4 ms·
This would feel better but isn't it less efficient because then there's more stopping and starting? Like instead of waiting at an average of 5 lights for 60 sec
by droidist2 7y ago
This would feel better but isn't it less efficient because then there's more stopping and starting? Like instead of waiting at an average of 5 lights for 60 seconds, you wait at 10 lights for 30 seconds, which means you spend twice as much time decelerating/accelerating to/from a stop.
- Svip 7y agoBut it will feel like more is happening, thus lowering impatience, and it will also mean that even if the lights are synced, it's harder to get up to a dangerous speed in built up areas. So it's also safer. In cities, I don't really care about making it convenient for drivers, but lowering their impatience will make it safer for everyone.
- droidist2 7y agoOh yeah, in the city you might have a point. I was picturing a limited-access road in a suburb, with lights spaced pretty far apart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited-access_road https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited-access_road