4 ms·
There is pretty well established modeling that demonstrates that the stop and go rhythm that arises from tight following distances leads to worse throughput. To
by dcow 3y ago
There is pretty well established modeling that demonstrates that the stop and go rhythm that arises from tight following distances leads to worse throughput. To avoid slinking, everyone needs to accelerate and decelerate at the same rate. A safe stopping distance is the only way build in the micro buffers needed to achieve relatively consistent speed at human scale, or without large scale traffic orchestration. The naïve takes just sound like armchair hand waving. I guess that’s what I’m responding to.
- seadan83 3y agoIt does seem on the road that many people lose the ability to predict 30 seconds in the future. That car in front of you has 10 feet to move? GO GO GO! Wait, it only moved just 10 feet - BRAKE BRAKE BRAKE! I think it can fun to be the driver that smooths out the shock waves, so I do largely agree with your point. Though, all things being equal, double following distance and that will double the length of a traffic jam. Longer traffic jams are more impactful - it takes longer to get through them & the longer traffic jam distance is more likely to cause back-ups on on-ramps and in turn to the surface streets leading to those on-ramps. Which is to say, a higher prevalence of grid-lock. The AI crowd is right to say that with 100% AI cars, you can have smooth and fast traffic with impossibly tight following distances. I do believe you need some impractical necessities to accomplish that though.