Stop Lights with a Progress bar!

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Christ

For some reason, I imagine you're the only driver that does this. If that's true, your statement is self-defeating, because it relies on other drivers having to do the same thing as you're doing, which they most likely do not.

My wife does as well. Other drivers either floor it or lock them up, depending on how paranoid they are. The point is, I do this because I don't like to have to use near maximum braking in the course of my normal drive. (And I shouldn't have to.)

The fact is, that there is no decision to brake or floor it. Read the law. If a cop notices you attempting to beat a yellow light, you can be stopped and ticketed in many states. They don't want you to go through the yellow light.. there's a difficult concept, I see.

Since I am only speeding up to the speed limit when I decide to go for it, they can't do a damn thing.

Yellow does not mean "make a choice" or "keep going - it's not red yet" it means "yield and prepare to stop".

Really? So when you're 25 feet from the intersection, the law says you have to stop and can't go through?

If I can't stop at it, I keep going through it, and it's only because I was within 100 feet of the light when it turned yellow anyway.

B-B-But you just broke the law. Yellow does not "make a choice" or "keep going", remember?

Maybe I posted incorrectly... I should have posted the 30-0 time for the heaviest vehicle I could find under the worst possible non-inclement conditions... maybe that would get you to realize that 3 seconds is actually quite a long distance.

The intersection in question is 50 mph. Given 50 mph and 2.5 seconds (I'm giving .5 seconds as a VERY generous reaction time, since we're apparently now required to hover our foot over the brake pedal lest the light turn yellow), that's 183 feet. The '97 Geo Metro has a stopping distance of 156 feet from 60, again under ideal vehicle and road conditions, unloaded and with an expert driver. The upshot of this is that you're basically saying that it's okay to set a yellow so that drivers have to hover their foot over the brake pedal and be prepared to apply near maximum braking at EVERY intersection they cross. Sorry, that's crap.

Oh - remember - those red light cameras aren't active until the other light turns green, at least as far as I know. That means you have the 3 second yellow light and another second or two of cross over time before the other side of the intersection turns, so you won't get a ticket.

That is so amazingly wrong that I can't believe you even suggested it. Look at every red light camera website on the web. The biggest complaint with red light cameras is that you can get a ticket for crossing the line less than 0.1 seconds after the light turns red. In fact, the trigger is so short that they have photo evidence that shows one light red and the other still yellow on the same tree (the red light was LED and the yellow incandescent.)

Look, I have no problem with ticketing people for actually running legitimate red lights. (And no, I've never had a red light ticket.) In fact, I watched at that same intersection as a woman was flashed for going through the turn signal a full two seconds after the light turned red. (And in that case, she was only going about 15--very brazen.) But study after study has shown that 5 second yellows, plus a 1-second all-red before opposing traffic goes green, reduces accidents far more than cameras do, and that when those requirements are placed in an intersection with a camera, red light tickets go down to the point where cities are starting to remove them because they're no longer profitable.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Christ

By the way, at 50 MPH, 3 seconds @ 73.3 FPS is 220 feet. That means you'd be able to travel 220 feet in the time that the light stays yellow.

If you're within 220 feet, you're safe. If you're outside of 220 feet, you've got more than enough time to brake to a complete stop. They don't hire civil engineers to run numbers on traffic intersections for no reason, my friend.

So no reaction time, huh? I'm glad your car has the yellow detector that automatically applies instant braking.

Civil engineers run the numbers. When the camera company gets involved, those numbers get thrown away to make more revenue. (In fact, sometimes the camera company's contract actually defines the maximum yellow time the city is allowed to set.)

[Christ]

Originally Posted by Clev

So no reaction time, huh? I'm glad your car has the yellow detector that automatically applies instant braking.

Civil engineers run the numbers. When the camera company gets involved, those numbers get thrown away to make more revenue. (In fact, sometimes the camera company's contract actually defines the maximum yellow time the city is allowed to set.)

Regarding the above post, and whether or not you can make it through a yellow light, I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you about it. Use common sense. I've driven in the same conditions as many other drivers on this and other forums, and the relative number of complaints about the light timing pales in comparison to other road-going comments, such as speed limits, etc. everywhere I go, because it's really not a problem.

If you've got an issue with the way the contracts are drawn up for the light cameras, go to a public forum (in RL, not on the internet) and say something. That's why they're there.

