BuzzSkyline writes "Traffic jams are minimized if a significant fraction of drivers break the rules by doing things like passing on the wrong side or changing lanes too close to an intersection. The insight comes from a cellular automata study published this month in the journal Physical Review E. In effect, people who disregard the rules help to break up the groups that form as rule-followers clump together. The risk of jamming is lower if all people obey the rules than if they all disobey them, according to the analysis, but jamming risk is lowest when about 40 percent of people drive like jerks."
And it depends on which rules, and where. Not all rule-breaking helps, just those that encourage the flow of traffic.
Personally, there's one rule I'd like ingrained in every driver's head: never match speeds with someone in the lane next to you. Pass, fall behind, whatever. Just don't sit there turning a two-lane road into what's effectively a one-lane road.
Tell that to all of the A$$holes who suddenly feel the need to accelerate as you try to pass them! Maybe it's just an unconscious competitive thing for some people, but it happens all too frequently. These are definitely not the types of jerks who increase the flow of traffic. I've got my cruise control on, and am steadily approaching the car in front of me at a relative speed of 5-10 mph. I change lanes to pass and all of a sudden the relative rate of speed drops to '0'? Maybe my cruise control just stops working in the center or left lanes?
Interesting post... I do that all the time, too. I use my cruise not just to maintain speed, but because I'm a leadfoot it helps keep me from getting tickets, and I see it all the time. I think some people are just jerks, but many people do it subconsciously... they'll actually slow when someone is behind them (not necessarily tailgating, as I avoid that), and speed up when you change lanes. It's just perception, as we've both come to the same conclusion by the same means.
Other things that completely screw up traffic (besides the obvious grid-lockers and rubberneckers, even when someone is just changing a tire or getting a ticket):
1. "hypermilers" who don't understand lights are timed for the speed limit, and if you don't get up to speed in a reasonable amount of time, you're just going to waste all that gas at red lights.
2. During rush hour, the problem on "surface" streets is that lights can't be long enough to allow everyone to go through during the green light, so those people just sitting there when the light turns green are racking up the number of cars that are going to get stuck for an extra cycle... but the problem, as I see it, is people have largely stopped honking, so they'll just sit behind such an oblivious person and just wait. If people honked, we could get things moving again. It doesn't have to be a nasty lean on the horn, just a toot-toot.
3. Cops... I like cops, I appreciate cops, I have cops in the family; it's not really the cops, it's the people who drop below the speed limit simply because one is nearby.
A few other things that affect me daily: we have a number of locations where the right turn goes into a protected lane... so there are "keep moving" signs... nothing so infuriating as the people in front of you coming to a COMPLETE stop at a "keep moving" sign. In the same vein, there are a number of places with RIGHT turn arrows that are green when the cross traffic has the left turn... again, people come to a complete stop, and sometimes don't even continue moving at all, treating it as a right turn on red.
And lately, the past year or so, I wouldn't necessarily call them "hypermilers" but so many people seem unwilling to even get up to the speed limit, let alone exceed it by a few miles per hour, as if you're going to get a ticket for 48 in a 45... I know the police aren't going to give me a ticket for 5 miles over, and I often get passed by cops when doing so.
Whew. Nice to rant about it every once in awhile... "cathartic" experience.
Like the guy a few posts up said, the people who irritate me the most are the people who sit in the fast and go the same speed as everyone in the other lanes. We've got a 4/5-lane highway with a speed limit of 65 running through town.
Going home from work I'll see quite a bit of traffic in the right two lanes, a little less in the third lane, and hardly any in the left lane. Except the one jackass who's going the same speed as everyone in the other lanes and just wants his (her?) own lane. I have no problem running up on those people and sitting on their bumper until they get a clue.
If you're going the same speed as people in the lane next to you, get in the lane next to you.
The cop-drivers like you said are always good for a laugh. On the same 65mph highway I'll come up on a clump of cars and, sure enough, there's a cop leading the pack. These people might be going 5 or 10 mph below the speed limit, but no one wants to pass the cop. Assuming there's a lane open I always enjoy passing the clot at 10mph over everyone else and leaving them wondering why the cop isn't pulling me over.
I saw this once in my rearview, a cop pulled on the onramp and everyone behind him slowed to match his speed (which was lower than the limit). I was the last car in front of him and for the next several miles until we were out of view I just watched the headlights in the mirror get farther and farther back, not a single person passed him. There was a miles-wide gap between myself and the cars in front of me, and the cop.
Yeah, we should have a daily traffic thread to get this out.
but if it's the latter, why should I make room for you to break the law (go over 65)?
At least in Illinois, it's the Law to move over to the right lane if there is faster traffic behind you. So in illinois, you would be breaking the law to enforce another one. Not to mention that it's just plain rude of you just move over to the other lane that's driving all legal and stuff. Or become a traffic cop. A real one. with tickets and stuff.
I actually saw a woman driving with her elbow this morning. She had the cellphone in her right hand and her left hand was blocking the sun from her eyes.
That bitch really needs to learn how to use her knee.
The former is understandable, but if it's the latter, why should I make room for you to break the law (go over 65)? Sure, it's your choice to speed, but I don't see where I should feel bad about doing the speed limit.
Because "slower traffic keep right" is the law too, and if you fail to yield then you're breaking it!
Yes, it is your fault. You are not the police. You are not God. Stop trying to control traffic with YOUR over-inflated sense of entitlement.
YOU are the single point of failure in these scenarios. You are outnumbered by the people wanting to go 69 (or whatever speed) in a 65.
I typically drive about 4-6 mph over on the freeway. I have no problem moving to the right (or even the center) lane when someone wants to go faster than me. Neither should you. The only reason in the world for you to think it's OK to sit in the left lane going the same speed as the person in the next lane over is because you think you are in control. You are a bad-ass wannabe traffic director.
Get out of the way of the other people needing or wanting to move faster than you.
