Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition
-
@PleegWat
It would be even a stretch for a Golf+ ...
maybe they just got the wrong sport and where aiming for the nearby Polo field?
-
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Re that 12'4" bridge vid - Anyone else enjoy how much of the traffic (including the truck that got peeled) clearly goes through those lights on amber/red too?
Amber is normal....... If you can safely clear the intersection before it goes red.
Red though, that's just plain illegal.
I find these American-style traffic lights confusing. In Europe they are always above or next to the entry line, so then passing the light itself after it turned red is the obvious infraction. I suppose here it is still the entry line that is illegal to cross on red, so while the truck that got peeled passed under the bridge on red light, it clearly entered it when it was still amber, so it shouldn't be a problem.
In NL, the lights are usually (but not always) on the entry side of the crossing. Nevertheless, the location that is illegal to cross when the light is red is the entire crossing area, starting at the line ('stopstreep'). You should not enter the intersection if you are not certain you will be able to leave it before the light turns red.
Such formulations are common, as they prevent gridlock from cars stuck unable to leave the intersection due to traffic.
-
@PleegWat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Such formulations are common, as they prevent gridlock from cars stuck unable to leave the intersection due to traffic.
extra so when one exit side of the crossroad is blocked by a railway crossing or a bridge ... but the amount of people who don't seem to get this is staggering ...
-
@PleegWat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Luhmann said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Zerosquare
Clearly not a GolfI don't think anyone would describe a Golf as an SUV.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Golf_Mk2#Golf_Country.
( ) Technically it's a crossover...
-
@PleegWat said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
In NL, the lights are usually (but not always) on the entry side of the crossing. Nevertheless, the location that is illegal to cross when the light is red is the entire crossing area, starting at the line ('stopstreep'). You should not enter the intersection if you are not certain you will be able to leave it before the light turns red.
Such formulations are common, as they prevent gridlock from cars stuck unable to leave the intersection due to traffic.That is actually not correct.
It is illegal on a red light to cross the white line, which is just before you would enter the crossing. Once you passed that line (on a green light), you're good.
However, there is another law that makes stopping on a crossing illegal. So even if the light is green, but there is so much traffic that you cannot cross in its entirety, you are not allowed to enter the crossing.
Except nobody seems to care about that law.
There is one crossing on my route from work back home, which is always packed during rush hour. If I would not enter until I could cross, I would probably be sitting there until the end of rush hour.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@nerd4sale This. It's too separate things—not entering on red light, and not entering at all, independent of any lights, if you won't be able to clear it promptly.
In heavy traffic it's just difficult to say how quickly you will or won't be able to clear the junction, so the cars end up jamming it anyway. Because it's moving, although at slow pace, when you are entering the junction, and then it stops suddenlyish and if you are in the junction, you can't do much about it any more.
-
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Re that 12'4" bridge vid - Anyone else enjoy how much of the traffic (including the truck that got peeled) clearly goes through those lights on amber/red too?
Amber is normal....... If you can safely clear the intersection before it goes red.
Red though, that's just plain illegal.
I find these American-style traffic lights confusing. In Europe they are always above or next to the entry line, so then passing the light itself after it turned red is the obvious infraction. I suppose here it is still the entry line that is illegal to cross on red, so while the truck that got peeled passed under the bridge on red light, it clearly entered it when it was still amber, so it shouldn't be a problem.
I hate it when they're that close. Makes them difficult to see if you're in the front of the line.
-
Today as I was biking to pick up lunch, I saw a bus run red light because of ambulance.
There is a big four-lane road with a divider (with relatively little traffic and lot of lights to slow it down, so it's passable for cycling). As I approached the lights where I turn off (to the left) to the pub, I heard an ambulance approaching and was looking for it. Nevertheless a bus coming in the opposite direction shoot out of the stop and went straight into the left (fast) lane. There was a car or two in the right lane already. And only then he did notice the ambulance coming from behind him. So he made a way for it by going into the junction.
I think it is actually legal to do that to let ambulance pass, it just struck me as not paying attention, because the ambulance could be heard for quite some time already, and seen before he got beside the cars in the right lane.
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Re that 12'4" bridge vid - Anyone else enjoy how much of the traffic (including the truck that got peeled) clearly goes through those lights on amber/red too?
Amber is normal....... If you can safely clear the intersection before it goes red.
Red though, that's just plain illegal.
I find these American-style traffic lights confusing. In Europe they are always above or next to the entry line, so then passing the light itself after it turned red is the obvious infraction. I suppose here it is still the entry line that is illegal to cross on red, so while the truck that got peeled passed under the bridge on red light, it clearly entered it when it was still amber, so it shouldn't be a problem.
I hate it when they're that close. Makes them difficult to see if you're in the front of the line.
A little. But it's more obvious which lane and direction they apply to.
-
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Re that 12'4" bridge vid - Anyone else enjoy how much of the traffic (including the truck that got peeled) clearly goes through those lights on amber/red too?
Amber is normal....... If you can safely clear the intersection before it goes red.
Red though, that's just plain illegal.