Nothing gets done unless someone actually quits *****ing and gets up off their ass and does something about it.

But seriously - I hold the same view. If you get a ticket at a red light, it's your fault.

[Christ]

Regarding the camera image showing a yellow light and a red light on the same stalk, well... Gimme a friggin break, man. What yahoo couldn't beat that one in court?

The same argument you've held the whole time about human reaction time, when applied to the length of the yellow light before turning red, would have easily gotten that ticket thrown out in any reasonable court, provided the defendant wasn't acting like a moron. Yes, I've been to court. I've also beaten most of the 100+ tickets I've gotten since I was 16, mostly on technicalities. Unlike most drivers, I read/understand the laws of the areas I drive in.

Regarding reaction times:

Originally Posted by Visual Expert Human Factors: Driver Reaction Time

Expectation

Reaction times are greatly affected by whether the driver is alert to the need to brake. I've found it useful to divide alertness into three classes:

* Expected: the driver is alert and aware of the good possibility that braking will be necessary. This is the absolute best reaction time possible. The best estimate is 0.7 second. Of this, 0.5 is perception and 0.2 is movement, the time required to release the accelerator and to depress the brake pedal.

* Unexpected: the driver detects a common road signal such as a brake from the car ahead or from a traffic signal. Reaction time is somewhat slower, about 1.25 seconds. This is due to the increase in perception time to over a second with movement time still about 0.2 second.

* Surprise: the drive encounters a very unusual circumstance, such as a pedestrian or another car crossing the road in the near distance. There is extra time needed to interpret the event and to decide upon response. Reaction time depends to some extent on the distance to the obstacle and whether it is approaching from the side and is first seen in peripheral vision. The best estimate is 1.5 seconds for side incursions and perhaps a few tenths of a second faster for straight-ahead obstacles. Perception time is 1.2 seconds while movement time lengthens to 0.3 second.

The increased reaction time is due to several factors, including the need to interpret the novel situation and possibly to decide whether there is time to brake or whether steering is better response. Moreover, drivers encountering another vehicle or pedestrian that violates traffic regulations tend to hesitate, expecting the vehicle/pedestrian to eventually halt. Lastly, there can be response conflict that lengthens reaction time. For example, if a driver's only possible response requires steering into an oncoming traffic lane (to the left) there may be a hesitation.

Of course, there's also the idea that you're out of the several million people that live in California, and the several 10's of thousands that commute on the same road as you, and the several hundreds that are on that stretch of road within the same few seconds as you, you're probably not always the first person to come to that intersection, therefore, it's probably not always necessary that you slow down/stop/speed up at it. In fact, I'd wager that you're the person that gets stopped at the light (first in line) less than 20% of the times you pass it, unless you do something to directly affect your circumstances, such as slowing down every time you come near it. On top of that, the number of times you're approaching that specific light, and having it turn yellow at any point within the 220 feet threshold for the speed limit, is even less likely, making that argument basically moot. If the total number of times your specific argument was true came to even 10%, I'd be amazed. Truly.

Also, if you only accelerate back to the speed limit, it stands to reason that you could have avoided the scenario by just doing the damn speed limit to begin with, eh?

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Christ

Regarding the camera image showing a yellow light and a red light on the same stalk, well... Gimme a friggin break, man. What yahoo couldn't beat that one in court?

Why should he have to take the day off and go to court? And what happens when he gets in one of those kangaroo traffic courts where the judge lines up 10 people at a time and says, "You're all guilty. Pay and get out." (Yes, that happens too.)

Is it really a safety issue that we have to issue a ticket to somebody for crossing before all of the lights have even turned red?

The same argument you've held the whole time about human reaction time, when applied to the length of the yellow light before turning red, would have easily gotten that ticket thrown out in any reasonable court, provided the defendant wasn't acting like a moron. Yes, I've been to court. I've also beaten most of the 100+ tickets I've gotten since I was 16, mostly on technicalities. Unlike most drivers, I read/understand the laws of the areas I drive in.

Wow, 100+ tickets, huh? Kinda arguing for the wrong side, aren't you?

[Christ]

Originally Posted by Clev

Why should he have to take the day off and go to court? And what happens when he gets in one of those kangaroo traffic courts where the judge lines up 10 people at a time and says, "You're all guilty. Pay and get out." (Yes, that happens too.)

