Make it make sense
-
Do you know of a paper that describes this kind of traffic motion?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Bumper riders
Lane switchers
Brake checkers
Ramp users switching lanes wayyy too late -
A few years ago, I was bitching and moaning about a jam, and my pal just said "you're not in traffic, you are traffic".
I know it's nothing more than a cheeky soundbite but just reframing it like that and knowing I'm part of the problem rather than the exception has made me a lot calmer on slow moving roads.
Plus it has encouraged me to either use public transport more, or just drive to a park-and-ride a mile or three out, and run the rest - facilities permitting of course.
Yeah that was a through the matrix moment for me too.
-
Too many dudes doing slam dunks on fire. I'm more of a log jam kinda guy.
Too many opportunities for death. I'm more of a signal jam kinda guy.
-
Cars cause traffic. Cars changing lanes causes traffic. Cars merging causes traffic. Only solution, get rid of the cars and the system built to cater to them.
This is the correct answer. There isn't a city on earth that has fixed congestion by building for more cars. It's the places that build for trains and bikes that are best for driving, ironically.
-
Funnily enough, I'm planning on getting my licence at some point.
I've no interest in motorbikes, I would just love to learn how to ride one safely.
I understood them as expensive toys, like an old Italian project car that's fun to tool around in in nice weather, but when you need to get to work, you drive your car, but experiencing its role in SEA completely change my perspective. They can be cheap, boring, functional machines, with a suprisingly high capacity. that even a dog can perform basic maintenance on and keep running for decades, that work just fine in rain.
-
This post did not contain any content.
It's all a mad rush of people trying to get to where they don't want to be as fast as possible
-
It's the people not zipper merging correctly. You have idiots entering that are not up to speed and you have idiots breaking for the idiots not up to speed.
On ramps should be required to have their lane not end abruptly which causes the panic. The on ram should continue for at least a 1/4 mile.
I've literally seen a test with 4 cars driving around a circle, and they tell the drivers, "go at a consistent speed and maintain the distance in front of you" and after 5 minutes they're all bunched up on one side of the circle. No amount of zipper merging and nice ramps will fix this.
-
wrote last edited by [email protected]
That's also why the best way to relieve traffic is to go at a slow even pace without braking. Every time the someone in heavy traffic runs up the ass of another car and brakes hard, or swerves into the "faster" lane and make someone else brake to not hit them, they cause another brake wave. If you have a few cars intentionally just hanging back and cruising with a big enough gap between them and the cars jocking for position in traffic in front of them, then their brake waves do not propogate behind you and eventually traffic just picks up pace again.
Edit: side bonus, you still get there just as fast, but with a lot less stress fighting assholes for position (minus the ones who fly past you thinking you're the asshole for not riding someone else's bumper)
-
people not zipper merging correctly
Zipper merging is more complicated than driving straight forward and requires both lanes to slow down significantly relative to the cars in front and behind them.
The biggest issue with zipper merging is humans need to not be selfish for it to work. Its very efficient when moving well and everyone is in turn, as soon as 1 asshole sneaks in or prevents a merge, it causes the entire flow to stop.
-
My area kinda has this except the on ramp ends quickly merging into the right lane, then the off ramp starts almost immediately after. It makes traffic worse as cars trying to get on cannot merge effectively because cars want to be in that lane to exit. I find the best flow is having the off ramp before the on ramp, which minimizes right lane conflicts.
-
I understood them as expensive toys, like an old Italian project car that's fun to tool around in in nice weather, but when you need to get to work, you drive your car, but experiencing its role in SEA completely change my perspective. They can be cheap, boring, functional machines, with a suprisingly high capacity. that even a dog can perform basic maintenance on and keep running for decades, that work just fine in rain.
Good shout.
I live fairly rurally and the roads/drivers don't really lend themselves to new riders.
I think if I lived in a big town or city though, I'd absolutely pick up a chicken chaser and rattle about short distances on one, they seem to be perfect for that sort of use case.
