Uncle Rummy writes "A central traffic control computer in Montgomery County, Maryland failed early Wednesday morning, leading to widespread gridlock across the entire county. The computer, which dates to the 1970s, is the single point of unified control for all traffic signals in the county, which comprises a number of major Washington DC-area suburban communities. When the system failed, it caused all signals to default to stand-alone operation, rather than the highly-tuned synchronization that usually serves to facilitate traffic flow during rush hours. The resulting chaos is a yet another stark reminder of how much modern civilization relies on behind-the-scenes automation to deliver and control basic services and infrastructure. The system remains down Thursday, with no ETA in sight."
Bringing in Bruce Willis is *never* a bad idea. Need an asteroid destroyed in an affront to basic science? Call Willis. Need to remove an East German terrorist that can't speak proper German? Willis. Need someone to have sex with a hot, orange haired diety? Willis. Need Chuck Norris' ass kicked? Willis. Cancer cure? Willis. Making a Jaws Sequel? Have Bruce Willis play the shark.
back in the day i read a "tfile" by Sunspot IIRC that explained how to break into those boxes attached the stop lights at intersections and make every light stay green all the time. Not sure if it was legit or not but it sounded a little far fetched.
As for the single computer, i bet a coke no one knows the root password, the system administrator is long gone and the programmers are very long gone. I bet the staff tried to power cycle it thinking it was just like a PC and now they've made the problem 3x worse.
Most of those boxes have a "conflicting green" detector circuit that automatically puts the signal in "safe mode" when it detects two conflicting green lights.
On simpler systems, "safe mode" is all-way flashing red lights.
I guess if you knew what wires to mess with you could disable this safety feature.
After hurricane Ike blew through Houston, I ended up parking at a light that was stuck, showing green for traffic in one direction only for at least 15 minutes.
Every time someone was brave enough to try to run the red light, someone else would drive through the green light and spook everyone. Eventually I turned right, U-turned, and turned right again.
I thought about that too. All those press references to "1970s" and "Carter-era". But these are the same geniuses in the Fourth Estate who called the thing a "mainframe", so their ignorance is manifest.
I apply the BS test here. If anyone tells me they have a Nova (even a late-model Nova 4) controlling all the traffic lights of an entire metropolitan county adjacent to the District of Columbia, will I cry shenanigans? In this case, yes. I've worked with Novas, PDP-11s, and Perkin-Elmer 16-bit minis. I'm familiar with their capabilities. You would have to be coder of absolute godly skill to write the realtime control software to safely manage dozens (scores? hundreds?) of street lights in only 64Kbytes of core (or RAM, whatever).
Whereas the most primitive Eclipse would have ample horsepower to do the trick.
So I still say Eclipse. Certainly, the comparative newness of the Eclipse over the Nova doesn't help the parts situation at all, because they're both dead as a doornail, support-wise. EMC end-of-lifed [dg.com] the last and greatest Data General line, AViiON, nearly a year ago.
For those who aren't familiar with Montgomery County, MD. It is one of, if not the richest counties in the nation. I find it amazing that even in a county like this, the public infrastructure is crumbling.
They had a massive water main break earlier this year that made the national news.
No one fixes infrastructure until it's broken. That's pretty standard everywhere.
Los Angeles has had an increase in water main breaks also. They fix the spot as they break. If I remember their numbers, they expect about 400 to 700 main breaks per year.
Who cares about the old mini/mainframe running the traffic lights. If it's run since the 70's or 80's, it'll run forever. I always love that intelligence. I like to laugh about it more when it fails too.:)
No one fixes infrastructure until it's broken. That's pretty standard everywhere.
Sometimes not even after it's broken. Or more commonly, when it's broken, there's a half-assed temporary repair that becomes the permanent repair until it breaks again.
The biggest reason for doing this is short-term-ism: If a politician manages to save money now, it doesn't matter to him that somebody else 10 years down the line will have to spend far more money to clean up the mess after the system failed. So each administration (at any level: state, county, and municipal governments are far from immune to
The WashPost, in another article touts Fragile Technology. I reach for my 70's era calculator and estimate the operational life of 34 years for this system. Some Fragility. Who or what at the Post has been there that long.
Wonder if its some ancient PDP version or an small IBM mainframe. The article is scarce on details. Parts for either are getting hard to find except in the scrap market.
