - or oblivious...



  • @dkf said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Usually round here, the slow lane is full of heavy vehicles that mostly can't go very fast, so people in cars tend to try to stay out of it.

    I can understand that when there are some heavy vehicles around. When it's miles of deserted highway... not so much.

    (also, the funny thing with that argument is that when traffic becomes very heavy and slows down, the slow lane tends to actually move faster than the fast one, because truck drivers drive much more smoothly than individual cars, keep distances between themselves so that they don't stop-and-go and so on. There is a stretch of road when I get to my office where as soon as traffic gets heavy, I make sure to keep on the "slow" lane and go much faster than the other!)

    The other argument I've heard for that behaviour is people saying that you are safer from e.g. wandering wild animals in the middle lane than in the slow lane. Given that one colleague got his car destroyed by hitting a boar while he was on the fast lane, I am not convinced at all by this argument. Especially since hugging the middle lane makes it much more dangerous for you, because some people will pass you on the right -- yes they are stupid for doing so, but they still do it, and it is much more likely to happen than a wild animal coming on the highway, since there are fences almost everywhere.


  • kills Dumbledore

    @pleegwat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    French drivers do love their blinkers.
    Like on the highway, on the middle lane, with their left blinker on, while the left lane is empty, and not moving sideways.

    AIUI, that's how it used to be taught in European driving lessons. You keep the left indicator on the whole time you're overtaking. It's not recommended any more but older drivers are set in their ways



  • @jaloopa Truck drivers tend to do it that way as well. It's less of an issue with them since they don't go to the left-most lane anyway, but it's still a bit weird.

    The real issue with that is when a truck is passing another truck, and a car is behind the passing truck in the middle lane, with its left blinker on. Does this mean that the car is doing the same thing as the truck (i.e. just passing the slow lane truck, with no intention of using the fast lane), or that the car is going to move to the fast lane to pass both trucks?



  • @jaloopa said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @pleegwat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    French drivers do love their blinkers.
    Like on the highway, on the middle lane, with their left blinker on, while the left lane is empty, and not moving sideways.

    AIUI, that's how it used to be taught in European driving lessons. You keep the left indicator on the whole time you're overtaking. It's not recommended any more but older drivers are set in their ways

    That's been my working hypothesis. I don't think I was taught to do that at all. I do do it, when I overtake in the oncoming traffic lane. When there are multiple lanes in the same direction, I indicate lane changes only, not overtaking.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @lolwhat Yeah, like Peugeots. I have one and when I got it I really had trouble hearing the indicator sound if the radio was on (not even loud or anything).



  • @blek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @lolwhat Yeah, like Peugeots. I have one and when I got it I really had trouble hearing the indicator sound if the radio was on (not even loud or anything).

    Aren't you scanning your instrument cluster periodically? That's how I catch myself when I accidentally don't turn off my indicators after changing lanes. I rarely depend on the sound, especially since I'm usually blasting music.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @benjamin-hall Well I got used to the sound so I hear it fine now, and I don't really have problems with leaving my indicators on, I think I did it maybe once ever.



  • @blek fair enough.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    When it's miles of deserted highway... not so much.

    If the highway is deserted, it doesn't matter what lane they're in because by definition they can't be blocking anyone else. :pendant:


  • And then the murders began.

    @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @anotherusername If your point is that roundabouts are not a perfect solution to when there is heavy traffic, well, duh. Nothing is a perfect solution when there is heavy traffic.

    Still, if you enter any intersection with a yield sign without actually making sure that no one is coming, it's your fault. Roundabout or normal intersection. Don't blame the intersection, blame the guy behind the wheel (you).

    They're not blaming the intersection for getting in an accident if they do that. They're pointing out that if they don't do that, then the roundabout is worse for traffic flow than a traffic light explicitly granting cars the right-of-way.

    It's not just that roundabouts aren't a perfect solution; they're a decidedly inferior solution than what they're supposedly improving on.



  • @dkf said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    When it's miles of deserted highway... not so much.