I find these American-style traffic lights confusing. In Europe they are always above or next to the entry line, so then passing the light itself after it turned red is the obvious infraction. I suppose here it is still the entry line that is illegal to cross on red, so while the truck that got peeled passed under the bridge on red light, it clearly entered it when it was still amber, so it shouldn't be a problem.
I hate it when they're that close. Makes them difficult to see if you're in the front of the line.
A little. But it's more obvious which lane and direction they apply to.
I can't remember having such a problem. It's common to have specific lights for turning left. But then the lane is also usually marked and you expect it because you're in the left turn lane. Ditto for turning right (though these are rarer). Everything else is...going straight.
-
@boomzilla Right turn lanes are common here (we don't have right turn on red light), and there is often an island between the right-turn lane and the straight lanes. And that's still simple layout. We have plenty of junctions with lots of divided lanes and mess of lines criss-crossing them around here.
-
-
- Park your car blocking a farmer's driveway or land entry.
- Refuse to move it.
- Get your car flipped over with a telehandler.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAOVTJ2vGOg
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@bobjanova said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Re that 12'4" bridge vid - Anyone else enjoy how much of the traffic (including the truck that got peeled) clearly goes through those lights on amber/red too?
Amber is normal....... If you can safely clear the intersection before it goes red.
Red though, that's just plain illegal.
I find these American-style traffic lights confusing. In Europe they are always above or next to the entry line, so then passing the light itself after it turned red is the obvious infraction. I suppose here it is still the entry line that is illegal to cross on red, so while the truck that got peeled passed under the bridge on red light, it clearly entered it when it was still amber, so it shouldn't be a problem.
I hate it when they're that close. Makes them difficult to see if you're in the front of the line.
A little. But it's more obvious which lane and direction they apply to.
I can't remember having such a problem. It's common to have specific lights for turning left. But then the lane is also usually marked and you expect it because you're in the left turn lane. Ditto for turning right (though these are rarer). Everything else is...going straight.
Yeah. Things only get weird if you have an intersection with more than 4 roads.. but there isn't much of anything you can do to make that particular situation less confusing... Otherwise..
PseudocodeIf turning left: If left signal: follow arrow Else if protected left (left arrow integrated into signal, usually a doghouse or 4-5 light signal): follow arrow OR turn when able/safe Else: turn when able/safe If going straight: follow straight signals (usually un-arrowed, sometimes a straight arrow) If turning right: Go on green straight light OR right arrow, if present OR (go on red when safe AND NOT "No Turn on Red" AND)
EDIT: I think I just realized the main difference between these signaling systems - the American system essentially, the signals display, for lack of a better term, an "aspect" showing the state of the intersection from your road. They're not showing a specific lane what it needs to do, but instead an indication of "if going to X, do Y". You could have, like, 3 left lanes all controlled by one signal. (You probably wouldn't, since it could burn out, etc), but they all show the same information.
-
@sloosecannon Nope, in NL it's actually pretty common to have two lights for a single left or right turn lane. One of them will be overhead above the lane, the other about 2.5m from the ground attached to the pole at the side.
-
-
-
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Yeah. Things only get weird if you have an intersection with more than 4 roads.. but there isn't much of anything you can do to make that particular situation less confusing...
Those things are par for the course here. Where would you place the lights in places like
Ok, in this particular case, the tricky bit is knowing which left is which, because you can go a little less to the left or a little more to the left here.
Then this is a fairly normal junction
but notice how the right turn does not enter it at all (and has separate light). That's very common around here.
And of course we have some monstrosities too, like:
where there are two junctions right next to each other, with the split right turns like above.
-
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Those things are par for the course here. Where would you place the lights in places like
I don't see anything really weird about any of those or why you couldn't have the lights across the intersections where they're easy to see.
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Bulb said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Those things are par for the course here. Where would you place the lights in places like
I don't see anything really weird about any of those or why you couldn't have the lights across the intersections where they're easy to see.
Yeah. In the States, you might see those fancy signals that have a really narrow viewing angle for some of them, just to cut down on confusion if you've got two roads at an angle.
Of course, your traffic pattern is still gonna be horrible, but that's not the fault of the signals....
-
@Bulb yeah so the first one, you'd just place em as close to opposite the lanes as you can get and angle the lights to the street they're controlling. That's a pretty typical installation.
Second one, you'd do the same, you might have an additional, lower pole light there in the right turn, depending on how sharp that angle is. I've also seen something like that just turned into a continuous right turn, where you have a little distance as a new lane specifically for that right turn lane. Little weirder, especially with those right turn lanes, but still fairly typical.
The third one is just an abomination.. you'd need a lot of low-angle signals and it would still be confusing as hell.
-
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
The third one is just an abomination
How so? It's kinda busy with islands but the traffic flow seems pretty straight forward. Are we looking at the same thing?
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
How so? It's kinda busy with islands but the traffic flow seems pretty straight forward. Are we looking at the same thing?
It could be signalled a bit better. The placement of the lights is on the opposite side of each lane to the driver, making it harder to see than it should be. Not that I spotted that at first. It just looked like a miserable junction…
-
@boomzilla The traffic flow is not all that straightforward, because there are three turn-offs to the right, with the second set of lights in the middle.