Still you have to wonder why it wasn't ported to some other platform if nothing else as an exercise in disaster preparedness. Any commodity computer could do the job.
There is a lot of stuff like this still in service. I saw a PDP 8 monitoring turbines in a hydro Power station, and asked about where they get that fixed. The reply was it never broke down, but they had stockpiled 6 replacements, tested each yearly, just because they realized how old it was. Nobody knows exactly what it does anymore.
From TFA: "They know where the problem is, but they just don't know what it is," she said. "The server seems to be sending the signal, but the conduit is not transferring the information to the signal lights."
I can tell you where it is. Right there on layer 4. Does that help? Then try layer 8.
I was going to say we should blame this on Windows Vista, until I saw the part about the computer system dating back to the 1970s, so that wouldn't work. Still, there's got to be some way we can put the fault on Micro$oft? Maybe the computer was in need of some necessary maintenance, and the technician whose responsibility that was was too tied up in a game of Minesweeper or Solitaire, or something?
The resulting chaos is a yet another stark reminder of how much modern civilization relies on behind-the-scenes automation to deliver and control basic services and infrastructure.
Just Skynet trying to figure out how to bunch up targets when it seizes control of our Predator and Reaper UAV's.
... to mediate traffic instead of traffic signals, they wouldn't have needed the aging old single-point-of-failure computer in the first place, because roundabouts (a) require no computers, (b) require no electronics at all, (c) require no electricity, and (d) don't require maintenance. What's more, since they allow motorists to preserve some momentum in all but the most congested traffic, gas consumption from forced arbitrary deceleration and acceleration is reduced. The only intelligence they require isn't of the artificial sort at all, only a smidgen of it from the motorists using them. They are un-powered and self-adjusting to traffic flow.
Would anyone like to take a stab at how much energy and man-hours is expended on the traffic signal network in the United States every year?
As a UK resident and driver in the true home of the roundabout, I wish to tell you that roundabouts are not a panacea.
Roundabouts work best for light to moderate traffic, where all 4 directions and all movements (left turn, right turn etc) are fairly equal in demand. For heavy traffic, they very quickly congest as traffic builds on the roundabout and blocks all entry. Indeed, round here most busy/large roundabouts have traffic lights on them as well, with varying degrees of success.
As for "gas consumption from forced arbitrary deceleration and acceleration is reduced" - I strongly disagree. Here roundabouts are used as a form of 'traffic calming', ie a deliberate obstacle to slow traffic. With a traffic light its a 50/50 chance between stopping completely and carrying on at cruising speed. With roundabouts there is always a decelerate/accelerate cycle, which depending on the design of the junction can be quite severe. In Birmingham (UK) and elsewhere. there was even a recent fad among local traffic engineers to plant high vegetation on the sightlines for approaching traffic to force all vehicles entering the roundabout to slow to below 5mph to be able to see traffic on the junction. On some examples here you have maybe 3 ft before the roundabout itself where you can see oncoming vehicles.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that roundabouts are rubbish and traffic lights are good, but theres different solutions to different problems. Replacing non-synchronised traffic lights with roundabouts in a situation with very heavy traffic would have a very much worse result.
I have been very happy with the traffic circle which replaced the traffic light near where I live. It is on a two-lane highway in a smaller city here in Arizona.
I was very sceptical when the state said they were planning to replace the stop light with a traffic circle. But, the traffic circle has been able to handle the traffic much more smoothly than the stoplight did. I rarely need to wait more than a few seconds to get through the traffic circle, even during rush hour. I also usually do not need to make a complete stop, which saves gas and reduces the wear on my clutch.
As you mentioned, no electricity, computers or electronics are needed. It keeps working just fine, whenever the power occasionally goes off after a summer thunderstorm, for a few minutes.
I haven't read the article, but if the summary correctly reflects the situation, the traffic lights are all working - they're just working independently, so rather than being in sync so the main flow of traffic never has to stop (or stops less) they're all just doing their own thing.
Hey, that's like traffic signals where I've live -- they're specifically timed to ensure that you consume as much gas as possible, while sitting in traffic for the maximum amount of time every day!