1. "hypermilers" who don't understand lights are timed for the speed limit, and if you don't get up to speed in a reasonable amount of time, you're just going to waste all that gas at red lights.
2. During rush hour, the problem on "surface" streets is that lights can't be long enough to allow everyone to go through during the green light, so those people just sitting there when the light turns green are racking up the number of cars that are going to get stuck for an extra cycle... but the problem, as I see it, is people have largely stopped honking, so they'll just sit behind such an oblivious person and just wait. If people honked, we could get things moving again. It doesn't have to be a nasty lean on the horn, just a toot-toot.
And lately, the past year or so, I wouldn't necessarily call them "hypermilers" but so many people seem unwilling to even get up to the speed limit, let alone exceed it by a few miles per hour, as if you're going to get a ticket for 48 in a 45... I know the police aren't going to give me a ticket for 5 miles over, and I often get passed by cops when doing so.
He's a thing I do: When the light in front of me turns red, I get my foot off the gas, and I let the car decelerate towards the red light. When I'm in the zone, I pretty much don't stop at red lights because they have the time to turn back to green before I get to them.
Now, here's the problem with that: The masses of idiots who are in a fucking hurry to go park on the red. They cut me off, and then I have to stop behind them while I wait for them to start up again when the light turns green. Some of them are salvageable, as after seeing me do my thing for a few lights they understand the principle and start laying off the gas when they see the next red, some are not, and insist on cutting me off and, I dunno... win the street race going on in their demented little heads. First one wasting gas and brake lining wins! Woo!
Anyway, leadfoot, remember that red lights mean "stop accelerating", not "this is the finish line to the race, quick, get here before anybody else":)
When you are paying for my gasoline, I will let you choose what speed I decide to move at on the road. Here our speed limit is set to 70. I get better gas mileage at 65. Everyone else goes 83 except truckers, I guess gas just is not high enough for people who speed.
Fine, just stay out of the left lane.
The "Speed Limit" is not the "Minimum Required Speed"
Sure, but it is the expected speed in good conditions.
Remember the speed limit is created as the maximum safe speed for a given length of road on favorable conditions. So I continue to ask everyone, what is your hurry?
The speed limit is often political, and is defined for the crappiest car that's road worthy - drive a uhaul truck at the speed limit and it's a whole lot more risk than my WRX going 10 (or 25) over. I'm not in a hurry, but I like to drive fast.
For all those who are wondering about why people tend (see that 40% thing again) to speed up while you are passing them?
Because some people don't want to drive fast, but can't stand the idea of someone passing them. Pretty messed up, really.
I think this may be hardwired behaviour, NOT due to just being a competitive asshole. It is essentially herd behaviour -- stick with the herd, don't get left behind for the predators to notice.
I've noticed my neighbour, who has no push-and-shove in her at all and is very much a "herd animal", will drive faster to "keep up with" a car in the next lane, AND DOES NOT REALISE SHE IS DOING IT. She will speed up by as much as 10mph to "keep up" and still doesn't notice she's done so.
Me, I'm a predator by nature, and I find that my natural response is to get AWAY from the car in the next lane, to get ahead of or behind them, but never to travel side by side.
Ditto on the D.C. beltway. I don't understand people who slowdown for bridges or curves. It's not going to kill you to take the curve at 65mph. That's why the sign says 65 - because it was designed for high-speed travel. (duh)
By slowing-down you impede the flow of traffic and create a chain of cars behind you. Show some consideration. (sigh). This is why I leave home at 5 a.m. Most of the idiots don't come-out until after 6:30. Leaving early helps me to beat them.
20-lane roads won't really solve the problem, as now you end up with the left few lanes having the long-distance drivers, and the right lanes being a mess of cars trying to change lanes and get over to their exits. How many times have you seen cars fly across 3 lanes of traffic to get to an exit? Now imagine cars trying this across 5 or 10 or even 20 lanes. Now you need far more road to change lanes, and now you'll get stuck with multi-lane traffic accidents. I suppose traffic can still move around the
Last week I was in France, in a car, on the motorway. I couldn't understand why the traffic was so jammed up, but I sat in traffic on the 3+3 lane road for almost an hour. There was no traffic on the other side.
Then, as I came up to a bridge I noticed there were people lined up underneath it -- the Tour de France was passing underneath the motorway. Some people were driving past at less than walking pace hoping that the cyclists would pass by at just that time, but they didn't. Once over the bridge, there was no traffic jam at all -- except on the other side of the road, where the jam went on for miles.
Another cure for traffic jams is to make our highways 20-lanes wide (like in Asimov's novels).
Two words, separated by a hyphen: rubber-neckers.
They are the cause of almost all traffic jams.
(I live in Sterling, couldn't fathom driving into or out of DC every day. I'd do what you do and leave at 5. My neighbor does that as well.)
I notice a lot of other little tendencies that also contribute to the problem. There's one in particular that comes to mind.
I usually see this on four-lane highways, where you have two lanes going one way and two lanes going the other way. Anytime there are only two other cars, they are right beside each other, in lock-step, doing the exact same speed over the course of miles. That way no one can pass them. If you tap (not lay on) your horn to try to get the guy in the passing lane to do some crazy like y'know, pass the other driver so you can get by them, they often think you're challenging their manhood rather than asking them not to monopolize a public resource. When I see this shit all the time, it becomes easier to understand why impatient drivers get fed up with it and will make dangerous maneuvers (like cutting right in front of someone) to get around these people. I'm not saying it's an excuse, only that if you create a strong enough temptation some people WILL succumb to it even if they aren't supposed to.