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
The third one is just an abomination.. you'd need a lot of low-angle signals and it would still be confusing as hell.
That's the point. It is confusing, but not the signals, only which lane you need to be in depending on where you want to go. The signals are obvious where you should stop at which.
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
Second one, you'd do the same, you might have an additional, lower pole light there in the right turn, depending on how sharp that angle is. I've also seen something like that just turned into a continuous right turn, where you have a little distance as a new lane specifically for that right turn lane.
You can certainly put the signal for the right turn in many places. This is still the obvious one.
There also often is a green left arrow on the far side of the junction. It is actually on this one in the other direction (unfortunately it's not on in the streetview and I can't quickly find a place where it is):
This light only applies when you are already past the stop line, and it will only ever be green when the main light is red. It tells those turning left that the opposing traffic already got red, so they now can, and should, get the hell out of the junction before those coming from the sides will want to go—and it should be noted that in this particular junction the timing is wrong and cars get stuck in the middle trying to turn left sometimes.
-
@dkf said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
How so? It's kinda busy with islands but the traffic flow seems pretty straight forward. Are we looking at the same thing?
It could be signalled a bit better. The placement of the lights is on the opposite side of each lane to the driver, making it harder to see than it should be. Not that I spotted that at first. It just looked like a miserable junction…
The lights are always on the right side, because on the left side they would be in the middle of the road on non-divided ones. So right side (or above) is where you are looking for the signals. That's how the signage is defined to work. Yes, it is fairly far to the side of your view when you are waiting on the line, but it is consistent.
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@sloosecannon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
The third one is just an abomination
How so? It's kinda busy with islands but the traffic flow seems pretty straight forward. Are we looking at the same thing?
Yeah ok so I think between being on mobile, which is different, and misunderstanding where roads actually are, I totally overestimated the complexity.
It's still a mess but it's about normal for a complicated city intersection...
-
-
@loopback0 To be fair, the driver did approach slowly enough that there was no significant damage. It's certainly not the best way to check the height of your truck, but no harm, no foul.
-
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@loopback0 To be fair, the driver did approach slowly enough that there was no significant damage. It's certainly not the best way to check the height of your truck, but no harm, no foul.
Slowly while ignoring the illuminated OVERHEIGHT PLEASE TURN sign.
-
Another one bites the dust
-
Boxtruck tries to sneak
slow down, slow down, slow down, BANG
-
@loopback0 Not only that, he runs the red light. The light turns yellow 4 seconds, and red 1 second, before the truck enters the intersection.
He almost made it though. It looks to me like the truck was only about 1" too high. And it also looks like the truck was leaning slightly to the right, perhaps due to the crowning of the road, off-center loading, or . If the top of the truck had been level, I think he might have just barely cleared it.
And finally, I can tell you from having driven such a rental truck on several occasions, that the rental contract explicitly excludes damage from insufficient clearance (although I just checked the rental agreement from the last time I rented a truck, when I moved to TX last year, and that exclusion applies only to commercial, not household, rentals; different companies might have different policies).
-
@Zerosquare said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
That's pretty impressive.
Once after gooning with my volvo 240 out in the weeds, I had a small tree stuck in the undercarriage. I did the dumb to get it there too. That car was night immortal, I spent two years trying to kill the fucker and it just wouldn't die.
-
-
@HardwareGeek said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
night immortal
It was a vampire?
that would explain KITT
-
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
That car was night immortal, I spent two years trying to kill the fucker and it just wouldn't die.
Did you consider trying to kill it during the day?
-
@Deadfast said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@Carnage said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
That car was night immortal, I spent two years trying to kill the fucker and it just wouldn't die.
Did you consider trying to kill it during the day?
Just stuff yourself with garlic and let the farts do the work ...
-
Broke: brake checking a truck when you're driving a car
Woke: brake checking a truck when you're riding a bike(video inside)
-
-
@boomzilla Is there an accompanying article, or other information?
I don't see any rope remains, and I'd like to know if this happened because he failed to secure the boat to the trailer in any way whatsoever.
-
@acrow Let's give the driver a little more credit.
Maybe they were just patiently waiting for the traffic light to change with an empty trailer attached when a speeding boat collided from behind.
-
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla Is there an accompanying article, or other information?
I don't see any rope remains, and I'd like to know if this happened because he failed to secure the boat to the trailer in any way whatsoever.
It is a good example of what happens when you don't wear a seatbelt...
-
@dcon said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@acrow said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
@boomzilla Is there an accompanying article, or other information?
I don't see any rope remains, and I'd like to know if this happened because he failed to secure the boat to the trailer in any way whatsoever.
It is a good example of what happens when you don't wear a seatbelt...
Unsecured pets in the backseat are also fun to all people in the front.
-
-
Danzuka was subsequently transported to a local hospital where a blood sample showed that his blood alcohol level was a staggering .778, more than nine times the legal .08 limit. At time of his arrest, Danzuka was driving on a suspended license due to a prior drunk driving conviction.
-
-
@boomzilla said in Driving Anti-Patterns - Necro Edition:
staggering .778, more than nine times the legal .08 limit
Screw the legal limit, it's double the value that usually causes delirium!
-