Wouldn't matter. The traffic lights were working fine, the problem was there was no central system that could take a larger view of traffic and sense that turning a light green a block away could prevent a gridlock issue at a specific intersection. Intelligent traffic control takes traffic that is approaching a heavily congested area and intentionally slows it down, while freeing up cars to LEAVE congested areas more quickly. They help prevent gridlock by making sure that once a specific light turns green you can actually drive through the intersection, and turns the light red BEFORE cars get caught in the middle of an intersection.
You see this kind of design a lot in well-designed roads in smaller towns. Busy towns will tend to have lots of stop signs coming in to town, but try to reduce stop signs when leaving town. The idea is to keep inbound traffic from filling the town faster than departing cars can leave by making sure cars that are leaving can do so as quickly as possible, while cars wanting to come in will be intentionally slowed down.
A meter maid has no more information about traffic flow at adjacent intersections than an autonomous single light would.
I believe you haven't noticed the pattern. If lights are aligned vertically, the red light is ALWAYS on top and the green one ALWAYS on the bottom. If they're aligned horizontally, the red light is ALWAYS on the left. The arrangement is always the same, regardless of where the traffic light is exactly located.
Being from Buffalo I was curious that I'd never heard of that - turns out it's actually in Syracuse, which is two cities east of Buffalo (Rochester in between) and about a two and a half hour drive:)
I live here too and it was mayhem last night. It took me 2.5 hours to get home from work which usually takes 25 minutes. (6 miles) Many of my coworkers and friends have also reported major headaches...
We were sitting at traffic lights with nowhere to go for sometimes up to 5 cycles of the lights. What I heard is that there is a different timing for rush hours that lets more traffic flow south in the morning and north in the evenings. The worst areas according to news reports are Rockville Pike, which I experienced last night, Connecticut Ave, Georgia Ave and Rt 29.
The official word is that some board blew in the main computer and they are unable to find "parts" to replace it. I am not certain about the details. The county website is reporting that all traffic lights are going to have to be manually updated one-by-one. There are 800 intersections.
I live in downtown Silver Spring. I commute from Columbia. It's usually a 30 minute drive, but last night took me an hour and a half. The worst part was when I crossed Georgia Ave a block from my home, right by the DC border. That last block took me 20 minutes.
I was trying to figure out what was up with the traffic. I didn't see any accidents or emergency vehicles, and the traffic reports I heard just said that traffic on Georgia was slow. Didn't hear anything about the control system until today.
Time to break out the bicycle. Or walk it, for that matter.
6 miles should take about an hour and a half at a decent walking pace, or about 45 minutes at a fairly leisurely cycling pace, and a week or so of it and your new sculpted bod will drive the ladies wild.:)
Old systems stick around because they work. City-wide traffic systems are very complicated affairs. Getting rid of a 40 year old system also means trashing 40 years of hard lessons.
I mean, sure, the law states that when an intersection has traffic lights, and the lights are out, it's an all-way stop. But in practice, I rarely see other drivers actually give a fuck that they are supposed to stop.
I have seen accidents at lightly trafficked intersections when the light was completely out... I don't want to imagine the apocalypse of a couple hundred all going out in a well populated area; it would turn into Mad Max in a matter of hours.
When I lived in Kentucky, we had an ice storm that knocked out power in Lexington for the better part of a week. The loss of traffic lights meant every intersection was supposed to turn into a 4-way stop. Which meant that every car came to a halt (in theory) at every intersection for a second or two. My 8-mile 15-minute drive to work turned into 3 hours one morning. I finally found a parking lot, parked my car there, and walked the remaining 3 miles. It was faster. Seriously - I recognized a guy 2 cars ahead of me and he arrived at work 1/2 hour after I did.
The reality was that people were assuming that dark lights meant that either (a) it was a 4-way stop, (b) people on the "larger/main" road had right-of-way, (c) I have no idea so I'm going to creep through, or (d) screw it, y'all, I've got the big fukkin truck - get outta my way.
On the third day, they deployed every police officer, meter reader, and anyone else with a pulse who was trainable to direct traffic. Of course, this meant that every bad driver in Lexington knew that all bets were off in terms of speed limits, right-of-way, and other moving violations during those times. Ever read "Lord of the Flies"? Yeah, it was like that. With cars.
