News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

This One Weird Trick Could Double the Capacity of our Freeways

Started by kernals12, March 12, 2021, 09:51:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

vdeane

Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 14, 2021, 12:11:03 AM
Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2021, 10:40:18 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 10:21:05 PM
With electric cars, mileage taxes are the only option to keep our roads funded.

And I suspect tomorrow's cars will offer a manual mode (with the AI stepping in as necessary)
Easy: just slap a per kwh tax on everyone's electric bill and at chargers.  Or push hydrogen fuel cell cars instead of electric, as they work just like gas cars, except cleaner.

I'd rather not deal with the AI at all.  Things like Scott's story of adaptive cruise make me want absolutely nothing to do with it.

And yet, Scott's example also highlighted with us being in control of our vehicles, we don't think about the hazards we create.  If his car started slowing him down automatically, it sensed that it was too close to the car in front of him.  He could've easily have moved over into that line of traffic seconds earlier, but chose to remain in his lane.
Most people do not keep three second following distances in front of them.  Even Driver's Ed classes only tell people to keep two.  I would guess most people on the road only keep one.  And if you're following what traffic several car lengths ahead is doing (as you're supposed to) rather than just the car ahead, anything that would cause braking to occur shouldn't be a surprise.

Moving over that early would also mean that you're holding up traffic in the left lane longer.  Keep right except to pass exists for a reason.  I was taught not to move over way early to pass someone as a courtesy - in fact, I tend to get quite annoyed at drivers that do and hold me up for longer than need be!  I imagine drivers behind me get quite annoyed when they need to wait for me to finish passing, too.  Having to move over much earlier prolongs the duration of said annoyance.

I also wouldn't want the car to slow down in the event someone moved back quickly after passing (as happens often on the Thruway).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.


skluth

Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2021, 10:18:34 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 13, 2021, 07:24:35 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 03:40:08 PM
One idea would be to allow these cars to use HOT lanes. You could have a device at the on ramps that tells the cars to automatically turn on their adaptive cruise control. This would incentivize take up.

I expect at some point in the future some urban freeways will be entirely self-driving with traffic density being controlled by computers controlling the cars. I'd be fine getting in my car, driving to the onramp, and entering my destination then taking a nap, reading a book, or sightseeing until I reached my destination. With almost nobody paying a gas tax, your trip would be metered and car owners will be charged a mileage tax monthly much like FasTrak does for HOT lanes. Drivers would get points or possibly even lose their license for turning off the autopilot before exiting the highway.
Yuck.  I don't want the car navigating for me.  I want to drive myself, select my route myself, get around slowpokes if I so wish, etc.

Also yuck on mileage taxes.  I prefer how it's mostly invisible now.  I don't want to get big bills for my car usage.

If you're the one zipping around "slowpokes" on the freeway, you could be the one creating new roadblocks by causing drivers to brake as you zip between cars, thereby increasing congestion behind you. Others have done the same ahead of you. Allowing the computer to navigate, chances are cars would normally travel well over the legal 55 mph in cities and closer to the 65-70 mph that cars normally drive through urban areas. I would gladly give up control to get from Riverside to Santa Monica at an average speed of 65 mph or more.

Also, somebody will have to pay for new roads. They won't pay for themselves.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: vdeane on March 14, 2021, 02:32:09 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 14, 2021, 12:11:03 AM
Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2021, 10:40:18 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 10:21:05 PM
With electric cars, mileage taxes are the only option to keep our roads funded.

And I suspect tomorrow's cars will offer a manual mode (with the AI stepping in as necessary)
Easy: just slap a per kwh tax on everyone's electric bill and at chargers.  Or push hydrogen fuel cell cars instead of electric, as they work just like gas cars, except cleaner.

I'd rather not deal with the AI at all.  Things like Scott's story of adaptive cruise make me want absolutely nothing to do with it.