    If the highway is deserted, it doesn't matter what lane they're in because by definition they can't be blocking anyone else. :pendant:

    If the highway is deserted they can't even be there. :pendant: :pendant:



  • @unperverted-vixen said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @anotherusername If your point is that roundabouts are not a perfect solution to when there is heavy traffic, well, duh. Nothing is a perfect solution when there is heavy traffic.

    Still, if you enter any intersection with a yield sign without actually making sure that no one is coming, it's your fault. Roundabout or normal intersection. Don't blame the intersection, blame the guy behind the wheel (you).

    They're not blaming the intersection for getting in an accident if they do that. They're pointing out that if they don't do that, then the roundabout is worse for traffic flow than a traffic light explicitly granting cars the right-of-way.

    It's not just that roundabouts aren't a perfect solution; they're a decidedly inferior solution than what they're supposedly improving on.

    Well then the problem is not roundabouts, it's a yield sign on any intersection. Many UK (I have not seen many of those outside the UK?) roundabouts have traffic lights controlling their entrances. That would solve that issue (or compound them, depending on your point of view.



  • @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @unperverted-vixen said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @anotherusername If your point is that roundabouts are not a perfect solution to when there is heavy traffic, well, duh. Nothing is a perfect solution when there is heavy traffic.

    Still, if you enter any intersection with a yield sign without actually making sure that no one is coming, it's your fault. Roundabout or normal intersection. Don't blame the intersection, blame the guy behind the wheel (you).

    They're not blaming the intersection for getting in an accident if they do that. They're pointing out that if they don't do that, then the roundabout is worse for traffic flow than a traffic light explicitly granting cars the right-of-way.

    It's not just that roundabouts aren't a perfect solution; they're a decidedly inferior solution than what they're supposedly improving on.

    Well then the problem is not roundabouts, it's a yield sign on any intersection. Many UK (I have not seen many of those outside the UK?) roundabouts have traffic lights controlling their entrances. That would solve that issue (or compound them, depending on your point of view.

    ERR_UNCLOSED_PARENTHESES: Log level--fatal. Now terminating operation. It's amazing how much that bugs me these days....



  • @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @anotherusername If your point is that roundabouts are not a perfect solution to when there is heavy traffic, well, duh. Nothing is a perfect solution when there is heavy traffic.

    My point was that ordinary intersections controlled by signal lights are better than roundabouts under heavy traffic.

    And that ordinary intersections with appropriately placed stop/yield signs are better than roundabouts under light traffic.

    There's one situation where roundabouts perform better, and that's when some moron decided to make one huge-ass mosh pit intersection with 5, 6, or more streets emptying out into it. Then, a roundabout adds at least some semblance of order to the ensuing chaos.



  • @pleegwat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    the left lane is empty, and not moving sideways

    I've never seen a lane move at all, much less sideways.

    Filed under: INB4: Landslides, earthquakes, etc.



  • @remi said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Many UK (I have not seen many of those outside the UK?) roundabouts have traffic lights controlling their entrances. That would solve that issue

    That would be an acceptable solution for situations where there are more than 4 streets intersecting, and they all have relatively similar amounts of traffic.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @anotherusername said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    And that ordinary intersections with appropriately placed stop/yield signs are better than roundabouts under light traffic.

    Not sure I entirely believe that, other than in the sense of requiring slightly less space, given that roundabouts are fundamentally a collection of yields onto a small circular one way street.


  • Fake News

    @dkf said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @anotherusername said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    And that ordinary intersections with appropriately placed stop/yield signs are better than roundabouts under light traffic.

    Not sure I entirely believe that, other than in the sense of requiring slightly less space, given that roundabouts are fundamentally a collection of yields onto a small circular one way street.

    Indeed. We have plenty of roundabouts here - even one that (gasp!) is two lanes wide and quite busy. It's fucking great that most of the time, I can get through any of them with only a minimal slowdown. That's far less likely with a stop sign or traffic light.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @lolwhat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    That's far less likely with a stop sign or traffic light.

    We've hardly any stop signs round here, even on junctions where they would be quite a good idea because you really can't see if it is safe to go until you're at the line. Instead, it's almost all yields with roundabouts and traffic lights as both less common options, depending on traffic flows and junction geometry. (The latter matters quite a bit; there are places where traffic is such that a roundabout would work and there's space, but where the angle of the slope of the land makes a traffic light work better.)

    Of course, once traffic gets heavy enough you can get really complicated junctions (often grade-separated) but they get expensive.



  • My left blinker broke.

    On the plus side, I wasn't in a roundabout with @anotherusername coming the other way.



  • @zecc said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    My left blinker broke.

    Completely or just a bulb so it started flashing really fast?



  • @zecc said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    My left blinker broke.

    On the plus side, I wasn't in a roundabout with @anotherusername coming the other way.

    That is lucky. We drive counter-clockwise in them here, so you'd have been going the wrong way if I was coming the other way.



  • @zemm said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @zecc said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    My left blinker broke.

    Completely or just a bulb so it started flashing really fast?

    The latter. That's how I could tell from the inside. The clicks were faster than usual.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole



  • @pleegwat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @jaloopa said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @pleegwat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    French drivers do love their blinkers.
    Like on the highway, on the middle lane, with their left blinker on, while the left lane is empty, and not moving sideways.

    AIUI, that's how it used to be taught in European driving lessons. You keep the left indicator on the whole time you're overtaking. It's not recommended any more but older drivers are set in their ways

    That's been my working hypothesis. I don't think I was taught to do that at all. I do do it, when I overtake in the oncoming traffic lane. When there are multiple lanes in the same direction, I indicate lane changes only, not overtaking.

    It never was the rule in the Netherlands. Changing lanes used to be allowed without any signals. That changed in - I believe - the eighties to signalling before/while changing lanes.

    In Germany (and possibly France?) the rule was signalling until the overtaking was finished, so only switch off the signal when back in the original lane.
    I think that also changed in the eighties or maybe the nineties.



  • @anotherusername said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    My point was that ordinary intersections controlled by signal lights are better than roundabouts under heavy traffic.
    And that ordinary intersections with appropriately placed stop/yield signs are better than roundabouts under light traffic.
    There's one situation where roundabouts perform better, and that's when some moron decided to make one huge-ass mosh pit intersection with 5, 6, or more streets emptying out into it. Then, a roundabout adds at least some semblance of order to the ensuing chaos.

    The important thing about roundabouts is not traffic flow. It is that they significantly reduce the amount and severity of injuries due to an accident, simply because all traffic on the roundabout is forced to move slower than would be possible on a regular intersection.

    Having said that, in my experience there is generally much less congestion at roundabouts than at intersections with traffic lights.



  • @polygeekery If all car uses switched to a combination of bikes and public transit, all car-related accidents would go away or be replaced with bike-bike accidents, which cause far less injury because the speeds are lower.



  • @pleegwat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @polygeekery If all car uses switched to a combination of bikes and public transit, all car-related accidents would go away or be replaced with bike-bike accidents, which cause far less injury because the speeds are lower.

    I dunno about that. Some would be replaced by bike versus bus ("public transit") which tends to end badly for the bike rider(1), and bike versus pedestrian often doesn't end well for the pedestrian, and (if the bike rider is unlucky and is deflected into a bus) for the bike rider either. And bike versus lorry universally ends badly for the bike rider.(1)(2)

    Given the usual level of respect shown by cyclists for the rules of the road(3), it's a wonder that more of them aren't involved in fatal moving traffic accidents.

    (1) Cars are heavier than bikes[citation needed], but buses are heavier than cars, and lorries are heavier still.

    (2) My great-uncle(2a) had arms of different lengths because when he was young he thought it would be a good idea to hold on to the back of a lorry while riding his bike. He found out that this was, in fact, a very bad idea, although in his case not a fatal one.

    (2a) Brother of my maternal grandmother.

    (3) Typically none whatsoever. I've noticed a reluctance on their part to actually run me over when they are cycling on the same pavement I'm walking on, but I think that's more to do with them not wanting to be delayed by the consequences than anything else.


  • Impossible Mission Players - A

    @steve_the_cynic
    Pedestrians do cause quite a bit of damage to your tire rims.