I often notice people will try to stay in my blind spot so they can do this. There's just no way that they are accidentally going my exact same speed over the course of miles. Any fraction faster or slower would eventually cause one car to pass the other over distances. I also see that when I have to stop for a traffic light, the guy beside me will slow down at the same time that I slow down even though there may be cars in front of me that require me to slow down earlier than he does. This often causes them to stop short, or to stop short, realize it, and then pull up to the light. Or if you take an exit ramp off the highway and you are slowing down in a turning lane, watch the guy who is still on the highway; often he will slow down on the highway lane just because you are slowing down in the separate turning lane, needlessly holding up anyone behind him. I refer to highways that are specifically designed so that turning traffic has its own lane and need not slow down the main road. I think drivers don't understand that groups of cars exhibit wave-like behaviors, so a minor needless slowdown can contribute to jams miles behind you. That is, it does not occur to them to even think at all of how their decisions are affecting other people, which sums up nearly all traffic problems.
I really don't think they intend to do it. I think they're just such sheep that they cannot even independently choose their own speed. Doing as others around them are doing is just so deeply ingrained. I won't allow someone to hang out in my blind spot for very long at all and will alter my speed to prevent it, both because it prevents me from being able to change lanes and because it limits my maneuverability if I ever had to dodge an obstacle. It has these two downsides and it has no upside for anyone so it's not even selfish of the other drivers, just stupid.
Another issue that causes some jams is the traffic lights themselves. Traffic lights seem to be why cars travel in these huge packs because they all line up at the red light. The tendencies I mentioned above guarantee that the packs usually don't disperse over distances. If I can manage to get in front of or just behind such a pack of cars, it makes things much easier for me than when I'm stuck within one. I'd be interested in whether something like traffic circles would prevent these large packs from forming.
Okay, none of these people are allowed to drive any car with an automatic transmission, ever again. They can drive when they can think.
Hah! I have also wondered if that alone would change much of this.
When I was a teenager and had a learner's permit I had a choice of whether I would start out with a manual or an automatic transmission as my parents had each. I chose the manual. I have never regretted that. The extra involvement with what the vehicle is doing helped to give me a better awareness of what's going on around me, because to operate a manual transmission smoothly you can't just react, you have to anticipate what the traffic around and in front of you is doing. That is, it's best to see ahead of time that traffic is slowing down or speeding up so you can already be in the right gear when it does. Learning to use a manual skillfully also implied extra time practicing, giving more opportunities for my parents to notice and correct what would otherwise have become bad habits. Not to mention that if you are familiar with a manual then you can drive nearly any vehicle (at least, any vehicle a normal license would allow you to drive).
I wish I could prove it but I am convinced that if automatics were outlawed there would be a strong reduction in the number of accidents.
Of course rude drivers ease congestion. When they kill someone because of their stupidity, not only will that person not drive again, but they'll probably lose their license, so they won't either!
No kidding. I have to wonder if they bothered to look at the number of accidents caused when someone did something stupid. TFA doesn't mention accidents at all.
I've always wanted a law that billed people who cause accidents on major freeways (or their estates, as the case may be) the average hourly wage for that state multiplied by the number of total hours lost due to their actions. For example, if some asshole gets into a fender bender on 95 because he was fucking with his goddammed cell phone and 10,000 people are delayed for an hour and the average wage in Maryland is $17/hour then he (or his estate) owes $170,000 which can then be used to fund hypertension treatment facilities and meditation centers in the state.
That doesn't mean its wise or safe. Don't go lane splitting on your motorcycle and then get pissed that someone who couldn't see you because you're moving at twice the speed of traffic tried to change lanes and you wrecked. You were engaging in an unsafe, if legal, maneuver.
I think the jury is still out on whether its safe or not - and most evidence so far suggests its actually safer. I know if traffic is crawling along it seems safe enough to me - the biggest problem is being cut off by arse holes who are pissed off you're filtering through traffic despite the fact they are sitting there.
I know in the UK you can only do it when traffic is flowing below a certain speed, and that they ask you questions about it if you are getting a regular drivers license (yes - hard to believe they'd want drivers of cars to be aware of motorcycles) - of course license requirements there are much much more stringent than they are in the USA.
Thing is - on a hot day sitting on a hot bike in full gear (its like wearing your fur coat to the beach...) not moving can be really miserable. It can contribute to fatigue, bike failure - all kinds of stuff that I would figure would be more dangerous to traffic than filtering.
The problem of cars "clumping" is due to the "rule abiding" drivers following each other too closely. This is in fact not rule abiding.
A reasonable space must be left between each car to provide enough extra slack to handle unexpected events like braking and slowing. When people follow too closely, this slack is all but eliminated thus causing each unexpected event's effect to become magnified. A quick tap of the brakes causes a chain reaction resulting in a traffic jam. Leaving enough space to handle an unexpected event provides each driver extra time to react.
In addition, since the additional slack allows for longer reaction times, a faster average speed can be achieved. Bob Dobbs would be so proud.
The problem of cars "clumping" is due to the "rule abiding" drivers following each other too closely. This is in fact not rule abiding.
And in fact that behavior is largely caused by the people who break the rules as defined by this study. So, the 40% who break the rules to make traffic flow better cause the other people to drive in such a manner so as to make the traffic problem worse in such a way as that behavior by the 40% fixes.
That whole "don't follow so close" thing works great, until you have a significant amount of merging going on. When merges occur drivers either need to slow down to maintain distance or start driving closer (or, oftentimes both...). It'd be nice if our roads actually allowed us to drive like that. Certainly in DC they don't, maybe other places arn't as bad.
Woah, woah, wait a second, there, pal. If you back up 4 or 5 car lengths, and expect everyone else to, then you're, in effect, increasing traffic by 4-5 times. Rush hour traffic jams are caused by too many cars on the road at one time. If you say each car needs to extend its personal sphere by 3-4 times, then you're turning every civic into a double-trailer. Suddenly, the capacity for a highway goes from 500 cars per lane per mile down to 200 cars per lane per mile. This might be ok for a place like... Unknown Town, Idaho -- but in places where traffic is caused by BOTTLENECKS and not just COWS or ACCIDENTS, (cities with populations over 3,000). Breaking because the guy in front of you is breaking or slowing or merging may cause temporarily slowdown or lag in a slinky effect, but it's not what shuts down entire 8-lane freeways for hours.