And yet, Scott's example also highlighted with us being in control of our vehicles, we don't think about the hazards we create.  If his car started slowing him down automatically, it sensed that it was too close to the car in front of him.  He could've easily have moved over into that line of traffic seconds earlier, but chose to remain in his lane.
Most people do not keep three second following distances in front of them.  Even Driver's Ed classes only tell people to keep two.  I would guess most people on the road only keep one.  And if you're following what traffic several car lengths ahead is doing (as you're supposed to) rather than just the car ahead, anything that would cause braking to occur shouldn't be a surprise.

Moving over that early would also mean that you're holding up traffic in the left lane longer.  Keep right except to pass exists for a reason.  I was taught not to move over way early to pass someone as a courtesy - in fact, I tend to get quite annoyed at drivers that do and hold me up for longer than need be!  I imagine drivers behind me get quite annoyed when they need to wait for me to finish passing, too.  Having to move over much earlier prolongs the duration of said annoyance.

I also wouldn't want the car to slow down in the event someone moved back quickly after passing (as happens often on the Thruway).

Adaptive cruise control doesn't require a 3 second interval. On my vehicle, I can choose 1, 1.5, 2 or 3 seconds. I have it set to 1...and that's probably still more room than I usually allow.

Most people don't watch vehicles several vehicles in front of them, which is why rear-end accidents are so prevalent, especially when traffic suddenly slows down.

If you're moving over with less than 1 second between you and the vehicle in front of you, then you're tailgating that vehicle in front of you. Sure, don't move over too early, but at some point you have to judge the speed of everyone around you and decides when it's best for you to move over.  If the car slows down on its own, it'll speed back up automatically when you merge over and the distance widens.

As far as merging traffic goes, my car senses the speed of the next vehicle ahead. If a vehicle merges in front of me and it's going a faster speed than I am, my car won't slow down as it recognizes I will gain that 1 second distance interval on its own. In fact, there's a function on my display that shows me the distance between me and the vehicle in front of me. After approximately 100 yards, it goes away, as the next vehicle in front of me is far enough away to not be a concern.

What we all learn in drivers ed changes over time. For years, we were told to hold the wheel at 10 and 2. Now, it's 9 and 3.  A DUI limit was .10, now it's .08. Things like flashing yellow arrows and roundabouts probably weren't commonplace in most manuals. Bicycle lanes either. Heck, even seat belts weren't mandatory until the 80s.  Trainings change, and what you might have been taught doesn't apply anymore, or applies in a different fashion.

kernals12

One thing that worries me is that this will turn into an excuse to take away lanes from our freeways and force us to always drive in platoon mode, which would take the fun out of the interstate.

Dirt Roads

Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 14, 2021, 05:47:34 PM
As far as merging traffic goes, my car senses the speed of the next vehicle ahead. If a vehicle merges in front of me and it's going a faster speed than I am, my car won't slow down as it recognizes I will gain that 1 second distance interval on its own. In fact, there's a function on my display that shows me the distance between me and the vehicle in front of me. After approximately 100 yards, it goes away, as the next vehicle in front of me is far enough away to not be a concern.

Wrong idea.  If you set your ACC at 20MPH over the speed limit and are pacing the car ahead at a 1-second interval when they change lanes to let a car merge into traffic, your car shoots ahead and leaves the merging vehicle with no safe braking margin to take the gap created for it.  If the merging vehicle takes the gap, the ACC vehicle in the "slow lane" will need to take action to avoid collision.  Which is difficult from full acceleration.  Also note that safe braking distances are much different when a vehicle is assumed to be under full acceleration.

vdeane

Quote from: skluth on March 14, 2021, 03:30:44 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2021, 10:18:34 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 13, 2021, 07:24:35 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 03:40:08 PM
One idea would be to allow these cars to use HOT lanes. You could have a device at the on ramps that tells the cars to automatically turn on their adaptive cruise control. This would incentivize take up.

I expect at some point in the future some urban freeways will be entirely self-driving with traffic density being controlled by computers controlling the cars. I'd be fine getting in my car, driving to the onramp, and entering my destination then taking a nap, reading a book, or sightseeing until I reached my destination. With almost nobody paying a gas tax, your trip would be metered and car owners will be charged a mileage tax monthly much like FasTrak does for HOT lanes. Drivers would get points or possibly even lose their license for turning off the autopilot before exiting the highway.
Yuck.  I don't want the car navigating for me.  I want to drive myself, select my route myself, get around slowpokes if I so wish, etc.