  • @nerd4sale said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    The important thing about roundabouts is not traffic flow. It is that they significantly reduce the amount and severity of injuries due to an accident, simply because all traffic on the roundabout is forced to move slower

    Making the speed limit 15 MPH everywhere and putting speed bumps every 100 yards would also do that.

    Or as @PleegWat mentioned, ban cars and force everyone to ride bikes.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @steve_the_cynic said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Typically none whatsoever. I've noticed a reluctance on their part to actually run me over when they are cycling on the same pavement I'm walking on, but I think that's more to do with them not wanting to be delayed by the consequences than anything else.

    I've had cyclists swear at me for using the pedestrian phase of a pedestrian crossing (in accordance with the way UK law describes it should be used). Some cyclists are just massively ignorant of the rights of others. My guess is that the only reason drivers of motor vehicles aren't as bad is that they have to actually pass formal testing before they're allowed to drive on their own, and have to actually have proper (expensive!) insurance and so bear the true cost of being inconsiderate jerks. It doesn't stop all drivers from being terrible, but it acts as a gate against many of the worst assholery. By contrast, anyone at all can get on a bike.



  • @anotherusername said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    putting speed bumps every 100 yards would also do that.

    I'll just perfect my bike hopping skills. (Back in college when I was racing, I was pretty good at that - hop up on a curb, over small things. I wimped out on trying to hop trees when mountain biking...)



  • @dkf said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @steve_the_cynic said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Typically none whatsoever. I've noticed a reluctance on their part to actually run me over when they are cycling on the same pavement I'm walking on, but I think that's more to do with them not wanting to be delayed by the consequences than anything else.

    I've had cyclists swear at me for using the pedestrian phase of a pedestrian crossing (in accordance with the way UK law describes it should be used). Some cyclists are just massively ignorant of the rights of others. My guess is that the only reason drivers of motor vehicles aren't as bad is that they have to actually pass formal testing before they're allowed to drive on their own, and have to actually have proper (expensive!) insurance and so bear the true cost of being inconsiderate jerks. It doesn't stop all drivers from being terrible, but it acts as a gate against many of the worst assholery. By contrast, anyone at all can get on a bike.

    There is, perhaps, also the fact that the testing you mention is accompanied by instruction and the motor-vehicle operator having to have at least heard of the rules of the road. Many cyclists behave as if there are no rules of the road for cyclists.



  • @polygeekery said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Unable to find the quoted study by quick dig around the NHTSA pages. And that article is the only page referring it for some reason


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @masterx244179 welcome to Earth. Enjoy your stay.



  • @polygeekery said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @masterx244179 welcome to Earth, enjoy your stay.

    dug deeper since i prefer to know where a information originates from to avoid fudged up stuff. No source given triggers my bullshit detector


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @masterx244179 said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @polygeekery said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @masterx244179 welcome to Earth, enjoy your stay.

    dug deeper since i prefer to know where a information originates from to avoid fudged up stuff. No source given triggers my bullshit detector

    Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary? Go look. See for yourself.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @masterx244179 said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    fudged up stuff

    Also, you can say "fuck" around here. It is entirely OK.

    Fuck, fuck, fuckity fuck fuck.





  • @masterx244179 said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    @polygeekery said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Unable to find the quoted study by quick dig around the NHTSA pages. And that article is the only page referring it for some reason

    Yeah, but it's, like, totally common sense even if they've suppressed the study.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Yeah, but it's, like, totally common sense even if they've suppressed the study.

    Illuminati lizard people strike again.



  • @polygeekery You must be diligent to be able to peel back all of the layers.



  • @masterx244179 said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    Unable to find the quoted study by quick dig around the NHTSA pages. And that article is the only page referring it for some reason

    Serious reply: That "article" is from The Onion. The Onion should not be considered a reliable source. Of anything.



  • @polygeekery said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:

    I resemble that remark.

    Speaking buses versus cars...buses usually move very predictably and stay in the right or right two lanes.

    On one way avenues in NYC then bikers can go stay toward the left.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.