5 ms·

"If we make driving less safe people will drive safer"

by gok 10y ago

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
a3n 10y ago
"A crowded society is a polite society."
kuschku 10y ago
That's actually one of the most basic principles of traffic design. Roads built in the Netherlands and Germany are designed so that you absolutely can't drive safely at speeds higher than the supposed speeds - it feels unsafe, and you just don't. For example, in areas before schools, you usually limit the road to one lane, and switch which side that is every 50 meters, requiring cars to drive slalom, which in turn requires cars to slow down (or crash into concrete). You don't make it actually unsafe (there's enough space that it won't ever cause any fatal accident), it just has to feel unsafe. EDIT: More examples: Another example are the emergency lanes and outer lane markings on the Autobahn: they are a lot louder to drive on intentionally, so if you accidentally steer onto them, you'll hear a very loud noise, and your car will vibrate just slightly - if you fell asleep and steered onto them, you'll instantly wake up again. Another example would be speed bumps.
- Swizec 10y ago
  I've seen a similar principle in the Alps. Every town is preceded by a really sharp turn. Works much better than any speed limit sign.
  - kuschku 10y ago
    Yes, this is part of what is not just good, but great design. It just works, thanks to subconscious influence. If we'd spend more of our resources on designing such systems that any human instantly gets, I'd assume humanity would be a lot better off.
- userbinator 10y ago
  they are a lot louder to drive on intentionally, so if you accidentally steer onto them, you'll hear a very loud noise, and your car will vibrate just slightly - if you fell asleep and steered onto them, you'll instantly wake up again. These are present in the US too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumble_strip#Continuous_shoulder_rumble_strips_.28CSRS.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumble_strip#Continuous_should...
dasil003 10y ago
Yes. This is absolutely true. People don't speed around mountain passes on snowy nights. So I'm not clear what your point is. A better way to frame it is do we want to optimize everything for automobile travel speed and convenience? That's what the US has done for the last 100 years, and the result is poor public transit, unwalkable neighborhoods, urban cycling as extreme sport, and an epidemic of road rage.
- bcook 10y ago
  You're implying that slippery, curvy roads are safer?
  - mhalle 10y ago
    No. The implication is that driver behavior adapts to road conditions, and that slippery curvy roads demand higher attention and care to navigate. In many instances, improved driver attention compensates for the increased risks of dangerous road conditions: more "dangerous" roads may not have proportionally increased accident rates or fatalities. In the extreme case where a road appears life-threatening, a driver with that knowledge chooses not to drive. The most dangerous conditions occur if the road appears safe but has unforeseen or transient hazards.
- mcguire 10y ago
  Rather than making roads visibly more dangerous, there are better options. One I heard long ago on a motorcycle forum is: get rid of seat belts, mount the driver in a plexiglass bubble in front of the front bumper, and put a bloody great spike in the middle of the steering wheel. I wonder why that idea hasn't caught on?
- 75j 10y ago
  > People don't speed around mountain passes on snowy nights. I don't follow. Driving on a snowy mountain road is still incredibly dangerous though, even after I've adapted my behavior.
ocschwar 10y ago
Yes. It will. And it does. Massachusetts roads are infamously lined with trees, rocks, and all sorts of other barriers that make it a very bad idea to drive carelessly. Drive like an idiot and you'll send a body shop owner's kid to college. However, that steep price for careless drivers makes life a lot safer for those of us biking or walking in MA.
- foobarian 10y ago
  I don't know where this is coming from; I've been in MA for a long time and never any road obstacles like the above. Now having said that driving backroads is not easy to do fast simply because they are windy and narrow. I guess if you compare to someplace like Arizona where if you spin out you just end up in sand instead of hitting a tree, sure, but why single out MA instead of just anyplace with trees? :)
  - ocschwar 10y ago
    I am not kidding about this: there are places in the Midwest where people have been required to remove trees from their front yards in order to make things safer for drivers who might drift off roads.
    - Declanomous 10y ago
      My grandmother lived o a very wide but otherwise normal street in South Bend, IN. She had a row of GIANT oaks in front of her house. There were at least 3 crashes I heard about that killed drivers. People would drive down the street way too fast, hit a slight bump about 40-50 feet down the street from her house and lose control. The city offered to cut down the trees after 4 teenagers died a while back. She declined though, because they would end up in her living room if they didn't hit the tree. That being said, there's only one tree left, cause that last accident killed the tree they hit.
    - tbihl 10y ago
      That's to make the safety zone larger. You know, so drivers can safely drive off the road. https://youtu.be/P9BUyWVg1xI https://youtu.be/P9BUyWVg1xI
hexane360 10y ago
Yep. Traffic fatalities increased after clearing the sides of intersections to remove obstacles. If your field of vision is covered with trees, you drive much slower. If you feel like you're driving on an open road, you drive much faster. Obviously there are some cases where the increase in safety outweighs the increase in recklessness, but not all cases.
- mhalle 10y ago
  This relation is often true, but not always. For instance, if a driver can't see past an obstruction and needs to pull into a crosswalk to look for oncoming traffic, he or she may neglect to look for a crossing pedestrian because of a prioritization of risk. Progressive traffic engineering is required to balance these competing interests and safety needs on a case-by-case basis.