Also yuck on mileage taxes.  I prefer how it's mostly invisible now.  I don't want to get big bills for my car usage.

If you're the one zipping around "slowpokes" on the freeway, you could be the one creating new roadblocks by causing drivers to brake as you zip between cars, thereby increasing congestion behind you. Others have done the same ahead of you. Allowing the computer to navigate, chances are cars would normally travel well over the legal 55 mph in cities and closer to the 65-70 mph that cars normally drive through urban areas. I would gladly give up control to get from Riverside to Santa Monica at an average speed of 65 mph or more.

Also, somebody will have to pay for new roads. They won't pay for themselves.
I don't really weave, but I'd rather make the decision for myself when to pass rather than have a computer and its thoughts of what level of "priority" I am.  At least the government probably won't do anything like "pay more to get first priority to get around the truck kicking up debris", but I could see private roads like ON 407 doing it.

Actually, I only go 7 over, so for a 55 mph road that's 62, and there's still plenty of people going slower.  Same with the Thruway going 72.

Something tells me that the computer would always go exactly the speed limit and that the government (especially in places more obsessed with safety) would not raise the limit.

I have no objection to paying for roads - in fact, I believe the gas tax should be raised, significantly.  But I do want it to stay essentially invisible, as it is now.  Of course, the fact that a big bill for mileage would discourage driving is probably considered a "feature" by the Urbanists.  If a per kwh tax on electric bills and charging ins't something we're willing to do, then maybe the push should have been for hydrogen cars instead of electric.

Quote from: kernals12 on March 14, 2021, 06:45:20 PM
One thing that worries me is that this will turn into an excuse to take away lanes from our freeways and force us to always drive in platoon mode, which would take the fun out of the interstate.
From what I've read, that's EXACTLY what they're planning.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

kernals12

Quote from: vdeane on March 14, 2021, 09:18:54 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 14, 2021, 03:30:44 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 13, 2021, 10:18:34 PM
Quote from: skluth on March 13, 2021, 07:24:35 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 03:40:08 PM
One idea would be to allow these cars to use HOT lanes. You could have a device at the on ramps that tells the cars to automatically turn on their adaptive cruise control. This would incentivize take up.

I expect at some point in the future some urban freeways will be entirely self-driving with traffic density being controlled by computers controlling the cars. I'd be fine getting in my car, driving to the onramp, and entering my destination then taking a nap, reading a book, or sightseeing until I reached my destination. With almost nobody paying a gas tax, your trip would be metered and car owners will be charged a mileage tax monthly much like FasTrak does for HOT lanes. Drivers would get points or possibly even lose their license for turning off the autopilot before exiting the highway.
Yuck.  I don't want the car navigating for me.  I want to drive myself, select my route myself, get around slowpokes if I so wish, etc.

Also yuck on mileage taxes.  I prefer how it's mostly invisible now.  I don't want to get big bills for my car usage.

If you're the one zipping around "slowpokes" on the freeway, you could be the one creating new roadblocks by causing drivers to brake as you zip between cars, thereby increasing congestion behind you. Others have done the same ahead of you. Allowing the computer to navigate, chances are cars would normally travel well over the legal 55 mph in cities and closer to the 65-70 mph that cars normally drive through urban areas. I would gladly give up control to get from Riverside to Santa Monica at an average speed of 65 mph or more.

Also, somebody will have to pay for new roads. They won't pay for themselves.
I don't really weave, but I'd rather make the decision for myself when to pass rather than have a computer and its thoughts of what level of "priority" I am.  At least the government probably won't do anything like "pay more to get first priority to get around the truck kicking up debris", but I could see private roads like ON 407 doing it.

Actually, I only go 7 over, so for a 55 mph road that's 62, and there's still plenty of people going slower.  Same with the Thruway going 72.