IANATE (I Am Not A Traffic Engineer), but I've had the opportunity to talk to some over the years. From what I recall of those conversations, most, if not all, traffic signals are failsafe. They cannot have colliding greens, and they won't generally just turn off. Even in the event of a power failure, they're suppose to stay up on batteries for a while.
I have seen their failsafe behavior fail though. I was once driving on a dark foggy night. Visibility was very very poor. I was staying in my lane, but I couldn't see much else. I had a long drive in a rural area, and I was coming into an urban area. I expected to see street lights and traffic lights, but there were none. As I was driving, another car shot across the road just ahead of me, missing me by just a few feet. He didn't see the traffic light that wasn't working either. I called the police, so they could station an officer there. Their response was "Are you crazy? No one can see at that intersection. He'll get hit." Hmmm, good logic. At least no one got killed there that night.
Indeed. However, you can take heart in the fact that each intersection has its lights controlled by a computer (an embedded microcontroller or microprocessor), which is usually installed in a grey box at one of the corners. This controls the intersection's lights, including crosswalks, and takes input from inductive sensors in most lanes. If any part of this computer fails or does not pass sanity checks, the lights flash red, requiring a team to visit the intersection's box to diagnose and fix the problem.
Right. A failure of this system is not an issue of safety, just of horrible, horrible inconvenience.
You obviously don't live in this area. When anything like this happens, road rage incidents skyrocket. Maryland has some of the worst drivers I've ever seen. And Maryland doesn't require that drivers use turn signals. I hate driving through there, especially on the highways. The posted speed limit is 55, but I get about 20% of the drivers blowing by me at over 80. Montgomery and Prince George's County are the worst of the bunch.
I've seen this movie as well... (Score:5, Funny)
I smell foul play...
Quick, someone get Bruce Willis!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I've seen this movie as well... (Score:5, Funny)
Bringing in Bruce Willis is *never* a bad idea. Need an asteroid destroyed in an affront to basic science? Call Willis. Need to remove an East German terrorist that can't speak proper German? Willis. Need someone to have sex with a hot, orange haired diety? Willis. Need Chuck Norris' ass kicked? Willis. Cancer cure? Willis. Making a Jaws Sequel? Have Bruce Willis play the shark.
Parent
Re:I've seen this movie as well... (Score:5, Funny)
Whoa there, no need for Willis for that one. I'll do it. And if she objects, tell her the next choice is Shatner.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
remind of a Cult of The Dead Cow tfile (Score:4, Interesting)
As for the single computer, i bet a coke no one knows the root password, the system administrator is long gone and the programmers are very long gone. I bet the staff tried to power cycle it thinking it was just like a PC and now they've made the problem 3x worse.
All-green probably an urban legend (Score:4, Insightful)
Most of those boxes have a "conflicting green" detector circuit that automatically puts the signal in "safe mode" when it detects two conflicting green lights.
On simpler systems, "safe mode" is all-way flashing red lights.
I guess if you knew what wires to mess with you could disable this safety feature.
Physical access is root access.
Parent
Re:All-green probably an urban legend (Score:4, Funny)
After hurricane Ike blew through Houston, I ended up parking at a light that was stuck, showing green for traffic in one direction only for at least 15 minutes.
Every time someone was brave enough to try to run the red light, someone else would drive through the green light and spook everyone. Eventually I turned right, U-turned, and turned right again.
Parent
I do! (Score:3, Funny)
it's "password"!
This is government, you know.
Re:I do! (Score:5, Funny)
Silly billy! The system is now protected by a new set of rules. You have to have upper and lowercase, a special character, and a number.
The password is now: P@ssw0rd
See? The system is now completely secure!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's actually most likely VMS, and it's most likely going to require them to find whoever they laid off in order to outsource their 'legacy' system.
Have a taste of living in Los Angeles! (Score:5, Funny)
From the 1980s (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:From the 1980s (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought about that too. All those press references to "1970s" and "Carter-era". But these are the same geniuses in the Fourth Estate who called the thing a "mainframe", so their ignorance is manifest.
I apply the BS test here. If anyone tells me they have a Nova (even a late-model Nova 4) controlling all the traffic lights of an entire metropolitan county adjacent to the District of Columbia, will I cry shenanigans? In this case, yes. I've worked with Novas, PDP-11s, and Perkin-Elmer 16-bit minis. I'm familiar with their capabilities. You would have to be coder of absolute godly skill to write the realtime control software to safely manage dozens (scores? hundreds?) of street lights in only 64Kbytes of core (or RAM, whatever).