"If we make driving less safe people will drive safer"

by gok 10y ago

"If we make driving less safe people will drive safer"

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

a3n 10y ago

"A crowded society is a polite society."

kuschku 10y ago

That's actually one of the most basic principles of traffic design. Roads built in the Netherlands and Germany are designed so that you absolutely can't drive safely at speeds higher than the supposed speeds - it feels unsafe, and you just don't. For example, in areas before schools, you usually limit the road to one lane, and switch which side that is every 50 meters, requiring cars to drive slalom, which in turn requires cars to slow down (or crash into concrete). You don't make it actually unsafe (there's enough space that it won't ever cause any fatal accident), it just has to feel unsafe. EDIT: More examples: Another example are the emergency lanes and outer lane markings on the Autobahn: they are a lot louder to drive on intentionally, so if you accidentally steer onto them, you'll hear a very loud noise, and your car will vibrate just slightly - if you fell asleep and steered onto them, you'll instantly wake up again. Another example would be speed bumps.

Swizec 10y ago
I've seen a similar principle in the Alps. Every town is preceded by a really sharp turn. Works much better than any speed limit sign.
- kuschku 10y ago
  Yes, this is part of what is not just good, but great design. It just works, thanks to subconscious influence. If we'd spend more of our resources on designing such systems that any human instantly gets, I'd assume humanity would be a lot better off.
userbinator 10y ago
they are a lot louder to drive on intentionally, so if you accidentally steer onto them, you'll hear a very loud noise, and your car will vibrate just slightly - if you fell asleep and steered onto them, you'll instantly wake up again. These are present in the US too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumble_strip#Continuous_shoulder_rumble_strips_.28CSRS.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumble_strip#Continuous_should...

dasil003 10y ago

Yes. This is absolutely true. People don't speed around mountain passes on snowy nights. So I'm not clear what your point is. A better way to frame it is do we want to optimize everything for automobile travel speed and convenience? That's what the US has done for the last 100 years, and the result is poor public transit, unwalkable neighborhoods, urban cycling as extreme sport, and an epidemic of road rage.

bcook 10y ago
You're implying that slippery, curvy roads are safer?
- mhalle 10y ago
  No. The implication is that driver behavior adapts to road conditions, and that slippery curvy roads demand higher attention and care to navigate. In many instances, improved driver attention compensates for the increased risks of dangerous road conditions: more "dangerous" roads may not have proportionally increased accident rates or fatalities. In the extreme case where a road appears life-threatening, a driver with that knowledge chooses not to drive. The most dangerous conditions occur if the road appears safe but has unforeseen or transient hazards.
mcguire 10y ago
Rather than making roads visibly more dangerous, there are better options. One I heard long ago on a motorcycle forum is: get rid of seat belts, mount the driver in a plexiglass bubble in front of the front bumper, and put a bloody great spike in the middle of the steering wheel. I wonder why that idea hasn't caught on?
75j 10y ago
> People don't speed around mountain passes on snowy nights. I don't follow. Driving on a snowy mountain road is still incredibly dangerous though, even after I've adapted my behavior.

ocschwar 10y ago

Yes. It will. And it does. Massachusetts roads are infamously lined with trees, rocks, and all sorts of other barriers that make it a very bad idea to drive carelessly. Drive like an idiot and you'll send a body shop owner's kid to college. However, that steep price for careless drivers makes life a lot safer for those of us biking or walking in MA.

foobarian 10y ago
I don't know where this is coming from; I've been in MA for a long time and never any road obstacles like the above. Now having said that driving backroads is not easy to do fast simply because they are windy and narrow. I guess if you compare to someplace like Arizona where if you spin out you just end up in sand instead of hitting a tree, sure, but why single out MA instead of just anyplace with trees? :)
- ocschwar 10y ago
  I am not kidding about this: there are places in the Midwest where people have been required to remove trees from their front yards in order to make things safer for drivers who might drift off roads.
  - Declanomous 10y ago
    My grandmother lived o a very wide but otherwise normal street in South Bend, IN. She had a row of GIANT oaks in front of her house. There were at least 3 crashes I heard about that killed drivers. People would drive down the street way too fast, hit a slight bump about 40-50 feet down the street from her house and lose control. The city offered to cut down the trees after 4 teenagers died a while back. She declined though, because they would end up in her living room if they didn't hit the tree. That being said, there's only one tree left, cause that last accident killed the tree they hit.
  - tbihl 10y ago
    That's to make the safety zone larger. You know, so drivers can safely drive off the road. https://youtu.be/P9BUyWVg1xI https://youtu.be/P9BUyWVg1xI

hexane360 10y ago

Yep. Traffic fatalities increased after clearing the sides of intersections to remove obstacles. If your field of vision is covered with trees, you drive much slower. If you feel like you're driving on an open road, you drive much faster. Obviously there are some cases where the increase in safety outweighs the increase in recklessness, but not all cases.

mhalle 10y ago
This relation is often true, but not always. For instance, if a driver can't see past an obstruction and needs to pull into a crosswalk to look for oncoming traffic, he or she may neglect to look for a crossing pedestrian because of a prioritization of risk. Progressive traffic engineering is required to balance these competing interests and safety needs on a case-by-case basis.