Something tells me that the computer would always go exactly the speed limit and that the government (especially in places more obsessed with safety) would not raise the limit.

I have no objection to paying for roads - in fact, I believe the gas tax should be raised, significantly.  But I do want it to stay essentially invisible, as it is now.  Of course, the fact that a big bill for mileage would discourage driving is probably considered a "feature" by the Urbanists.  If a per kwh tax on electric bills and charging ins't something we're willing to do, then maybe the push should have been for hydrogen cars instead of electric.

Quote from: kernals12 on March 14, 2021, 06:45:20 PM
One thing that worries me is that this will turn into an excuse to take away lanes from our freeways and force us to always drive in platoon mode, which would take the fun out of the interstate.

From what I've read, that's EXACTLY what they're planning.


Why is it that cyclists have such a well organized lobby but driving enthusiasts don't?

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 14, 2021, 08:11:56 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 14, 2021, 05:47:34 PM
As far as merging traffic goes, my car senses the speed of the next vehicle ahead. If a vehicle merges in front of me and it's going a faster speed than I am, my car won't slow down as it recognizes I will gain that 1 second distance interval on its own. In fact, there's a function on my display that shows me the distance between me and the vehicle in front of me. After approximately 100 yards, it goes away, as the next vehicle in front of me is far enough away to not be a concern.

Wrong idea.  If you set your ACC at 20MPH over the speed limit and are pacing the car ahead at a 1-second interval when they change lanes to let a car merge into traffic, your car shoots ahead and leaves the merging vehicle with no safe braking margin to take the gap created for it.  If the merging vehicle takes the gap, the ACC vehicle in the "slow lane" will need to take action to avoid collision.  Which is difficult from full acceleration.  Also note that safe braking distances are much different when a vehicle is assumed to be under full acceleration.

Invalid example.  You're not using the equipment as intended.  If you hit that merging driver, are you going to tell the cop you had your ACC set for 90 mph in a 70 mph zone and you're not liable for the crash?

Also, if you saw the car merging onto the highway, why didn't you merge over as well or hit the brake pedal yourself?

You're supposed to use the ACC to set the top speed that you want to go, not to continously pace traffic in front of you.  That car in front of you could merge out of the lane for any number of reasons - a pedestrian or kid entered the roadway, there's a debris in the road, a cop has someone pulled over on the side of the roadway, or for no particular reason in general.  In none of these examples is it prudent to simply let your car speed up without interacting with it to merge over or slow down yourself, and especially with the claim that you set the top speed to be 20 mph over the limit.

Quote from: vdeane on March 14, 2021, 09:18:54 PM
Something tells me that the computer would always go exactly the speed limit and that the government (especially in places more obsessed with safety) would not raise the limit.

How fast do Teslas go compared to the speed limit? 

While this technology is out there now, based on what I've seen for my vehicle, it has a long way to go.  My car will show the speed limit based on the previous sign it saw.  But...it has to see that sign, and it has to be accurate.  There's one Speed Limit 50 sign that my car always seems to think it says Speed Limit 60.  Just one of them though - the sign is clearly a 50 sign, and it's not dirty or obstructed.  Sometimes it mis-reads or doesn't read other speed limit signs.  Other times, it misreads a route sign or something else to be a speed limit sign.  The car's speed limit indicator will max out at 100 mph.  But for now, this is all just for show - the speed limit indicator does not factor in to the car's performance, and there's nothing I can set in relation to the speed limit shown on the car.

Also, the car won't know the speed limit has changed if I turn onto a different road.  It won't know the limit of a highway until it sees a sign.  It won't know the statutory limit.

So, there's certainly some work to be done. There's a bit of programming that will need to draw from *accurate* state and local databases, and signage out in the field.  It's far from perfect by any means, but we also shouldn't expect to go from nothing to everything right away either.

Quote from: kernals12 on March 14, 2021, 06:45:20 PM
One thing that worries me is that this will turn into an excuse to take away lanes from our freeways and force us to always drive in platoon mode, which would take the fun out of the interstate.