IMO, a lot of problems could be avoided if people respected all the rules of the road, and not just the official ones. For example, I respect anyone's right to drive at whatever speed they feel comfortable with. If that's at, above or below the speed limit I don't care. However, no matter how fast you're going, if there's someone behind you who wishes to go faster, move over to the right. It's not your job to set speed limits, the cops do that, and they exercise discretion too depending on the traffic and time of the day.
What gets me really frustrated is people in the left lane, going at or slightly below the speed limit, with a LONG line behind them. It's situations like these that cause problems, as people who wish to go faster try to get around the slowpokes.
In my opinion, if people simply moved over for a faster car, kept the left lane open for passing/faster traffic, then the vast majority of weaving cars and "jerks" on the highways would disappear.
It's a big peeve of mine. I drive faster than the speed limit, I'll admit it. If I'm in the wrong, the cops will pull me over. However, get out of the left lane if you're going slow and there's 10 cars tailgating behind you!
On a related note, my other biggest pet peeve is the slow people who speed up when they see you trying to pass them so that you can't, and then slow down again.
I know I slow down when people tailgate me very badly (within a meter), and speed up again when they change lanes. It's a guilty pleasure.
Honestly, it's the only safe thing to me do. If I have someone driving that close behind me I'll need more time to brake if something happens up ahead, to prevent the person behind me ramming into me.
Give me space, and we'll go a nice fast speed. I'll be happy to let you pass me and will move to the right. Ride my ass and expect to go under the limit.
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
This isn't always possible. Often, there are people in the right hand lane going 70-75 mph and passing the speed limiters in the left lane who are traveling 65 mph. Just because you want to go 85 mph doesn't mean the slower motorists should automatically bow to your speedy abilities. This would, in my opinion, mean that *you* are driving like an asshole.
This is *most* evident when two tractor trailers are passing each other on a major two or three lane highway. But basic congestion causes it too... and whenever you drive like an asshole when there is already congestion... you are only going to make it worse.
Corollary: I've always thought cops should actively seek to give tickets to motorists who get passed on the left by drivers who are traveling at a legal speed limit. That behavior is just a dangerous as the asshole who weaves in and out of traffic. So, slow drivers in right-hand and middle lanes are assholes, too.
I'm with you there, I used to like to speed. Now I like to cruise in the slow lane, and I have the opposite peeve: Asshats who refuse to use the two empty lanes on my left to pass, and ride my frickin bumper. I'll give em a minute, then the foot comes off the gas. Had one guy wait until we got down to 35 before he passed me. So sorry, is changing lanes really that hard?
I live in Boston, so I have empirical evidence that if 40% people drive like assholes, you still get plenty of traffic jams. Sorry, your model must be broken.
As somebody has already mentioned in the comment on PhysicsCentral, a realistic model should take into account the dependence between the probability of causing an accident resulting in a traffic jam and the driving style.
I could read only the abstract. If the parameter q is the only parameter used, it is not entirely surprising that they got the results they got. In such a model, the rule-obeying drivers driving in the same direction stick together. Rule non-obedience makes the fluid more compressible. Shock waves in compressible fluids appears at higher velocities.
It is surely nice their model agrees with the intuition. I would not call such a simplified model realistic, though.
The other day, a person was changing their tire on the shoulder of the road facing the opposite direction (was a 4-lane road, 2 lanes in each direction, separated by a 20 foot or so median) and traffic on my side of the road came to a halt. Once I made it to the front of the line of traffic, in the lane (going the opposite direction) nearest the tire-changer, a car in the lane next to me and slightly ahead of me was gawking at the scene so hard they started drifting HARD into my lane. They were completely mesmerized by someone changing a frigging tire. To the point that they weren't even conscious that they were still driving a car.
I swear I don't get it. I had to blare my horn at them to get them to get back over into their lane, and they had the temerity to flip me off! Luckily for me, I drive a large truck and was able to pull in front of them at the next light where I stopped, put on my hazards, drug them from their car and threw them into traffic. No, of course I didn't. However, it's interesting how rage-filled we people get in traffic. I am trying to get it under control, but cannot abide selfish, stupid unaware drivers. I hate them with a burning passion.
Funny. When I have driven there, I thought that ppl were actually pretty nice, though fast.
In fact, I normally speed at about 9 over, but was being passed all over in Atlanta.
Another nice place was Seattle, but they tend to be slow.
Denver Colorado has some horribly rude drivers (esp. Highlands Ranch), but these are the types that cause jams. They like to drive in left lane AND go slow. I do a lot of passing on the right because ppl here are so bad. Likewise, they like to jam up. I do my utmost to get pass idiots like that and be in the open where I do not have to worry about bad drivers. Drivers here will actually try to prevent you from passing them and will flip you off if you do. We have far too many Texans and Easterners.
The risk of jamming is lower if all people obey the rules than if they all disobey them, according to the analysis, but jamming risk is lowest when about 40 percent of people drive like jerks.
Well, in Germany it would be against the law to change early. It has been shown that driving till the end, and then merging as "one from the left lane, one from the right lane" is the most efficient way to handle ending lanes. Therefore the law demands that. It's called "Reissverschlussverfahren" ("zipper procedure").
It's not that throughput is cut down, it's that if you leave that much space, someone will move into it. In rush hour, it's IMPOSSIBLE to maintain more than a 2-3 car distance at any speed, because someone will immediately occupy a 5-8 car distance the moment it is created.
While they make the situation better for everybody, the people breaking the rules benefit the most. This is sort of like the "tragedy of the commons," with a twist. In the tragedy of the commons, the people who don't break the rules don't derive any benefit. In this situation, they're at least a little bit better off than if nobody broke the rules. Everybody has an incentive to try to be in that 40%, though. (Some people, like me, follow the rules dogmatically and altruistically.) I guess what's called for is some sort of automagic lottery system by which 40% of drivers in high-traffic situations are notified in real-time that they are being encouraged to drive more aggressively. AI researchers, get on that.