Whereas the most primitive Eclipse would have ample horsepower to do the trick.
So I still say Eclipse. Certainly, the comparative newness of the Eclipse over the Nova doesn't help the parts situation at all, because they're both dead as a doornail, support-wise. EMC end-of-lifed [dg.com] the last and greatest Data General line, AViiON, nearly a year ago.
Parent
MontCo $$ (Score:5, Interesting)
For those who aren't familiar with Montgomery County, MD. It is one of, if not the richest counties in the nation. I find it amazing that even in a county like this, the public infrastructure is crumbling.
They had a massive water main break earlier this year that made the national news.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No one fixes infrastructure until it's broken. That's pretty standard everywhere.
Los Angeles has had an increase in water main breaks also. They fix the spot as they break. If I remember their numbers, they expect about 400 to 700 main breaks per year.
Who cares about the old mini/mainframe running the traffic lights. If it's run since the 70's or 80's, it'll run forever. I always love that intelligence. I like to laugh about it more when it fails too. :)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, not since the tax-cut/reduce-government fanatics came into power.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No one fixes infrastructure until it's broken. That's pretty standard everywhere.
Sometimes not even after it's broken. Or more commonly, when it's broken, there's a half-assed temporary repair that becomes the permanent repair until it breaks again.
The biggest reason for doing this is short-term-ism: If a politician manages to save money now, it doesn't matter to him that somebody else 10 years down the line will have to spend far more money to clean up the mess after the system failed. So each administration (at any level: state, county, and municipal governments are far from immune to
Job opening in MD... (Score:3, Funny)
70s computer (Score:5, Insightful)
Damn! 70s? Talk about Return on Investment.
The WashPost, in another article touts Fragile Technology.
I reach for my 70's era calculator and estimate the operational life of 34 years for this system. Some Fragility. Who or what at the Post has been there that long.
Wonder if its some ancient PDP version or an small IBM mainframe. The article is scarce on details. Parts for either are getting hard to find except in the scrap market.
Still you have to wonder why it wasn't ported to some other platform if nothing else as an exercise in disaster preparedness. Any commodity computer could do the job.
There is a lot of stuff like this still in service. I saw a PDP 8 monitoring turbines in a hydro Power station, and asked about where they get that fixed. The reply was it never broke down, but they had stockpiled 6 replacements, tested each yearly, just because they realized how old it was. Nobody knows exactly what it does anymore.
Re:70s computer (Score:5, Informative)
You misunderstand. They have reliable equipment, and they are installing more of it. So they are installing more reliable equipment.
Parent
Where? (Score:3, Funny)
I can tell you where it is. Right there on layer 4. Does that help? Then try layer 8.
Blame it on Vista? (Score:4, Funny)
Just Skynet Running Some Tests (Score:4, Funny)
The resulting chaos is a yet another stark reminder of how much modern civilization relies on behind-the-scenes automation to deliver and control basic services and infrastructure.
Just Skynet trying to figure out how to bunch up targets when it seizes control of our Predator and Reaper UAV's.
And if they had been using roundabouts... (Score:5, Interesting)
... to mediate traffic instead of traffic signals, they wouldn't have needed the aging old single-point-of-failure computer in the first place, because roundabouts (a) require no computers, (b) require no electronics at all, (c) require no electricity, and (d) don't require maintenance. What's more, since they allow motorists to preserve some momentum in all but the most congested traffic, gas consumption from forced arbitrary deceleration and acceleration is reduced. The only intelligence they require isn't of the artificial sort at all, only a smidgen of it from the motorists using them. They are un-powered and self-adjusting to traffic flow.
Would anyone like to take a stab at how much energy and man-hours is expended on the traffic signal network in the United States every year?
Re:And if they had been using roundabouts... (Score:5, Insightful)
As a UK resident and driver in the true home of the roundabout, I wish to tell you that roundabouts are not a panacea.
Roundabouts work best for light to moderate traffic, where all 4 directions and all movements (left turn, right turn etc) are fairly equal in demand. For heavy traffic, they very quickly congest as traffic builds on the roundabout and blocks all entry. Indeed, round here most busy/large roundabouts have traffic lights on them as well, with varying degrees of success.