For the majority of drivers, this will be absolutely fine with them.  There's just a very small percentage of drivers that don't want to get from point A to point B the fastest way possible. 

kernals12

Quote
For the majority of drivers, this will be absolutely fine with them.  There's just a very small percentage of drivers that don't want to get from point A to point B the fastest way possible.

That's not true. 78% say they enjoy driving to some degree https://news.gallup.com/poll/236813/adults-drive-frequently-fewer-enjoy-lot.aspx

Why do you think all those car commercials sell us on the fun of driving?

Dirt Roads

Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 14, 2021, 05:47:34 PM
As far as merging traffic goes, my car senses the speed of the next vehicle ahead. If a vehicle merges in front of me and it's going a faster speed than I am, my car won't slow down as it recognizes I will gain that 1 second distance interval on its own. In fact, there's a function on my display that shows me the distance between me and the vehicle in front of me. After approximately 100 yards, it goes away, as the next vehicle in front of me is far enough away to not be a concern.

Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 14, 2021, 08:11:56 PM
Wrong idea.  If you set your ACC at 20MPH over the speed limit and are pacing the car ahead at a 1-second interval when they change lanes to let a car merge into traffic, your car shoots ahead and leaves the merging vehicle with no safe braking margin to take the gap created for it.  If the merging vehicle takes the gap, the ACC vehicle in the "slow lane" will need to take action to avoid collision.  Which is difficult from full acceleration.  Also note that safe braking distances are much different when a vehicle is assumed to be under full acceleration.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 15, 2021, 09:11:15 AM
Invalid example.  You're not using the equipment as intended.  If you hit that merging driver, are you going to tell the cop you had your ACC set for 90 mph in a 70 mph zone and you're not liable for the crash?

I totally agree, but this is already a major problem here.  I'm seeing this happen at least 5 times a week now along the eight-lane section of I-85/I-40 in Central North Carolina, and I'm not driving near as much these days.  I'll get cut off myself about once or twice a month, sometimes by folks who are not even paying attention (using autonomous mode); one of those guys was reading a newspaper.  It's usually easy to slap on the brakes hard and then blast out behind the offender, but sometimes you get boxed out by the car behind you on the on-ramp.  We don't see this much on the four-lane sections of I-40 or I-85 [to the south and east of us, respectively].

You also see the same maneuver used by super-aggressive drivers, but you can usually see them coming as they switch lanes frequently.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: kernals12 on March 14, 2021, 11:01:41 PM
Why is it that cyclists have such a well organized lobby but driving enthusiasts don't?

Heck, to be absolutely honest, we don't have a great organized lobby here either, on what's probably the only real forum for road enthusiasts.  We like talking about roads to each other, but don't like talking roads to the officials that can actually push forth change.  I've seen myself where I'll post info about a public meeting or public comment periods on this forum: They almost always result in no responses, and I can't recall seeing any attendees or comments filed as a result.  We can have a 300 count thread about roads that need to be widened or signage that needs to be improved, but when it matters the most, the government only gets comments for better bicycle lanes.  Guess where they're going to put some excess money towards, if they are basing it on what they hear from the public?

I've mentioned something I saw a while back...a (human) traffic counter at an intersection.  Every time a bicyclist pedaled by, they would note that on a clipboard. Then I noticed quite a number of bicyclists rolling by, way more than I've ever seen at this location.  Clearly word had gotten out among the bicyclist community that there was going to be a survey done at a particular location and time, so they coordinated to go out there and add to the count.  Now, since then, not only have I never seen those bicyclists again, but no other improvements have been done either.  That lobby may have done a little too much for their own good...an unannounced observation where the DOT may have sent an employee out and watched traffic go by at a similar time probably would reveal that the survey results was clearly flawed.

Quote from: kernals12 on March 15, 2021, 09:28:18 AM
That's not true. 78% say they enjoy driving to some degree https://news.gallup.com/poll/236813/adults-drive-frequently-fewer-enjoy-lot.aspx

Not sure what you're getting at.  They enjoy driving, but that doesn't mean they drive excessively.  They can just enjoy driving to work compared to taking the bus, or enjoy driving so they can listen to their radio, stop at stores on the way home, or go straight to another event.