Cute. But actually the paper is more about the probability of forming jams, not about getting rid of jams once they've already formed.
The conclusion is more like: Though traffic rules are designed to lead to orderly flows, the lowest jamming rate (under certain conditions) actually occurs when some fraction of participants ignore the rules.
(As a side note, it's a bit of a pet-peeve of mine when people make fun of studies by saying "That conclusion is so obvious! What a waste of time!" Common sense, hunches, and gut feelings are often wrong, which is why we do rigorous research to get at the right answers. And even if the general conclusion is obvious (in hindsight, mind you), rigorous research means that we can say something about error bars and make specific statements about applicability and predictability of models.)
and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:4, Interesting)
especially on the Belt Parkway where people seem to slow down to 30mph to go over a bridge
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Funny)
especially on the Belt Parkway where people seem to slow down to 30mph to go over a bridge
The rule only applies if SOME people break the rules, not every one of you hot-dog-eating-bastards.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Insightful)
And it depends on which rules, and where. Not all rule-breaking helps, just those that encourage the flow of traffic.
Personally, there's one rule I'd like ingrained in every driver's head: never match speeds with someone in the lane next to you. Pass, fall behind, whatever. Just don't sit there turning a two-lane road into what's effectively a one-lane road.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Insightful)
Tell that to all of the A$$holes who suddenly feel the need to accelerate as you try to pass them! Maybe it's just an unconscious competitive thing for some people, but it happens all too frequently. These are definitely not the types of jerks who increase the flow of traffic. I've got my cruise control on, and am steadily approaching the car in front of me at a relative speed of 5-10 mph. I change lanes to pass and all of a sudden the relative rate of speed drops to '0'? Maybe my cruise control just stops working in the center or left lanes?
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Interesting)
Other things that completely screw up traffic (besides the obvious grid-lockers and rubberneckers, even when someone is just changing a tire or getting a ticket):
1. "hypermilers" who don't understand lights are timed for the speed limit, and if you don't get up to speed in a reasonable amount of time, you're just going to waste all that gas at red lights.
2. During rush hour, the problem on "surface" streets is that lights can't be long enough to allow everyone to go through during the green light, so those people just sitting there when the light turns green are racking up the number of cars that are going to get stuck for an extra cycle... but the problem, as I see it, is people have largely stopped honking, so they'll just sit behind such an oblivious person and just wait. If people honked, we could get things moving again. It doesn't have to be a nasty lean on the horn, just a toot-toot.
3. Cops... I like cops, I appreciate cops, I have cops in the family; it's not really the cops, it's the people who drop below the speed limit simply because one is nearby.
A few other things that affect me daily: we have a number of locations where the right turn goes into a protected lane... so there are "keep moving" signs... nothing so infuriating as the people in front of you coming to a COMPLETE stop at a "keep moving" sign. In the same vein, there are a number of places with RIGHT turn arrows that are green when the cross traffic has the left turn... again, people come to a complete stop, and sometimes don't even continue moving at all, treating it as a right turn on red.
And lately, the past year or so, I wouldn't necessarily call them "hypermilers" but so many people seem unwilling to even get up to the speed limit, let alone exceed it by a few miles per hour, as if you're going to get a ticket for 48 in a 45... I know the police aren't going to give me a ticket for 5 miles over, and I often get passed by cops when doing so.
Whew. Nice to rant about it every once in awhile... "cathartic" experience.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:4, Interesting)
Like the guy a few posts up said, the people who irritate me the most are the people who sit in the fast and go the same speed as everyone in the other lanes. We've got a 4/5-lane highway with a speed limit of 65 running through town.
Going home from work I'll see quite a bit of traffic in the right two lanes, a little less in the third lane, and hardly any in the left lane. Except the one jackass who's going the same speed as everyone in the other lanes and just wants his (her?) own lane. I have no problem running up on those people and sitting on their bumper until they get a clue.
If you're going the same speed as people in the lane next to you, get in the lane next to you.
The cop-drivers like you said are always good for a laugh. On the same 65mph highway I'll come up on a clump of cars and, sure enough, there's a cop leading the pack. These people might be going 5 or 10 mph below the speed limit, but no one wants to pass the cop. Assuming there's a lane open I always enjoy passing the clot at 10mph over everyone else and leaving them wondering why the cop isn't pulling me over.
I saw this once in my rearview, a cop pulled on the onramp and everyone behind him slowed to match his speed (which was lower than the limit). I was the last car in front of him and for the next several miles until we were out of view I just watched the headlights in the mirror get farther and farther back, not a single person passed him. There was a miles-wide gap between myself and the cars in front of me, and the cop.
Yeah, we should have a daily traffic thread to get this out.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:4, Informative)
but if it's the latter, why should I make room for you to break the law (go over 65)?
At least in Illinois, it's the Law to move over to the right lane if there is faster traffic behind you. So in illinois, you would be breaking the law to enforce another one. Not to mention that it's just plain rude of you just move over to the other lane that's driving all legal and stuff. Or become a traffic cop. A real one. with tickets and stuff.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Funny)
That bitch really needs to learn how to use her knee.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Insightful)
Because "slower traffic keep right" is the law too, and if you fail to yield then you're breaking it!
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Informative)
YOU are the single point of failure in these scenarios. You are outnumbered by the people wanting to go 69 (or whatever speed) in a 65.
I typically drive about 4-6 mph over on the freeway. I have no problem moving to the right (or even the center) lane when someone wants to go faster than me. Neither should you. The only reason in the world for you to think it's OK to sit in the left lane going the same speed as the person in the next lane over is because you think you are in control. You are a bad-ass wannabe traffic director.
Get out of the way of the other people needing or wanting to move faster than you.
Parent
Red light: foot OFF the gas (Score:4, Interesting)
1. "hypermilers" who don't understand lights are timed for the speed limit, and if you don't get up to speed in a reasonable amount of time, you're just going to waste all that gas at red lights.