As for "gas consumption from forced arbitrary deceleration and acceleration is reduced" - I strongly disagree. Here roundabouts are used as a form of 'traffic calming', ie a deliberate obstacle to slow traffic. With a traffic light its a 50/50 chance between stopping completely and carrying on at cruising speed. With roundabouts there is always a decelerate/accelerate cycle, which depending on the design of the junction can be quite severe. In Birmingham (UK) and elsewhere. there was even a recent fad among local traffic engineers to plant high vegetation on the sightlines for approaching traffic to force all vehicles entering the roundabout to slow to below 5mph to be able to see traffic on the junction. On some examples here you have maybe 3 ft before the roundabout itself where you can see oncoming vehicles.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that roundabouts are rubbish and traffic lights are good, but theres different solutions to different problems. Replacing non-synchronised traffic lights with roundabouts in a situation with very heavy traffic would have a very much worse result.
Parent
Re:And if they had been using roundabouts... (Score:5, Interesting)
I was very sceptical when the state said they were planning to replace the stop light with a traffic circle. But, the traffic circle has been able to handle the traffic much more smoothly than the stoplight did. I rarely need to wait more than a few seconds to get through the traffic circle, even during rush hour. I also usually do not need to make a complete stop, which saves gas and reduces the wear on my clutch.
As you mentioned, no electricity, computers or electronics are needed. It keeps working just fine, whenever the power occasionally goes off after a summer thunderstorm, for a few minutes.
Parent
Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? (Score:5, Funny)
That wouldn't make it any better.
I haven't read the article, but if the summary correctly reflects the situation, the traffic lights are all working - they're just working independently, so rather than being in sync so the main flow of traffic never has to stop (or stops less) they're all just doing their own thing.
Parent
Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? (Score:5, Funny)
if the summary correctly reflects the situation
Please mod parent funny.
Parent
Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't matter. The traffic lights were working fine, the problem was there was no central system that could take a larger view of traffic and sense that turning a light green a block away could prevent a gridlock issue at a specific intersection. Intelligent traffic control takes traffic that is approaching a heavily congested area and intentionally slows it down, while freeing up cars to LEAVE congested areas more quickly. They help prevent gridlock by making sure that once a specific light turns green you can actually drive through the intersection, and turns the light red BEFORE cars get caught in the middle of an intersection.
You see this kind of design a lot in well-designed roads in smaller towns. Busy towns will tend to have lots of stop signs coming in to town, but try to reduce stop signs when leaving town. The idea is to keep inbound traffic from filling the town faster than departing cars can leave by making sure cars that are leaving can do so as quickly as possible, while cars wanting to come in will be intentionally slowed down.
A meter maid has no more information about traffic flow at adjacent intersections than an autonomous single light would.
Parent
Re:Where's a traffic cop when you need one? (Score:5, Funny)
A meter maid has no more information about traffic flow at adjacent intersections than an autonomous single light would.
Then how about a Beowulf cluster of meter maids? (with walkie talkies of course)
Parent
Re:Report from the field: "Drivers very confused" (Score:4, Informative)
Green lights are often blue to accommodate reg/green color blindness.
Parent
Re:Report from the field: "Drivers very confused" (Score:4, Interesting)
I believe you haven't noticed the pattern. If lights are aligned vertically, the red light is ALWAYS on top and the green one ALWAYS on the bottom. If they're aligned horizontally, the red light is ALWAYS on the left. The arrangement is always the same, regardless of where the traffic light is exactly located.
Parent
Re:Report from the field: "Drivers very confused" (Score:5, Interesting)
Except for one light in Buffalo, NY.
The folklore is that the Irish workmen thought that green should always be on the top.
The light has been reaplced, IIRC, several times, but remains the only inverted traffic light in the US.
Parent
Inverted traffic light - actually Syracuse, NY (Score:5, Informative)
Being from Buffalo I was curious that I'd never heard of that - turns out it's actually in Syracuse, which is two cities east of Buffalo (Rochester in between) and about a two and a half hour drive :)
Here's some info [roadsideamerica.com],
And here's a photo [flickr.com].