Quote from: kernals12 on March 15, 2021, 09:28:18 AM
Why do you think all those car commercials sell us on the fun of driving?

Because commercials try to show things in a positive light.

How many people enjoy laundry, mopping the floor, taking medication because they feel like crap, or buying insurance?  Not many.  But commercials will still show people happily doing all of this, because smiles sell.

Just wondering...have you ever seen commercials for mass transit?  Have they convinced you to take mass transit?

hotdogPi

Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 15, 2021, 10:41:11 AM
Just wondering...have you ever seen commercials for mass transit?  Have they convinced you to take mass transit?

I've seen billboards for the MBTA and for some of the private long-distance buses (like Greyhound, except that particular one hasn't), and I've seen online banner ads for Amtrak.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

kernals12

I think an average following distance of 80 feet is enough for the various maneuvers that make freeway driving fun. With a berth of 20 feet for the car itself, that's a traffic density of 53 cars per lane mile, at 60 mph, that's 3200 vph lane capacity, which is still a 60% improvement over the current 2000 vph.

kernals12

Quote from: 1 on March 15, 2021, 10:46:20 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 15, 2021, 10:41:11 AM
Just wondering...have you ever seen commercials for mass transit?  Have they convinced you to take mass transit?

I've seen billboards for the MBTA and for some of the private long-distance buses (like Greyhound, except that particular one hasn't), and I've seen online banner ads for Amtrak.
[/quvehicle.
Also, airlines spend a shit ton on advertising

But their ads usually focus on price or tell you that you need to get away from it all. They don't pretend that the flight itself is fun.

kphoger

Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Phantom jams are the reason why our freeways have low carrying capacity.

So, like, when a driver steps on the brakes for no good reason for a split-second (tell me you've never been behind drivers like that, or ones that drive two-foot-style and flutter the brake pedal)?  After the first four times of that, you figure out what's going on and don't bother braking every single time you see the red lights flicker in front of you.  Except, with cooperative adaptive cruise control, wouldn't your vehicle automatically slow down every time?
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

webny99

Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2021, 11:49:24 AM
So, like, when a driver steps on the brakes for no good reason for a split-second (tell me you've never been behind drivers like that, or ones that drive two-foot-style and flutter the brake pedal)?  After the first four times of that, you figure out what's going on and don't bother braking every single time you see the red lights flicker in front of you.

Yes. I have had this happen in both free-flowing and congested traffic conditions.

There have even been occasions where I started counting how many times the guy in front braked when I didn't. Say I got up to ten: I see that as ten favors that I've done for drivers behind me. I'm of the belief that it reduces congestion and provides a smoother driving experience to roll along at a consistent (but slow) speed rather than gas > brake > gas > brake > etc.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2021, 11:49:24 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Phantom jams are the reason why our freeways have low carrying capacity.

So, like, when a driver steps on the brakes for no good reason for a split-second (tell me you've never been behind drivers like that, or ones that drive two-foot-style and flutter the brake pedal)?  After the first four times of that, you figure out what's going on and don't bother braking every single time you see the red lights flicker in front of you.  Except, with cooperative adaptive cruise control, wouldn't your vehicle automatically slow down every time?

The car would slow down if that braking was done to the point where car slows down.  If it was just a light tap, it shouldn't affect you much if you were both going slow to begin with.  If you're going 60 to 30 to 60 to 30, yeah, that'll be an issue though.

BUT, as more and more vehicles have this function, and if it's used more and more, then that'll reduce the occurrences of this type of activity.  As noted above, the guy driving his car in 'manual mode', so to say, is causing the problem.

1995hoo

Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 15, 2021, 12:36:54 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2021, 11:49:24 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 13, 2021, 06:49:32 PM
Phantom jams are the reason why our freeways have low carrying capacity.

So, like, when a driver steps on the brakes for no good reason for a split-second (tell me you've never been behind drivers like that, or ones that drive two-foot-style and flutter the brake pedal)?  After the first four times of that, you figure out what's going on and don't bother braking every single time you see the red lights flicker in front of you.  Except, with cooperative adaptive cruise control, wouldn't your vehicle automatically slow down every time?