2. During rush hour, the problem on "surface" streets is that lights can't be long enough to allow everyone to go through during the green light, so those people just sitting there when the light turns green are racking up the number of cars that are going to get stuck for an extra cycle... but the problem, as I see it, is people have largely stopped honking, so they'll just sit behind such an oblivious person and just wait. If people honked, we could get things moving again. It doesn't have to be a nasty lean on the horn, just a toot-toot.
And lately, the past year or so, I wouldn't necessarily call them "hypermilers" but so many people seem unwilling to even get up to the speed limit, let alone exceed it by a few miles per hour, as if you're going to get a ticket for 48 in a 45... I know the police aren't going to give me a ticket for 5 miles over, and I often get passed by cops when doing so.
He's a thing I do: When the light in front of me turns red, I get my foot off the gas, and I let the car decelerate towards the red light.
When I'm in the zone, I pretty much don't stop at red lights because they have the time to turn back to green before I get to them.
Now, here's the problem with that: The masses of idiots who are in a fucking hurry to go park on the red. They cut me off, and then I have to stop behind them while I wait for them to start up again when the light turns green. Some of them are salvageable, as after seeing me do my thing for a few lights they understand the principle and start laying off the gas when they see the next red, some are not, and insist on cutting me off and, I dunno... win the street race going on in their demented little heads. First one wasting gas and brake lining wins! Woo!
Anyway, leadfoot, remember that red lights mean "stop accelerating", not "this is the finish line to the race, quick, get here before anybody else" :)
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Insightful)
When you are paying for my gasoline, I will let you choose what speed I decide to move at on the road. Here our speed limit is set to 70. I get better gas mileage at 65. Everyone else goes 83 except truckers, I guess gas just is not high enough for people who speed.
Fine, just stay out of the left lane.
The "Speed Limit" is not the "Minimum Required Speed"
Sure, but it is the expected speed in good conditions.
Remember the speed limit is created as the maximum safe speed for a given length of road on favorable conditions. So I continue to ask everyone, what is your hurry?
The speed limit is often political, and is defined for the crappiest car that's road worthy - drive a uhaul truck at the speed limit and it's a whole lot more risk than my WRX going 10 (or 25) over. I'm not in a hurry, but I like to drive fast.
For all those who are wondering about why people tend (see that 40% thing again) to speed up while you are passing them?
Because some people don't want to drive fast, but can't stand the idea of someone passing them. Pretty messed up, really.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:4, Insightful)
I think this may be hardwired behaviour, NOT due to just being a competitive asshole. It is essentially herd behaviour -- stick with the herd, don't get left behind for the predators to notice.
I've noticed my neighbour, who has no push-and-shove in her at all and is very much a "herd animal", will drive faster to "keep up with" a car in the next lane, AND DOES NOT REALISE SHE IS DOING IT. She will speed up by as much as 10mph to "keep up" and still doesn't notice she's done so.
Me, I'm a predator by nature, and I find that my natural response is to get AWAY from the car in the next lane, to get ahead of or behind them, but never to travel side by side.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know how people justify speeding for any reason other than in a critical situation.
Because when the limit is 55 and everyone else is going 70-75, it probably isn't safe to not speed.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ditto on the D.C. beltway. I don't understand people who slowdown for bridges or curves. It's not going to kill you to take the curve at 65mph. That's why the sign says 65 - because it was designed for high-speed travel. (duh)
By slowing-down you impede the flow of traffic and create a chain of cars behind you. Show some consideration. (sigh). This is why I leave home at 5 a.m. Most of the idiots don't come-out until after 6:30. Leaving early helps me to beat them.
Aside-
Another cure for traffic ja
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Interesting)
Last week I was in France, in a car, on the motorway. I couldn't understand why the traffic was so jammed up, but I sat in traffic on the 3+3 lane road for almost an hour. There was no traffic on the other side.
Then, as I came up to a bridge I noticed there were people lined up underneath it -- the Tour de France was passing underneath the motorway. Some people were driving past at less than walking pace hoping that the cyclists would pass by at just that time, but they didn't. Once over the bridge, there was no traffic jam at all -- except on the other side of the road, where the jam went on for miles.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:5, Insightful)
Another cure for traffic jams is to make our highways 20-lanes wide (like in Asimov's novels).
Two words, separated by a hyphen: rubber-neckers.
They are the cause of almost all traffic jams.
(I live in Sterling, couldn't fathom driving into or out of DC every day. I'd do what you do and leave at 5. My neighbor does that as well.)
I notice a lot of other little tendencies that also contribute to the problem. There's one in particular that comes to mind.
I usually see this on four-lane highways, where you have two lanes going one way and two lanes going the other way. Anytime there are only two other cars, they are right beside each other, in lock-step, doing the exact same speed over the course of miles. That way no one can pass them. If you tap (not lay on) your horn to try to get the guy in the passing lane to do some crazy like y'know, pass the other driver so you can get by them, they often think you're challenging their manhood rather than asking them not to monopolize a public resource. When I see this shit all the time, it becomes easier to understand why impatient drivers get fed up with it and will make dangerous maneuvers (like cutting right in front of someone) to get around these people. I'm not saying it's an excuse, only that if you create a strong enough temptation some people WILL succumb to it even if they aren't supposed to.
I often notice people will try to stay in my blind spot so they can do this. There's just no way that they are accidentally going my exact same speed over the course of miles. Any fraction faster or slower would eventually cause one car to pass the other over distances. I also see that when I have to stop for a traffic light, the guy beside me will slow down at the same time that I slow down even though there may be cars in front of me that require me to slow down earlier than he does. This often causes them to stop short, or to stop short, realize it, and then pull up to the light. Or if you take an exit ramp off the highway and you are slowing down in a turning lane, watch the guy who is still on the highway; often he will slow down on the highway lane just because you are slowing down in the separate turning lane, needlessly holding up anyone behind him. I refer to highways that are specifically designed so that turning traffic has its own lane and need not slow down the main road. I think drivers don't understand that groups of cars exhibit wave-like behaviors, so a minor needless slowdown can contribute to jams miles behind you. That is, it does not occur to them to even think at all of how their decisions are affecting other people, which sums up nearly all traffic problems.