Parent
Re:Report from the field: "Drivers very confused" (Score:5, Funny)
That's why in my town we have Braille traffic lights.
Parent
Re:Report from the field: "Drivers very confused" (Score:5, Funny)
The blue is from appraching the light too fast. You're aproximately going 20% the speed of light. SLOW DOWN.
Parent
Re:Report from the field: "Drivers very confused" (Score:5, Funny)
Let's just see you try that line on the police.
"I would have slowed down, officer, but it would have either taken too long or crushed me, so I didn't bother."
Parent
Re:I live there (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I live in downtown Silver Spring. I commute from Columbia. It's usually a 30 minute drive, but last night took me an hour and a half. The worst part was when I crossed Georgia Ave a block from my home, right by the DC border. That last block took me 20 minutes.
I was trying to figure out what was up with the traffic. I didn't see any accidents or emergency vehicles, and the traffic reports I heard just said that traffic on Georgia was slow. Didn't hear anything about the control system until today.
Re:I live there (Score:4, Insightful)
Time to break out the bicycle. Or walk it, for that matter.
6 miles should take about an hour and a half at a decent walking pace, or about 45 minutes at a fairly leisurely cycling pace, and a week or so of it and your new sculpted bod will drive the ladies wild. :)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Old systems stick around because they work. City-wide traffic systems are very complicated affairs. Getting rid of a 40 year old system also means trashing 40 years of hard lessons.
Re:When the system fails, shut the lights off. (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean, sure, the law states that when an intersection has traffic lights, and the lights are out, it's an all-way stop. But in practice, I rarely see other drivers actually give a fuck that they are supposed to stop.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I have seen accidents at lightly trafficked intersections when the light was completely out... I don't want to imagine the apocalypse of a couple hundred all going out in a well populated area; it would turn into Mad Max in a matter of hours.
Re:When the system fails, shut the lights off. (Score:5, Funny)
When I lived in Kentucky, we had an ice storm that knocked out power in Lexington for the better part of a week. The loss of traffic lights meant every intersection was supposed to turn into a 4-way stop. Which meant that every car came to a halt (in theory) at every intersection for a second or two. My 8-mile 15-minute drive to work turned into 3 hours one morning. I finally found a parking lot, parked my car there, and walked the remaining 3 miles. It was faster. Seriously - I recognized a guy 2 cars ahead of me and he arrived at work 1/2 hour after I did.
The reality was that people were assuming that dark lights meant that either (a) it was a 4-way stop, (b) people on the "larger/main" road had right-of-way, (c) I have no idea so I'm going to creep through, or (d) screw it, y'all, I've got the big fukkin truck - get outta my way.
On the third day, they deployed every police officer, meter reader, and anyone else with a pulse who was trainable to direct traffic. Of course, this meant that every bad driver in Lexington knew that all bets were off in terms of speed limits, right-of-way, and other moving violations during those times. Ever read "Lord of the Flies"? Yeah, it was like that. With cars.
Parent
Re:This is reassuring... (Score:5, Interesting)
IANATE (I Am Not A Traffic Engineer), but I've had the opportunity to talk to some over the years. From what I recall of those conversations, most, if not all, traffic signals are failsafe. They cannot have colliding greens, and they won't generally just turn off. Even in the event of a power failure, they're suppose to stay up on batteries for a while.
I have seen their failsafe behavior fail though. I was once driving on a dark foggy night. Visibility was very very poor. I was staying in my lane, but I couldn't see much else. I had a long drive in a rural area, and I was coming into an urban area. I expected to see street lights and traffic lights, but there were none. As I was driving, another car shot across the road just ahead of me, missing me by just a few feet. He didn't see the traffic light that wasn't working either. I called the police, so they could station an officer there. Their response was "Are you crazy? No one can see at that intersection. He'll get hit." Hmmm, good logic. At least no one got killed there that night.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Right. A failure of this system is not an issue of safety, just of horrible, horrible inconvenience.
You obviously don't live in this area. When anything like this happens, road rage incidents skyrocket. Maryland has some of the worst drivers I've ever seen. And Maryland doesn't require that drivers use turn signals. I hate driving through there, especially on the highways. The posted speed limit is 55, but I get about 20% of the drivers blowing by me at over 80. Montgomery and Prince George's County are the worst of the bunch.