The car would slow down if that braking was done to the point where car slows down.  If it was just a light tap, it shouldn't affect you much if you were both going slow to begin with.  If you're going 60 to 30 to 60 to 30, yeah, that'll be an issue though.

BUT, as more and more vehicles have this function, and if it's used more and more, then that'll reduce the occurrences of this type of activity.  As noted above, the guy driving his car in 'manual mode', so to say, is causing the problem.

However, you do have to be careful using adaptive cruise control in heavy traffic because of the risk if someone tailgates you when you're using the feature and the car ahead of you slows abruptly, or someone cuts you off, such that your adaptive cruise control essentially brakes heavily (causes your car to slow very suddenly). Good chance you get rear-ended in that situation if the guy behind you is not also using adaptive cruise control (which, if he's tailgating you, he probably isn't). When I drive my wife's car I do sometimes use that feature in traffic, but I hit the "Cancel" button if someone follows too closely for precisely this reason–when I take control, I bleed off speed a lot more gradually than the adaptive cruise control does.

As I've said in other threads, I very much like the adaptive cruise control feature, but there is definitely a bit of a learning curve with it compared to conventional cruise control (which is what our other cars have and which I used this morning to keep my speed down on the way to and from an appointment in Fairfax City). On my wife's car the system can actually be changed from adaptive to conventional, though neither of us has ever done that–we leave in adaptive mode.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

vdeane

Quote from: kernals12 on March 14, 2021, 11:01:41 PM
Why is it that cyclists have such a well organized lobby but driving enthusiasts don't?
Well, there's a lot of grass-roots organizing, it's a much larger group, and it's not just one lobby.  In addition to cyclists, you have every advocate for non-motorized transportation (transit, the disabled, pedestrian safety, etc.), every safety group out there, people who want the self-driving ridesharing future to get out of car ownership, Urbanists, the environmental movement, people against climate change, etc.  We have roadgeeks (mostly this forum and the broader community of people who go to roadmeets and on the Facebook groups) and car enthusiasts.  Most people drive to get from point A to point B.  For them, driving is about getting to the destination, not the destination itself.  And regardless of how you may think people enjoy driving (as mentioned, there are a lot of qualifiers on that), few people go gaga over driving an urban interstate for the sake of it.  Those car ads you mention tend to focus on things like tourism roads of off-roading for a reason - even for most people who enjoy driving, those are the experiences they prefer for recreation, not things like interstates (even rural ones, much less urban ones).

It's also worth noting that, even within the roadgeek community, things like the driving experience on urban freeways is not the slam dunk issue you may think it is.  There are actually roadgeeks who oppose new urban freeway projects and/or favor urban freeway teardowns!  Not as many as in the general population (especially the general population in urban cores), but there are some.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

kernals12

Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2021, 01:00:59 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 14, 2021, 11:01:41 PM
Why is it that cyclists have such a well organized lobby but driving enthusiasts don't?
Well, there's a lot of grass-roots organizing, it's a much larger group, and it's not just one lobby.  In addition to cyclists, you have every advocate for non-motorized transportation (transit, the disabled, pedestrian safety, etc.), every safety group out there, people who want the self-driving ridesharing future to get out of car ownership, Urbanists, the environmental movement, people against climate change, etc.  We have roadgeeks (mostly this forum and the broader community of people who go to roadmeets and on the Facebook groups) and car enthusiasts.  Most people drive to get from point A to point B.  For them, driving is about getting to the destination, not the destination itself.  And regardless of how you may think people enjoy driving (as mentioned, there are a lot of qualifiers on that), few people go gaga over driving an urban interstate for the sake of it.  Those car ads you mention tend to focus on things like tourism roads of off-roading for a reason - even for most people who enjoy driving, those are the experiences they prefer for recreation, not things like interstates (even rural ones, much less urban ones).