Is it really a safety issue that we have to issue a ticket to somebody for crossing before all of the lights have even turned red?

Like I said - if you're unsatisfied with how things work in your area, go through the proper channels, not a web forum.

Wow, 100+ tickets, huh? Kinda arguing for the wrong side, aren't you?

Yep, 100+. And not one for running a light. Go figure. In fact, most of them are speeding and wreckless driving... never ran a light though. Hell, I've even sped through intersections without signaling to make a turn while using the e-brake to slide like a jackass... beat that one too, and still missed the red light. :O

[cfg83]

Christ -

Originally Posted by Christ

...

I've got a variety of light timing on the many routes that I travel to get to different places... guess what's one ticket I've never had? Running a light. Why? I stop at yellow lights. If I can't stop at it, I keep going through it, and it's only because I was within 100 feet of the light when it turned yellow anyway.

...

Yeah, that's what I do when it's too late to stop.

I have a rule. If I have to speed up to get through the yellow light, I stop. If I am too close to stop safely (screeching brakes), then I roll through it without changing my speed.

There is another rule that trumps this. If I have the situational awareness to know that someone is right behind me, and I don't think I can stop *slowly*, aka reducing my speed slow enough for him/her to react and slow down, I may go through the light and/or increase speed to do it.

The reason is I don't care whose fault it will be. I don't want my car to be wrecked if I can avoid it. I also don't want the hassle of dealing with insurance and repairs. No time for that.

CarloSW2

[Christ]

Originally Posted by cfg83

Christ -



Yeah, that's what I do when it's too late to stop.

I have a rule. If I have to speed up to get through the yellow light, I stop. If I am too close to stop safely (screeching brakes), then I roll through it without changing my speed.

There is another rule that trumps this. If I have the situational awareness to know that someone is right behind me, and I don't think I can stop *slowly*, aka reducing my speed slow enough for him/her to react and slow down, I may go through the light and/or increase speed to do it.

The reason is I don't care whose fault it will be. I don't want my car to be wrecked if I can avoid it. I also don't want the hassle of dealing with insurance and repairs. No time for that.

CarloSW2

This is reasonable, sir.

Nobody (reasonably) expects every driver to be perfect all the time. I can tell you that if a cop sees you speeding up through a yellow light, whether you're actually speeding or not, at least around here, they'll stop you, and can ticket you for a form of wreckless driving. It matters not whether you're actually speeding or not, you're still breaking a law. Of course, whether the cop DOES pull you over or not depends wholly on his perception of the situation. If he sees someone tailgating you, there's a good chance he won't pull you over. If the person behind you caught the light as it turned red, guess who's screwed now?

I still don't find that these scenarios happen often enough to even be seriously addressed as a whole, though.

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Christ

Like I said - if you're unsatisfied with how things work in your area, go through the proper channels, not a web forum.

It's called influencing opinion. You obviously think that the current system is fine (and are misinformed regarding how red light cameras even work.) Before some politician or activist does a Google search and uses your misleading statements to continue to influence support for the status quo, I feel the need to set the record straight in the same forum, and before you go telling other people on other forums that they have a 1-second leeway after the light turns red, I figured I'd set you straight on that as well.

Oh, and lulz for thinking that I can in any way influence city hall by going down there and asking them to please stop raking in money illegally on the backs of their citizenry. That statement is a cop-out that's always used by the side who has the law on their side (right after "If you don't like the laws, leave!")

[Christ]

Originally Posted by Clev

It's called influencing opinion. You obviously think that the current system is fine (and are misinformed regarding how red light cameras even work.) Before some politician or activist does a Google search and uses your misleading statements to continue to influence support for the status quo, I feel the need to set the record straight in the same forum, and before you go telling other people on other forums that they have a 1-second leeway after the light turns red, I figured I'd set you straight on that as well.

Oh, and lulz for thinking that I can in any way influence city hall by going down there and asking them to please stop raking in money illegally on the backs of their citizenry. That statement is a cop-out that's always used by the side who has the law on their side (right after "If you don't like the laws, leave!")

You haven't set me straight on anything, pal. You've voiced your opinion on how things work in your area. Keep in mind, I'm 3200 miles from you, and things just may be slightly different out here.

If you don't feel that your voice matters to the lawmakers of your community, that's your problem.