I really don't think they intend to do it. I think they're just such sheep that they cannot even independently choose their own speed. Doing as others around them are doing is just so deeply ingrained. I won't allow someone to hang out in my blind spot for very long at all and will alter my speed to prevent it, both because it prevents me from being able to change lanes and because it limits my maneuverability if I ever had to dodge an obstacle. It has these two downsides and it has no upside for anyone so it's not even selfish of the other drivers, just stupid.
Another issue that causes some jams is the traffic lights themselves. Traffic lights seem to be why cars travel in these huge packs because they all line up at the red light. The tendencies I mentioned above guarantee that the packs usually don't disperse over distances. If I can manage to get in front of or just behind such a pack of cars, it makes things much easier for me than when I'm stuck within one. I'd be interested in whether something like traffic circles would prevent these large packs from forming.
Parent
Re:and yet NYC still has traffic jams (Score:4, Interesting)
Okay, none of these people are allowed to drive any car with an automatic transmission, ever again. They can drive when they can think.
Hah! I have also wondered if that alone would change much of this.
When I was a teenager and had a learner's permit I had a choice of whether I would start out with a manual or an automatic transmission as my parents had each. I chose the manual. I have never regretted that. The extra involvement with what the vehicle is doing helped to give me a better awareness of what's going on around me, because to operate a manual transmission smoothly you can't just react, you have to anticipate what the traffic around and in front of you is doing. That is, it's best to see ahead of time that traffic is slowing down or speeding up so you can already be in the right gear when it does. Learning to use a manual skillfully also implied extra time practicing, giving more opportunities for my parents to notice and correct what would otherwise have become bad habits. Not to mention that if you are familiar with a manual then you can drive nearly any vehicle (at least, any vehicle a normal license would allow you to drive).
I wish I could prove it but I am convinced that if automatics were outlawed there would be a strong reduction in the number of accidents.
Parent
Doing their part to reduce traffic! (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course rude drivers ease congestion. When they kill someone because of their stupidity, not only will that person not drive again, but they'll probably lose their license, so they won't either!
Re:Doing their part to reduce traffic! (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Doing their part to reduce traffic! (Score:4, Interesting)
I've always wanted a law that billed people who cause accidents on major freeways (or their estates, as the case may be) the average hourly wage for that state multiplied by the number of total hours lost due to their actions. For example, if some asshole gets into a fender bender on 95 because he was fucking with his goddammed cell phone and 10,000 people are delayed for an hour and the average wage in Maryland is $17/hour then he (or his estate) owes $170,000 which can then be used to fund hypertension treatment facilities and meditation centers in the state.
Parent
Re:Doing their part to reduce traffic! (Score:5, Insightful)
That doesn't mean its wise or safe. Don't go lane splitting on your motorcycle and then get pissed that someone who couldn't see you because you're moving at twice the speed of traffic tried to change lanes and you wrecked. You were engaging in an unsafe, if legal, maneuver.
Parent
Re:Doing their part to reduce traffic! (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the jury is still out on whether its safe or not - and most evidence so far suggests its actually safer. I know if traffic is crawling along it seems safe enough to me - the biggest problem is being cut off by arse holes who are pissed off you're filtering through traffic despite the fact they are sitting there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lane_splitting#Relevant_research [wikipedia.org]
I know in the UK you can only do it when traffic is flowing below a certain speed, and that they ask you questions about it if you are getting a regular drivers license (yes - hard to believe they'd want drivers of cars to be aware of motorcycles) - of course license requirements there are much much more stringent than they are in the USA.
Thing is - on a hot day sitting on a hot bike in full gear (its like wearing your fur coat to the beach...) not moving can be really miserable. It can contribute to fatigue, bike failure - all kinds of stuff that I would figure would be more dangerous to traffic than filtering.
Parent
Correlation != causation (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem of cars "clumping" is due to the "rule abiding" drivers following each other too closely. This is in fact not rule abiding.
A reasonable space must be left between each car to provide enough extra slack to handle unexpected events like braking and slowing. When people follow too closely, this slack is all but eliminated thus causing each unexpected event's effect to become magnified. A quick tap of the brakes causes a chain reaction resulting in a traffic jam. Leaving enough space to handle an unexpected event provides each driver extra time to react.
In addition, since the additional slack allows for longer reaction times, a faster average speed can be achieved. Bob Dobbs would be so proud.
Re:Correlation != causation (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem of cars "clumping" is due to the "rule abiding" drivers following each other too closely. This is in fact not rule abiding.
And in fact that behavior is largely caused by the people who break the rules as defined by this study. So, the 40% who break the rules to make traffic flow better cause the other people to drive in such a manner so as to make the traffic problem worse in such a way as that behavior by the 40% fixes.
Parent
Re:Correlation != causation (Score:5, Insightful)
That whole "don't follow so close" thing works great, until you have a significant amount of merging going on. When merges occur drivers either need to slow down to maintain distance or start driving closer (or, oftentimes both...). It'd be nice if our roads actually allowed us to drive like that. Certainly in DC they don't, maybe other places arn't as bad.
Parent
Re:Correlation != causation (Score:5, Informative)
See http://trafficwaves.org/trafexp.html [trafficwaves.org] for a model of tailgating.
Parent
Re:Correlation != causation (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Correlation != causation (Score:5, Insightful)
You save only 59 seconds over 8 miles by going 75 instead of 65. Do you really have to pass that guy? Do the Math!
Think of it like this: you're getting there 15% sooner. 15% of a long journey is not to be sneezed at.
Parent
Finally (Score:3, Funny)
Respect rules of the road, not just the official 1 (Score:5, Insightful)
IMO, a lot of problems could be avoided if people respected all the rules of the road, and not just the official ones. For example, I respect anyone's right to drive at whatever speed they feel comfortable with. If that's at, above or below the speed limit I don't care. However, no matter how fast you're going, if there's someone behind you who wishes to go faster, move over to the right. It's not your job to set speed limits, the cops do that, and they exercise discretion too depending on the traffic and time of the day.
What gets me really frustrated is people in the left lane, going at or slightly below the speed limit, with a LONG line behind them. It's situations like these that cause problems, as people who wish to go faster try to get around the slowpokes.
In my opinion, if people simply moved over for a faster car, kept the left lane open for passing/faster traffic, then the vast majority of weaving cars and "jerks" on the highways would disappear.
It's a big peeve of mine. I drive faster than the speed limit, I'll admit it. If I'm in the wrong, the cops will pull me over. However, get out of the left lane if you're going slow and there's 10 cars tailgating behind you!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
On a related note, my other biggest pet peeve is the slow people who speed up when they see you trying to pass them so that you can't, and then slow down again.
Re:Respect rules of the road, not just the officia (Score:5, Interesting)
I know I slow down when people tailgate me very badly (within a meter), and speed up again when they change lanes. It's a guilty pleasure.
Honestly, it's the only safe thing to me do. If I have someone driving that close behind me I'll need more time to brake if something happens up ahead, to prevent the person behind me ramming into me.
Give me space, and we'll go a nice fast speed. I'll be happy to let you pass me and will move to the right. Ride my ass and expect to go under the limit.
Parent
Re:Respect rules of the road, not just the officia (Score:5, Informative)
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
Parent
Re:Respect rules of the road, not just the officia (Score:4, Interesting)
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
This isn't always possible. Often, there are people in the right hand lane going 70-75 mph and passing the speed limiters in the left lane who are traveling 65 mph. Just because you want to go 85 mph doesn't mean the slower motorists should automatically bow to your speedy abilities. This would, in my opinion, mean that *you* are driving like an asshole.
This is *most* evident when two tractor trailers are passing each other on a major two or three lane highway. But basic congestion causes it too... and whenever you drive like an asshole when there is already congestion... you are only going to make it worse.
Corollary: I've always thought cops should actively seek to give tickets to motorists who get passed on the left by drivers who are traveling at a legal speed limit. That behavior is just a dangerous as the asshole who weaves in and out of traffic. So, slow drivers in right-hand and middle lanes are assholes, too.
Parent
Re:Respect rules of the road, not just the officia (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Empirical Evidence (Score:3, Insightful)
Unrealistic model of academic interest. (Score:3, Interesting)
I hate people (Score:5, Interesting)
The other day, a person was changing their tire on the shoulder of the road facing the opposite direction (was a 4-lane road, 2 lanes in each direction, separated by a 20 foot or so median) and traffic on my side of the road came to a halt. Once I made it to the front of the line of traffic, in the lane (going the opposite direction) nearest the tire-changer, a car in the lane next to me and slightly ahead of me was gawking at the scene so hard they started drifting HARD into my lane. They were completely mesmerized by someone changing a frigging tire. To the point that they weren't even conscious that they were still driving a car.
I swear I don't get it. I had to blare my horn at them to get them to get back over into their lane, and they had the temerity to flip me off! Luckily for me, I drive a large truck and was able to pull in front of them at the next light where I stopped, put on my hazards, drug them from their car and threw them into traffic. No, of course I didn't. However, it's interesting how rage-filled we people get in traffic. I am trying to get it under control, but cannot abide selfish, stupid unaware drivers. I hate them with a burning passion.
Re:I hate people (Score:5, Funny)
I suggest relaxing with a nice drink before you drive.
Parent
Cellular Autonima don't get into accidents. (Score:3, Insightful)
And they don't rubber-neck. They don't break down. They don't get pulled over for speeding tickets,
Re:atlanta (Score:4, Informative)
In fact, I normally speed at about 9 over, but was being passed all over in Atlanta.
Another nice place was Seattle, but they tend to be slow.
Denver Colorado has some horribly rude drivers (esp. Highlands Ranch), but these are the types that cause jams. They like to drive in left lane AND go slow. I do a lot of passing on the right because ppl here are so bad. Likewise, they like to jam up. I do my utmost to get pass idiots like that and be in the open where I do not have to worry about bad drivers. Drivers here will actually try to prevent you from passing them and will flip you off if you do. We have far too many Texans and Easterners.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think they did.
Re:Police Siren (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Riiiight. (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, in Germany it would be against the law to change early. It has been shown that driving till the end, and then merging as "one from the left lane, one from the right lane" is the most efficient way to handle ending lanes. Therefore the law demands that. It's called "Reissverschlussverfahren" ("zipper procedure").
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:40%? (Score:4, Insightful)
While they make the situation better for everybody, the people breaking the rules benefit the most. This is sort of like the "tragedy of the commons," with a twist. In the tragedy of the commons, the people who don't break the rules don't derive any benefit. In this situation, they're at least a little bit better off than if nobody broke the rules. Everybody has an incentive to try to be in that 40%, though. (Some people, like me, follow the rules dogmatically and altruistically.) I guess what's called for is some sort of automagic lottery system by which 40% of drivers in high-traffic situations are notified in real-time that they are being encouraged to drive more aggressively. AI researchers, get on that.
Parent
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
The conclusion is more like: Though traffic rules are designed to lead to orderly flows, the lowest jamming rate (under certain conditions) actually occurs when some fraction of participants ignore the rules.
(As a side note, it's a bit of a pet-peeve of mine when people make fun of studies by saying "That conclusion is so obvious! What a waste of time!" Common sense, hunches, and gut feelings are often wrong, which is why we do rigorous research to get at the right answers. And even if the general conclusion is obvious (in hindsight, mind you), rigorous research means that we can say something about error bars and make specific statements about applicability and predictability of models.)
Parent