It's also worth noting that, even within the roadgeek community, things like the driving experience on urban freeways is not the slam dunk issue you may think it is.  There are actually roadgeeks who oppose new urban freeway projects and/or favor urban freeway teardowns!  Not as many as in the general population (especially the general population in urban cores), but there are some.

Maybe electric cars, with the low cost of pleasure driving, will mint a critical mass of driving enthusiasts

kphoger

Quote from: kernals12 on March 15, 2021, 01:44:17 PM
Maybe electric cars, with the low cost of pleasure driving, will mint a critical mass of driving enthusiasts

Have the current EV drivers become driving enthusiasts since purchasing their electric car?  I'm guessing not.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

vdeane

Quote from: kernals12 on March 15, 2021, 01:44:17 PM
Maybe electric cars, with the low cost of pleasure driving, will mint a critical mass of driving enthusiasts
I doubt gas vs. electric has anything to do with it.  Gas isn't expensive enough to make me want to drive less, especially with my Civic, and electric cars won't stay cheap when the government rolls out mileage taxes (though it's worth noting that charging is NOT free).  If anything the combination of getting billed for the mileage tax and having to stop for 30 minutes every couple hours to recharge (which will vastly change roadtripping; EVs are best suited for commuter cars) will make people want to drive LESS.  Most people just don't like sitting in a box for long periods of time (especially in traffic) and/or feel they have better things to do with their time (especially as time behind the wheel is time you're not spending texting or on social media, which is sadly more important for most people in Gen Y/Z).
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

FrCorySticha

IMO, most people view driving as a chore you have to do rather than something they look forward to doing. They might enjoy the chore of driving, as some do with the chore of yard work, but it's still a chore that has to be done. Very few people wake up in the morning with, "Yay! I get to drive to work! Joy!" In fact, it's pretty likely they don't think about it. It's just that thing you do to get from your house to your work location or your vacation spot or wherever you need to go. I'd argue that the example above of people in car commercials smiling just like they do in laundry commercials is a point of evidence towards that fact.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: kernals12 on March 15, 2021, 01:44:17 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 15, 2021, 01:00:59 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 14, 2021, 11:01:41 PM
Why is it that cyclists have such a well organized lobby but driving enthusiasts don't?
Well, there's a lot of grass-roots organizing, it's a much larger group, and it's not just one lobby.  In addition to cyclists, you have every advocate for non-motorized transportation (transit, the disabled, pedestrian safety, etc.), every safety group out there, people who want the self-driving ridesharing future to get out of car ownership, Urbanists, the environmental movement, people against climate change, etc.  We have roadgeeks (mostly this forum and the broader community of people who go to roadmeets and on the Facebook groups) and car enthusiasts.  Most people drive to get from point A to point B.  For them, driving is about getting to the destination, not the destination itself.  And regardless of how you may think people enjoy driving (as mentioned, there are a lot of qualifiers on that), few people go gaga over driving an urban interstate for the sake of it.  Those car ads you mention tend to focus on things like tourism roads of off-roading for a reason - even for most people who enjoy driving, those are the experiences they prefer for recreation, not things like interstates (even rural ones, much less urban ones).

It's also worth noting that, even within the roadgeek community, things like the driving experience on urban freeways is not the slam dunk issue you may think it is.  There are actually roadgeeks who oppose new urban freeway projects and/or favor urban freeway teardowns!  Not as many as in the general population (especially the general population in urban cores), but there are some.

Maybe electric cars, with the low cost of pleasure driving, will mint a critical mass of driving enthusiasts

For those that really hate driving, and would rather deal with the TSA and fly rather than driving to relatively close destinations, I think self-driving cars, more than electric cars, will encourage those to drive instead.  Short-haul flights are decent money makers for airlines, so that will impact their bottom line.

kernals12

Quote from: kphoger on March 15, 2021, 01:49:14 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on March 15, 2021, 01:44:17 PM
Maybe electric cars, with the low cost of pleasure driving, will mint a critical mass of driving enthusiasts

Have the current EV drivers become driving enthusiasts since purchasing their electric car?  I'm guessing not.

Do you not know anything about Tesla fan Boys?



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.