Plus, not that I'm a huge fan of tobacco advertising, bikes in the Rothmans livery look absolutely stunning to me.
-
The biggest issue with zipper merging is humans need to not be selfish for it to work. Its very efficient when moving well and everyone is in turn, as soon as 1 asshole sneaks in or prevents a merge, it causes the entire flow to stop.
The biggest issue with zipper merging is humans need to not be selfish for it to work.
The biggest issue is that humans need to be aware of all the cars around them. That means using side and rear mirrors, leaving appropriate space for larger vehicles, keeping track of your place in the line, and - also, yes, not being selfish.
Its very efficient when moving well
If you've ever been alongside a semi during a zipper merge, you'd know that's not true. Their visibility is limited and the vehicle is huge, so they have to move at a glacial pace to complete the merge. Then the people in the leading/trailing positions need to open up a much larger gap than with a traditional car, complicated by the fact that they may not know exactly how big the truck they're letting in is. And heaven help if there's something hanging off the back of the vehicle. That's scary, so it causes nervous drivers to try and get away from the rear of the larger vehicle, which further snarls the traffic.
Like, as a procedure executed by a machine with perfect information of all elements involved, its efficient. As a game theory exercise between individual drivers of different skill and temperament, riding in vehicles of varying sizes, on a road with obstructions and other potential hazards, it is decidedly not efficient.
-
Do you know of a paper that describes this kind of traffic motion?
I couldn't find the paper I was thinking of that described the phenomenon of traffic propagating as a pressure wave, but I did find this paper (new to me) that describes a model for simulating how congestion spreads in urban environments (as opposed to an isolated highway, which IIRC the paper that most people reference models). It does have the full text available though, and it looks like a good read and has references that should get you going on the history of congestion research.
I am not an expert; I just found this with a few minutes of searching. If there are experts with better papers I'd be happy to hear from ya!
-
That's also why the best way to relieve traffic is to go at a slow even pace without braking. Every time the someone in heavy traffic runs up the ass of another car and brakes hard, or swerves into the "faster" lane and make someone else brake to not hit them, they cause another brake wave. If you have a few cars intentionally just hanging back and cruising with a big enough gap between them and the cars jocking for position in traffic in front of them, then their brake waves do not propogate behind you and eventually traffic just picks up pace again.
Edit: side bonus, you still get there just as fast, but with a lot less stress fighting assholes for position (minus the ones who fly past you thinking you're the asshole for not riding someone else's bumper)
Nicely demonstrated here: https://youtu.be/Suugn-p5C1M
-
Do you know of a paper that describes this kind of traffic motion?
I knew about the elastic band effect, but I was unsure if it was considered the same. But searching that I found about both:
-
This is the correct answer. There isn't a city on earth that has fixed congestion by building for more cars. It's the places that build for trains and bikes that are best for driving, ironically.
It always comes to a point where the only way to improve traffic is to flatten the buildings people drive to, defeating the purpose.
-
Do you know of a paper that describes this kind of traffic motion?
Here's the (abstract of the) paper I was thinking of https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/opre.4.1.42
Appalling that I can't find a free version of a 70 year old paper. You might be able to find the full text somewhere... I would of course never encourage anything that might run afoul of the scientific publishing protection racket.
-
Nicely demonstrated here: https://youtu.be/Suugn-p5C1M
I couldn't even see the traffic start because the fucking "Related Videos!" popups. God I hate what youtube has become.
-
A few years ago, I was bitching and moaning about a jam, and my pal just said "you're not in traffic, you are traffic".
I know it's nothing more than a cheeky soundbite but just reframing it like that and knowing I'm part of the problem rather than the exception has made me a lot calmer on slow moving roads.
Plus it has encouraged me to either use public transport more, or just drive to a park-and-ride a mile or three out, and run the rest - facilities permitting of course.
"No John, YOU are the traffic!"
And then John was traffic
