| General > General Technical Chat |
| How would you use electronics to solve the 11' 8" bridge problem |
| << < (12/50) > >> |
| tooki:
I guess we won’t agree on this. As I see it, with the signaling that the city has put in (which has significantly reduced the number of accidents, by the way), it’s done more than enough. Numerous studies have been done and continue to be done, it’s not as though they’ve been negligent. I’m pretty sure that most people would agree that people have to take responsibility for their actions at some point. (Yes, I know, you’re one of the exceptions.) But look at this video: the guy blasted right through a red light — one that had been red for some time. That would have been a major moving violation even if the truck hadn’t been overheight! There are plenty of intersections, road segments, etc. that for whatever reason are accident magnets. Some can be mitigated, but some danger is simply inherent to the activity. |
| Mr. Scram:
--- Quote from: tooki on January 08, 2018, 04:48:13 pm ---I guess we won’t agree on this. As I see it, with the signaling that the city has put in (which has significantly reduced the number of accidents, by the way), it’s done more than enough. Numerous studies have been done and continue to be done, it’s not as though they’ve been negligent. I’m pretty sure that most people would agree that people have to take responsibility for their actions at some point. (Yes, I know, you’re one of the exceptions.) But look at this video: the guy blasted right through a red light — one that had been red for some time. That would have been a major moving violation even if the truck hadn’t been overheight! There are plenty of intersections, road segments, etc. that for whatever reason are accident magnets. Some can be mitigated, but some danger is simply inherent to the activity. --- End quote --- From what I've read, they are actually contemplating finally changing the underpass, though they want to try flaps first. That sounds a lot like they know what the proper solution is, but just don't want to spend the money. I'm sure there are jerks causing accidents, but it can't all be jerks or it would be some jerk fly trap. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and the proof says there are a lot of accidens happening here, many more than elsewhere. It's the same people as elsewhere, so that can't be it. It must be an issue with the spot itself. Rather than fruitlessly trying to change the people, the obvious solution is to change the spot. Bringing it up to standards would be a good start. |
| xygor:
It appears to be a non-standard road sign. Are the signs preceding it standard? Could it be a language issue? |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: xygor on January 08, 2018, 05:02:19 pm ---It appears to be a non-standard road sign. Are the signs preceding it standard? Could it be a language issue? --- End quote --- What part of it is nonstandard?!? Looks absolutely normal to me. You can use google street view (link to the spot is in a prior comment of mine) to see the signage on the surrounding roads. Language issue? Running a red light isn't a language issue. |
| MarkS:
The issue is driver training. Most of the vehicles that hit are straight trucks, moving vans and RVs. Straight truck drivers receive minimal training and do not need the same license and certifications as a combination vehicle driver and depending on weight, may not need a CDL at all. We semi drivers consider them a menace and avoid them at all costs. People driving moving vans and RVs most likely have a standard license and have never driven anything bigger than a pickup truck. Overheight is a term that just doesn't register with these drivers due to lack of training, and/or experience. The semi drivers that hit this have no excuse. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |