Subject: Re: Driving Pet peeves

From: [email-masked] (Simon Craythorn)
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 15:09:00 GMT

> This is about the most insane, stupid behavior I can think of. Oh my,
 > a tailgater, I know, I'll slow down, that'll teach him. If the average
 > someone is tailgating (or driving remotely close to you) it should
 > send a signal to your hopefully driving aware brain. I am blocking the
 > road in some way, what can I do to alleviate this situation (I would
 > exclude crass tailgating just to be tailgating types here).  What are
 > you about 78 years old?

I agree with slowing down when being tailgated.  If you are already doing a 
resonable speed for the road, maybe even up or slightly above the speed limit 
and you are tailgated what are you to do.  If you speed up any more you are 
more than likely exceeding the safe or legal limit of the road, also it is 
highly likely that the tailgater will also speed up and remain on your tail.

In the event that you need to hit the brakes this tailgater is going to go 
strait in to the back of you.  Personally if someone is going to hit the back 
of me I would rather they did it at a slower speed than a quicker one.

Tailgaters take note - you will not get there any quicker, by hanging back a 
little you get a better view of the road in front of the other vehicle, you 
can then come closer when it is safe to pass.

Simon
Member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists (UK)

---

From: "Steven Miale" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 22:15:36 -0500

In article <[email-masked]>,
Techs Avery <[email-masked]> wrote:
>Simon Craythorn ([email-masked]) wrote:
>: I agree with slowing down when being tailgated.  If you are already doing a 
>: resonable speed for the road, maybe even up or slightly above the speed limit 
>: and you are tailgated what are you to do.  If you speed up any more you are 
>
>You let them pass you. Period. No argument. Most roads have turnouts or 
>dotted lines. If it's dotted lines and there's no oncoming traffic you 
>open your window, wave the guy around and slow down to make it safer to 
>pass. If you need to pull onto the shoulder to do it, then do it. It 
>could save your life, your car or just save you headaches. 

Right. If (s)he wants to pass, let them. It isn't your job to force them
to drive at what you consider a safe speed for yourself. I've had many
a tailgater when I'm driving 75 or so in the left lane on the interstate;
someone wants to go faster. Fine; I switch lanes as soon as it is safe to
do so, let them pass, and move back. 

'sides, that way they get caught for speeding, not me :-)

>I drive as fast as anyone, and I frequently let people, even suicidal 
>ones, pass me. I want them in front of me where I can keep an eye on them.

I want them WAY out in front so they can't do anything to me. The closer
they are, the worse it is IMHO. 

Steve
-- 
Steven Miale  <http://www.cs.indiana.edu/hyplan/smiale.html>

---

From: [email-masked] (Robert T. Weverka)
Date: 16 Jun 95 11:47:29 GMT

People who pass too slowly.  They get into the fast lane and creep
past the right lane cars.

And worse, they get on rec.autos.driving and dare suggest that
they have every right to do this.
They cannot estimate speed differentials.  

At a 5 mph speed differential, it should take you all of two seconds
to pass the slower car.  These idiots take much longer.

---

From: [email-masked] (David Glenn)
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 23:30:57 GMT

>and you are tailgated what are you to do.  If you speed up any more you are 

My point was, in case I didn't express it, that someone blasting on
their brakes as I come up from behind (or am following closely to
pass), does NOT make me want to quite 'tailgating'. It is fine if you
slow down in a passing zone such that I may do so, but flashing brake
lights, slowing down, etc. don't make me any happier about being
behind you.

My usual experience in these situations is that I am ready to pass
someone but there is oncoming traffic, so the individual in front, in
some amazing cerebral computation, figures he will slow down to let me
pass. However, the individual always slows down in no-passing zones (I
do NOT pass in these) and speeds back up in passing zones. I have
witnessed this behavior in my commute home for the past 8 years along
one specific road (probably 40 or more drivers). Go figure.

---

From: [email-masked] (Eric M Lam)
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 1995 12:15:04 GMT

In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (J. Hale ) writes:
>From: [email-masked] (J. Hale )
>Subject: Re: Driving Pet peeves
>Date: 13 Jun 1995 19:37:02 GMT

>What's wrong with driving with your lights on?  Studies show that even
>on damn fine days cars are up to 10 times more visible with headlights
>on.

If you want to use your lowbeams, fine; but I'm talking about people (kids) 
who uses those expensive FUCKING bright PIAA foglights in broad daylight. 
Blinding every single car passing by ... geeeezzz ...
And there are people who thinks they're doing other people a favour by using 
high beams at unecessary conditions, e.g. on a highway while FOLLOWING 
someone else. Wonder how that person in fron to him feels. THis happened to 
me when I drive back here on Sunday. I was driving at 140 or something and 
this guy came flying out form the middle lane with his highbeams on. (It was 
8pm and one can stillsee quite clearly with any lights). No he does not want 
to pass me; he was going at 110 or something ... oh well ...

>>14. Grandpa in Crown Vics or Caprice or shit cars of that kind and/or
>people 
>>who don't give a damned about people driving around them, e.g. my
>mama!

>Have to agree here, last Friday a 72 yr. old in his Buick boat tried to
>make a left turn in front of me just as I entered the
>intersection....So I plowed him. =)  Shittier than that is that he
>tried to say that I was coming through there "like a bat out of hell."
>(I was doing 5 UNDER the speed limit).  Oh well, his insurance company
>is still paying for it.

You never know what they're gonna do =(
    -----------------------------------------------------
    |  Eric M Lam                    |  94 Altima SE    |
    |  University of Waterloo        |  93 Camry LE     |
    |  Department of Systems Design  |  93 Camry V6 LE  |
    |  (519) 888-9578                |  80 Lancer SL    |
    -----------------------------------------------------

---

From: Dai F Toyama <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 1995 11:07:44 -0700

Michael:

I agree with you on every point you've made about 'driving pet peeves'
but this one below:

On Wed, 14 Jun 1995 [email-masked] wrote:

> 5) People who leave WAY too much space in front of them at lights, 
>    eating up space so that the left turn lane becomes blocked, forc-
>    ing people turning left to wait another cycle.
> 

I don't know how much is 'way too much' for you, but I think it's 
usually a good practice to leave enough space between you and the car
in front.  There's always the danger of someone ramming into you from
behind, pushing your car forward...

Cheers!

      |~~~~~~~~\    *----------------------------------------------------*
 |)=+||       _/|   | Dai F Toyama          << [email-masked] >>     |
 |==+||__-~~~~_/    | Computer Science  << Seattle Pacific University >> |
 +-\\||__-~~~~ ||   | Driving Maniac      << '92 Acura Integra GS-R >>   |
 | |\ ||            *----------------------------------------------------*
                               \ ASCII piano by Keith Wright /
                                *---------------------------*

---

From: Michael Johnson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 13:07:51 EDT

>behind, pushing your car forward...

Way too much for me would be more than is necessary to guard against such
an event. I see people who leave two or more car lengths at lights. When
traffic is heavy, chances are that 1/2 car length is adequate. Especially
once there are three-four vehicles behind you.

Michael Johnson, Relay Technology, Inc.
[email-masked], [email-masked]
"I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose Free Will." -- Neil Peart

---

From: [email-masked] (Joshua Kramer (Jish))
Date: 17 Jun 1995 00:39:02 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Trevor Battle -- WinTrumpet) says:

>There is nothing wrong with talking on the phone as long as you are alert and 
>there's little traffic around.   Yes I use a cell phone fequently in 

You know what pisses me off?  PEOPLE WHO CAN'T DRIVE WITH CELL PHONES!
My car is a stickshift, and I'm still able to talk on the phone and
shift without driving like a maniac.  It's fun at times, juggling the
phone and shifter, but then priorities come into play: if I have to
do something evasive, or get on the freeway, I tell whoever I'm talking
to to hold on and then I DROP THE PHONE!  People who can't drop the phone
are those we have to worry about.

But then again, I drive better talking on the phone than some people
who don't even have phones, so I don't know what to say... :-)

--Josh

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 19 Jun 1995 14:44:00 GMT

I would usually tell the person on the other end "Hold on, I'm about to 
rear end a truck!" Sometimes I'd yell "AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH!".  Of course I 
was exagerating for levity. 

I pay attention to my driving, only trying to communicate whatever urgent 
message needs to be conveyed (I'm late for my appointment, I'm stuck in 
traffic). Anything more involved and I just can't give the conversation 
my full attention. I think that's the way it should be.

----------
Steph
----------

Joshua Kramer (Jish) ([email-masked]) wrote:
: In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Trevor Battle -- WinTrumpet) says:

: >There is nothing wrong with talking on the phone as long as you are alert and 
: >there's little traffic around.   Yes I use a cell phone fequently in 

: You know what pisses me off?  PEOPLE WHO CAN'T DRIVE WITH CELL PHONES!
: My car is a stickshift, and I'm still able to talk on the phone and
: shift without driving like a maniac.  It's fun at times, juggling the
: phone and shifter, but then priorities come into play: if I have to
: do something evasive, or get on the freeway, I tell whoever I'm talking
: to to hold on and then I DROP THE PHONE!  People who can't drop the phone
: are those we have to worry about.

: But then again, I drive better talking on the phone than some people
: who don't even have phones, so I don't know what to say... :-)

: --Josh

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steph Greenberg                       
[email-masked]           "Every Friday is a prelude to Monday." 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked] (Tigress)
Date: 14 Jun 1995 01:58:31 -0400

David Glenn ([email-masked]) wrote:

: This is about the most insane, stupid behavior I can think of. Oh my,
: a tailgater, I know, I'll slow down, that'll teach him. If the average
: someone is tailgating (or driving remotely close to you) it should
: send a signal to your hopefully driving aware brain. I am blocking the
: road in some way, what can I do to alleviate this situation (I would
: exclude crass tailgating just to be tailgating types here). What are
: you about 78 years old?

: This rates right up there with normal ice driving behavior in the
: midwest (bridges, sleet covered roads, etc.). People will fly along at
: 55-60 and brake as the cross each ice covered bridge. These two
: situations are the absolute worse times to hit the brakes.

I agree stopping suddenly for a tailgater is stupid, but I slow down for
them mainly for three reasons:
1. Tailgaters piss me off. There are better ways of telling me to go
faster. If they are going to piss me off, I will piss them off right back.
2. When some one is tailgating me, I usually find going faster doesn't
make them stop, and if I have to stop suddenly, I would rather it be
slowly for them so that they have more time to stop.
3. Tailgaters usually get the point when you slow down
4. If they really piss me off, I will go snail speed, and if they never
get the point, I accelerate away from them to show them that I was going
slow on purpose, and beat their asses most of the time too.
5. Most of the times, I am only tailgated when I am behind some slow
person and I can't do anything about it (that really pisses me off), so
how am I supposed to speed up anyways?
6. Last but definitely not least, tailgaters at night make me wonder if they
are cops, which does not help them get me to go faster. I usually go
slower 'cause I am freaking out.

People who get a constant distance behind me that is not tailgating, and
never changes either though (they don't get farther, they don't get
closer), I will usually get the point and speed up (unless I am driving my
parents car, which handles like shit on curvy roads so that I am not
comfortable going to fast, but at least I go 45, which is about the
average on that road). I slow down or do nothing for tailgaters though.

Tigress

-- 
      |\      _,,,---,,_		Tigress
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_ 		[email-masked]
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)                cat drawn by: Felix Lee

---

From: Michael Johnson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 12:26:10 EDT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Tigress)
>faster. If they are going to piss me off, I will piss them off right back.

Very mature.

>slowly for them so that they have more time to stop.

By this do you mean that you would be making a panic stop?
This sounds good, but actually it doesn't work that way. Think about it.
No matter how fast you are going, the tailgater is the same distance
from your back end. If you slow from speed S to speed S-M where M is a
constant (say, 10 MPH) it will take them just as long to slow to your
new speed no matter how fast you are going relative to the pavement.
What matters is the relative velocity of your two vehicles.

>3. Tailgaters usually get the point when you slow down

Maybe. Often not.

>slow on purpose, and beat their asses most of the time too.

See (1) above.

>how am I supposed to speed up anyways?

Quite true.

>slower 'cause I am freaking out.

Yep.

There is, however, a good reason to slow down when you are being tailgated,
at least if there is someone in front of you. Slowing give you more room in
front so that you are less likely to have to panic stop, even if the person
in front of you does. That makes it less likely that you will be rear-ended
by the tailgater, since you can apply the brakes more gently.

---

From: [email-masked] (Alain Southiere)
Date: 20 Jun 1995 15:47:30 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] says...
>>faster. If they are going to piss me off, I will piss them off right back.

   Do you have a better suggestion to get rid of tailgaters ?

>What matters is the relative velocity of your two vehicles.

   This is not a physic course but it's the real world ! First some
cars brake much better than others by design. Second, I've noticed
that often, tailgaters have cars that seem to be poorly maintained,
so I expect their braking distance to be even longer. Third, I
drive an automatic and often use my left foot for the brake, giving
a faster reaction time... I might still have one foot on the gas when
I begin to brake !! So, in emergency situations, I don't want
a f*cking tailgater in my *ss because I'm almost sure he/she'll
rear-end me.

>>3. Tailgaters usually get the point when you slow down

   Maybe we would need some James Bond gadget car with some device
to repulse tailgaters ? Splash some old oil in their winshield
or something :-) :-)

>>slow on purpose, and beat their asses most of the time too.

   Myself, I'll try to safely get behind the tailgater and let him/her
annoy someone else. 

-- 
Alain Southiere              | My employers couldn't care less about what
[email-masked] (work) | I write here. Even if they did, they'd
[email-masked] (home)       | probably wouldn't share my views.

---

From: Scott Kirkham <[email-masked]>
Date: 15 Jun 1995 12:51:37 GMT

[email-masked] (David Glenn) wrote:
>[email-masked] (Ryan Taylor) wrote:
>
>>That's what I always used when I had a pickup. I'd see the bottom of the 
>>headlights dip below my tailgate, and my foot would ease up on the 
>>accelerator. Once the headlights submerge beyond the tailgate, foot comes 
>>off the accelerator. If my tailgate starts eatin up the hood in the 
>>rearview mirror, the brakes come on.
>

No disrespect meant from this 26-year-old driver of a full size, but
my question is, do you drive a truck? If not, you wouldn't understand.
A tailgater behind a truck is a person asking for a sheet metal lunch.
Truck bumpers and Miatas don't get along too well. I do this to protect
the tailgating moron behind me as well as my truck. If I can't see their
headlights, they are way too damn close. When I am doing 55 in light to
medium traffic, and some retard in a Z28, whom I just passed about 1/2
a mile back, comes blowing up on my bumper, he's lucky I don't get out
and ask him (yes, him) if he wants to drive my truck for me, as he seems
to want to get in the bed. Little cars have a tendency to get lost in
the blind spot of a vehicle that is 4 times larger than they are. The
tailgate of a truck is just such a large blind spot, especially one as
high up as mine.
 Morons tailgating, etc, need a wake up call. A light touch of the 
brakes, just enough to light up the Christmas tree, is perfect for 
putting the fool that is creeping up back where the both of you are
 safe.

>This rates right up there with normal ice driving behavior in the
>midwest (bridges, sleet covered roads, etc.). People will fly along at
>55-60 and brake as the cross each ice covered bridge. These two
>situations are the absolute worse times to hit the brakes.
>
You mean that's not how it's supposed to be done ;).

Scott Kirkham
'95 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4

---

From: [email-masked] (John P. Curcio)
Date: 20 Jun 1995 16:20:50 -0400

In article <[email-masked]>,
John Halbrook <[email-masked]> wrote:

>Guess what...it won't work!In fact it will increase the abuse as people
>become aware of the delay.What will work is enforcement by your local
>police.Specifically the enforcement of *AMBER* lights.Phone your local
>police and complain.

Ah, but once again, here is where we have a problem-- different laws
in different places...

In New York, it is entirely legal to enter an intersection while a
light is yellow.  The law states that the light is a signal to the
driver that the red is impending.  It does not even state what happens
if the light should turn red while you are in the intersection.

If you want a passage from the Vehicle and Traffic Law, I'll try to
get it...

-JPC

-- 
 -<=>- Just say NO! to Budmilloors...   Support your local MICROBREWERY -<=>-
John P. Curcio  [email-masked]  Philips Labs  Briarcliff Manor, NY
   "If nothing beats a Bud, given the choice, I'd take the nothing..."
   "No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'"  -BH

---

From: Indian Outlaw <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 15:07:53 -0500

> Boy, do I hate this one. I see it happen so often that I'm surprised
> I haven't seen any accidents occur as a result.
> 
> Oh, and I usually stop at a yellow light. Considering all the people that
> I see who try to beat the light, I believe that I'm one of a few who do this.

I only "run" yellows if I know stopping will be a lot tougher for the 
brakes than normal-I'd hate to stop in the intersection :)  I don't like 
sudden stops/starts, call me a fluid driver.  
I therefore usually stop for the yellow.  Just be careful that Mr. 
Leadfoot behind you isn't assuming you're running the yellow too.  I have 
seen that happen before.  

Brent Vaughan

---

From: Indian Outlaw <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 1995 15:11:40 -0500

On 15 Jun 1995, Michael Glicksman wrote:

> My personal plan(shall I ever become Governor) is to have a delay when a
> light changes, to clear out the intersection. Instead of having a light
> change from red to green as soon as the other light changes from yellow
> to red, I would have both lights stay red for a second or two before one
> of them changes to green.

In my town, all the lights work like that.  Some stay red toooo long, 
longer than 2 seconds.  

Brent Vaughan

---

From: Dai F Toyama <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 1995 10:28:37 -0700

On 15 Jun 1995, Michael Glicksman wrote:

> Oh, and I usually stop at a yellow light. Considering all the people
> that I see who try to beat the light, I believe that I'm one of a few 
> who do this.
>

I generally agree that it's a good practice to stop at a yellow signal.
OTOH, there are a few occasions on which it could be dangerous (IMO).
For instance, you are cruising at 40-50 MPH, with a car or two closely
following you, when the light in front of you turns yellow.  Under such
circumstances, I'd normally step on the gas and go through the inter-
section.

Some people slam on their brakes as soon as that happens, but that could 
cause the car behind you to rear-end theirs.  The worst action is to 
accelerate first, then think twice and suddenly stomp on the brakes.

---

From: "Nathan J. Nagel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 1995 10:48:26 -0400

Excerpts from netnews.rec.autos.driving: 15-Jun-95 Re: Driving Pet
peeves by Henri R Helanto@vipunen. 
> [email-masked] writes:
>  
> <re: tailgaters..>
>  
> >One defense: (IF they have room to pass on the right).. Carry a bag with an 

    Just a point....  NOBODY should ever pass you on the right, unless
you're about to make a left turn or get off on an off-ramp on the left
side of the freeway....

later,

Nate

> >assortment of gravel, from small pebbles to 1/2" rocks..  Just open your
> >sunroof and start pitching them up in the air, starting with the
small ones..
>  
> >Eggs work too, but they don't last long in the summer :-)
>  
>         Eggs just get better with time in the summer...
>         A friend of mine wired a switch to his backup lights, you can
>         imagine how people react when your backup lights light when
>         they're ten feet from your rear bumber ;-----)
>  
> -Henri

---

From: [email-masked] (Chris T. Papademetrious)
Date: 16 Jun 1995 09:40:24 -0400

Let's see, a couple of others...
 
 People who, when there's a straight-only and a turn-only lane, will go to
the end of the turn lane, then cut into a line of cars.  Or similar
situations, like people that go to the *end* of an exit ramp with a long
line of cars, then proceed to hold up highway traffic in the rightmost
lane until someone lets them in...
 
 The Parking Lot Drifters, those people who do 45mph diagonally through
parking lots without regard to safety or lane markings...

-- 
 | Chrispy                       | Dodge Omni GLH Turbo | Amiga Forever!  |
 | School: Drexel University     | 190hp, 2350lbs, 2.2L | (Commo-who?)    |
 | Workplace: Unisys Corporation | 0-60 in 6.2 s, cheap |_________________|
 |  (CMOS Processor Designer)    | to insure, looks like hell :)          |

---

From: [email-masked] (Carl Alex Friis Nielsen)
Date: 16 Jun 1995 12:43:42 -0400

And what about trucks pushing you of the higway, by changing lane into the
spot you are occupying - This has happened to me twice, and the first
time was only a week after I got my drivers license - fortunatly there was a
shoulder, I could escape onto.

Another one are people who speed up when you try to pass them.

I guess most problems in traffic are caused by

1. people who can't accept, that when driving you will get to your
destination in the most comfortable and fast way, if all the drivers
cooperate in keeping traffic flowing, instead of viewing it as a contest.
(weawers, tailgaters, passing-refusers etc.)

2. people who can't accept that buyond a certain point they are comitted
to going in a certain direction.
(people in the left lane suddenly realizing, that they have to exit 100
feet down the higway - and do it making unsafe lane changes all the way
instead of taking the next exit and doubling back, and people who are
surprised when the exit-only lane they have been driving in for the last 2
miles exits).

3. that many car drivers simply don't see smaller vehicles (a psycological
thing - the brain tends to ignore things, that aren't dangerous)
I bet most accidents involving bicycles and motorcycles are caused by this
effect. This is especially a problem in areas (Like her in Atlanta), where
there are very few bicycles in traffic to begin with, so drivers aren't
used to have to look out for them.

4. bad road design - at the shoulder of many roads, there is a drop of up to
a foot, forcing bikers to ride further away from it, than otherwise necesary.
Then there is an exit of I75, just north of the intersection with I285, where
it (the exit) merges wit an exit from I285, thus forcing traffic exiting
the two highways to cross - this often causes a huge traffic congestion.
I also once drove of an highway exit near Ossining(NY) - situation:
I was driwing at about 55 mph, the lane exits, the off-ramp curved sharply
immediatly after exiting the highway, no warning signs telling me of any
safe speed on the exit (would probably have been 25 mph or so), no lights,
no reflectors on the curve so it could bee seen from afar - result:
I learned what oversteering was, while I barely kept my Cougar on the road.
And all those right turn lanes allowing you to avoid going through the
intersection, are an invitation for an accident involving bicycles, since
they are then forced to cross in front of motor traffic.

5. DUI

Anybody who disagrees ?

-- 
-Carl Alex Friis Nielsen ([email-masked])
Love me - Take me as I think I am.

---

From: [email-masked] (Alain Southiere)
Date: 21 Jun 1995 14:06:10 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] says...
>
>Alain Southiere ([email-masked]) wrote:
>: In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] says
>...
>: >
>: >In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] (Tigress)
>: >says:
>: >>
>: >>I agree stopping suddenly for a tailgater is stupid, but I slow down for
>: >>them mainly for three reasons:
>: >>1. Tailgaters piss me off. There are better ways of telling me to go
>: >>faster. If they are going to piss me off, I will piss them off right back.
>: >
>: >Very mature.
>
>:    Do you have a better suggestion to get rid of tailgaters ?
>
>Yes. MOVE OVER AND LET THEM PASS. They're going to go faster than you anyway.
>What's the problem? I can't understand why you guys can't figure this out 
>for yourself. 

   No need for moronic shouting like that... We're not talking about someone
who wants to pass, but about TAILGATERS, you know, the kind of morons who
stick at less than 3 feet behind your read bumper, whatever you do ? The
kind that stay in you *ss wether you speed 20 mph over the limit or you
slow down 20 mph under the limit. I've even had some follow me between
lane changes !

   Moreover, I never ride in the left lane except to pass, the tailgaters
I'm talking about are people who don't want to pass me, they're just
morons. The left lane is open if they would want to pass, but they don't !
According to you, I should go onto the shoulder ? Stupid !

   The only way I've found to get rid of these morons is to get in the
left (passing lane) without signaling when there's noone on the lane
and then slam the brakes and return to the right lane. When I have to
do stunts like that to get rid of a tailgater, you can see (I hope
you can, or you're more stupid than you above statement imply) that
those tailgaters don't want to pass, they just want to tailgate !

>:    This is not a physic course but it's the real world ! First some
>: cars brake much better than others by design. Second, I've noticed
>: that often, tailgaters have cars that seem to be poorly maintained,
>: so I expect their braking distance to be even longer. Third, I
>: drive an automatic and often use my left foot for the brake, giving
>: a faster reaction time... I might still have one foot on the gas when
>: I begin to brake !! So, in emergency situations, I don't want
>: a f*cking tailgater in my *ss because I'm almost sure he/she'll
>: rear-end me.
>
>Better to have them in front of you than behind you.

   Exactly the point.

>: >>3. Tailgaters usually get the point when you slow down
>: >Maybe. Often not.
>
>And how do they communicate to you to GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY!      

   No it's not, read above paragraphs and get a clue.

>:    Myself, I'll try to safely get behind the tailgater and let him/her
>: annoy someone else. 
>
>Why didn't you just say this in the first place? It is the only safe 
>solution. Playing games on the road is a sure sign that someone shouldn't 
>have gotten their license in the first place.

   Who talked about playing games ? Don't you read a post before
replying ?

---

From: Dai F Toyama <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 10:51:37 -0700

On Wed, 21 Jun 1995, Andreas Michaelides wrote:
 
> [email-masked] (John P. Curcio) wrote:
> 
> >In article <[email-masked]>, Michael Glicksman <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >>In article <[email-masked]>,
> 
> >Don't most traffic lights do that?  Most of the ones I've seen here in
> >the Northeast, as well as those in the Midwest, seem to have a delay
> >built in.
> 
> I don't know about the states, but all the lights in New Zealand have
> two reds for a second.
> 

Same here in the Pacific Northwest.  Most signals stay red for a second
after the crossing ones turn red.

I know of one exceptioin near the Seattle Centre.  The lights on the main
road turn green at exactly the same as those on the crossing road turn
red.  You don't want to run the yellow; a lot of people do signal-racing
there!

Cheers!

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 21 Jun 1995 23:03:38 GMT

Alain Southiere ([email-masked]) wrote:
: In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] says...
: >
: >Yes. MOVE OVER AND LET THEM PASS. They're going to go faster than you anyway.
: >What's the problem? I can't understand why you guys can't figure this out 
: >for yourself. 

:    No need for moronic shouting like that... We're not talking about someone
: who wants to pass, but about TAILGATERS, you know, the kind of morons who
: stick at less than 3 feet behind your read bumper, whatever you do ? The
: kind that stay in you *ss wether you speed 20 mph over the limit or you
: slow down 20 mph under the limit. I've even had some follow me between
: lane changes !

I let them pass the moment they appear on my rear, unless there's no 
shoulder, no other lanes, or nothing I can do. I don't play games, I 
don't speed up, I have no reason to hold my position. 

:    Moreover, I never ride in the left lane except to pass, the tailgaters
: I'm talking about are people who don't want to pass me, they're just
: morons. The left lane is open if they would want to pass, but they don't !
: According to you, I should go onto the shoulder ? Stupid !

I guess I'm fortunate that I've never encountered one of these. 

:    The only way I've found to get rid of these morons is to get in the
: left (passing lane) without signaling when there's noone on the lane
: and then slam the brakes and return to the right lane. When I have to
: do stunts like that to get rid of a tailgater, you can see (I hope
: you can, or you're more stupid than you above statement imply) that
: those tailgaters don't want to pass, they just want to tailgate !

Weird! Either this is rare or a regional thing. Must make you wish you 
had a gun in your car.

: >solution. Playing games on the road is a sure sign that someone shouldn't 
: >have gotten their license in the first place.

:    Who talked about playing games ? Don't you read a post before
: replying ? 

No offense meant. I've never encountered a tailgater that didn't just 
want to go faster than me. I'm pretty responsive to this since I keep an 
eye on the rearview alot.

---

From: Michael Johnson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 15:12:16 EDT

In article <[email-masked]>, I said:
>
>   course, it is not going to be. The rate of velocity change is actually a
>   parabolic curve, so that the velocity curve is a third-order curve and
>   the actual distance traveled is a fourth-order curve.

Actually, upon reflection, the rate of velocity change (e.g. deceleration)
is a constant (A=F/M) so the velocity curve is a second-order curve and the
distance curve is a third-order curve.

There will be a little bit of deviation from constant deceleration due to
rolling resistance and wind resistance, but that only comes into play at
high speeds and favors the trailing car anyway.

Further on I wrote:

>3. I assumed that car 1 stops braking when it has changed speed by 10 mph.
>   Usually sudden braking in highway situations will be like this. However,
>   it is possible that someone might be making a panic stop, in which case
>   their velocity continues to drop, at an increasing rate, while the car
>   behind is losing velocity, but always at a lesser rate.

Actually, once car 2 gets on the brakes, the two cars will once again have a
constant (but non-zero) relative velocity.

>   In this case, it DOES make a difference how fast you are going, because
>   the time it takes to slow from 90 mph to 0 mph is greater than the time it
>   takes to slow from 50 mph to 0 mph, during all of which time car 2 is
>   closing on car 1 at an INCREASING rate, up until the time that car 1 comes
>   to a stop, at which point car 2 is closing at a DECREASING rate.

The closure rate is actually constant, until car 1 comes to a stop, then the
closure rate starts dropping.

The rest of what I wrote still holds true. The only consequence of my
error (i.e. assuming that deceleration was parabolic) is that the necessary
following distance to avoid a collision decreases.

The time to go from speed to zero increases linearly with speed, since
the rate of velocity change is linear with respect to time. So moving at
90 mph means it takes twice as long to stop as it does from 45 mph. Assuming
a velocity drop of 10 mph before car 2 gets on the brakes, that means that
car 2 is closing on car 1 at 10 mph for the entire time they are both slowing
down. So for a speed of 90 mph, car 2 should be twice as far back from car 1
as for 45 mph in order to avoid a collision. This is why the 2-second
following rule works.

Note that this does not change the case where both cars decelerate by an
equal amount (e.g. 10 mph) from a given speed (e.g. 90 mph or 50 mph). The
only reason why following distances need to be longer for 90 mph than for
45 mph is that the total time before car 2 comes to rest relative to car 1
differs in panic stops from those two speeds.

Again, if car 2 has better brakes than car 1, then the safe following
distance decreases by some factor.

Pardon my errata, it's been a number of years since I did a physics lab.

---

From: Dai F Toyama <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 10:51:37 -0700

Cheers!

---

From: [email-masked] (Kazuto Okayasu)
Date: 21 Jun 1995 22:15:06 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
>If you want a passage from the Vehicle and Traffic Law, I'll try to

Hmm...  I don't see how this would be different in different places.  
According to the textbooks I have on traffic/signaling, its perfectly
legal to enter an intersection on yellow.  It can even turn red while
you're in it, and its still OK.  I'm trying to remember exactly where this
is from, but I don't recall at this moment.
If its done the way its _supposed_ to, the yellow and red-in-all-directions
(called an All-Red) is calculated together, and the All-Red is also
calculated on its own, and is subtracted to get the yellow.  This time
is calculated such that its long enough for a car entering the
"point-of-no-return" can make it across the street before the other side
turns green.  Some of the parameters are pretty conservative, so its pretty
safe.  Its true, though, that some jurisdictions don't have an All-Red
interval, and just extend the yellow (to a certain extent).
I have the equations and I'll post them if there's enough interest.
  BTW, these things are available in most any traffic engineering text. 

--
School of Civil Engineering       **Kazuto Okayasu**      Microcomputer Support
University of California, Irvine                                 AdCom Services
D.G.I.F. #3052                                               <[email-masked]>
["I love it when a plan comes together"-Col. John "Hannibal" Smith; The A-Team]

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 20 Jun 1995 18:47:25 GMT

Chung Lu ([email-masked]) wrote:
: "Nathan J. Nagel" <[email-masked]> wrote:
: > 
: >     Just a point....  NOBODY should ever pass you on the right, unless
: > you're about to make a left turn or get off on an off-ramp on the left
: > side of the freeway....

: 	What about the Camero that STOPped from 75 mph on the far left lane
: only because he missed the left exit?

: 	I believe you will find me guilty passing the whole traffic on the
: far right lane. I do that when that's the only open space to get through
: those good ole citizens playing road block for the smoky.

I agree with Chung. NOBODY should ever be in the left lane unless they 
are passing. Since that is never true in the US (anywhere from my driving 
experience), neither is the passing on the right rule, unless it IS 
illegal AND enforced. In the US, people are equally likely to cut in 
front of you without looking if you are driving on the left or right. 

NOBODY who lives in a city would ever suggest NOT passing on the right at 
one time or another, though it is not prefered.

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 20 Jun 1995 18:35:29 GMT

: In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] says...

: -- 
: Alain Southiere              | My employers couldn't care less about what
: [email-masked] (work) | I write here. Even if they did, they'd
: [email-masked] (home)       | probably wouldn't share my views.
:

---

From: [email-masked] (Alain Southiere)
Date: 23 Jun 1995 14:30:07 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] says...
>don't speed up, I have no reason to hold my position. 

   How can we make you comprehend ??? Many tailgater DON'T WANT TO PASS !
Tailgating is the way they drive. Can't you understand that when you have
to pull the stunts I've described below, the tailgater in question doesn't
want to pass !!!

>I guess I'm fortunate that I've never encountered one of these. 

   Yeah ! I whish I'd never encounter them too... Makes driving too
stressfull.

>Weird! Either this is rare or a regional thing. Must make you wish you 

   Well, I'm in province of Quebec (in Canada) and drivers here are often
real morons. When I read someone complaining about bad drivers in the USA,
it makes me laugh ! They should come here a few days. For instance, I've
recently went on vacation for about 10 days. We went in Ohio, Pennsylvania
and New-Yor state. Driving over there was a real plasure. As soon as we
passed the border, we thought we entered hell, especially as we go nearer
to Montreal (principal city, about 3M people, including suburbs). In fact,
the only place I've seen that's worse than Quebec is New-York city. Even
in Boston, which about about the same size as Montreal, people are much
more courteous and les dangerous drivers.

>eye on the rearview alot.

   I do too ! People who have rode with me usually say that I'm a good
driver, expect for the fact that I drive a little too fast (always a
few MPH over the limit, that scare some people :-).

---

From: Michael Johnson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 1995 11:32:22 EDT

Alain still doesn't get it. He whined to me privately about how "that's
physics, I'm talking about the real world" and went on about a bunch of
irrelevancies, such as:

- Different cars have different braking abilities (for lots of reasons)
- Different drivers have different reaction times

Never mind that physics is the most accurate way we have of modeling the
real world, neither of those points changes the fact that:

For a given pair of cars and drivers (i.e. you and that moron on your butt),
you speeding up or slowing down is not going to reduce the chances of a
collision, if the tailgater sticks to you. Note that we're talking about a
specific tailgater here. If a different tailgater gets on you, the numbers
change, but the basic principle does not. Here's why.

- The tailgater pretty much has a consistent reaction time, on the order of
  less than a second generally. Let's say it's 0.5 sec, a convenient number
  for doing the math. It might be more or less, it doesn't really matter.

- If you hit the brakes, the tailgater will always have the same velocity
  relative to your vehicle when THEY START BRAKING, because you will be
  decelerating at a constant rate (say 32 ft/sec/sec) for the period of that
  reaction time. So let's say that by the time they get on the brakes, there
  is a relative velocity of 16 ft/sec between the two vehicles. This will be
  true whether you were going 90mph before you hit the brakes or 50 mph. You
  are not going to come to a stop before the tailgater can get on the brakes,
  if you are traveling at highway speeds.

- If the tailgater is really close, they are going to hit you before they even
  have a chance to get on the brakes. Again, your initial velocity does not
  change this. This might even be the most likely outcome, if they're three
  feet off your bumper.

- If the tailgater doesn't hit you before they get on the brakes, then for a
  given pair of cars both braking hard, there is going to be a fixed amount of
  time (given a fixed initial following distance) before the trailing car will
  either match velocity with the leading car or hit it. The initial velocity
  does not matter. What matters is the relative velocity of the two cars, and
  if they brake at different rates, the relative deceleration of the two cars.
  The closer the tailgater is, the smaller this time slice will be.

If you are moving really slowly, you might manage to stop before this time
elapses. Alternatively, you might take your foot off the brake and resume a
constant speed. This is probably the best thing (other than hitting the gas)
that you could do to avoid a collision at this point, because it gives the
trailing car a better chance to match your speed before it hits you.

Please note that I'm not saying that slowing down is a bad idea. There are
reasons why it is a good idea. However, the idea that slowing down is going
to reduce the chance of a collision, if you have to suddenly brake hard, is
a fallacy. The only way this would be true is if you slowed down so much that
the tailgater was perforce maintaining a safe following distance. Since they
are probably going to come even closer to you as you slow down, you'd probably
have to come almost to a dead stop. And because they are coming closer to
you, you are actually INCREASING the chance that they will hit you if you
have to brake hard.

---

From: Jeff Witzer <[email-masked]>
Date: 23 Jun 1995 17:45:45 GMT

Michael Johnson <[email-masked]> wrote:
> collision,

[snip]
 
> "I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose Free Will." -- Neil Peart

Remember, Michael, that you and I drive RX-7s and, until the new 911 Turbo
came out, no-one on the road can outbrake us.  We must use motorcycle
mentality to survive... namely, if they're on your butt and you don't feel
like (or traffic keeps you from) blowing away from them, slow down enough
to prompt the ass-sucker to pass.

As a general question:

Why do (WARNING: stereotype to follow) testosterone-enhanced, 
grey-matter-deprived, backwards-baseball-cap-wearing 18 year old
boys in lowered 1987 Honda Accords with  hyper-offset tiny wheels
(175/20R12 sticking 8 inches past the fenders) feel the NEED to challenge
generally law abiding (speed limits aside) drivers just because we're
driving hi-tech, hi-capability cars?  And why do they seem to think
that the closer they are to your ass, the more they've "proven" that
their car is as good or better than yours?  And if you do decide to 
put an end to their little game by blasting away from them, why do
they seem to think they're so victorious when they catch up to you 3 
miles and 5 minutes later after you've resumed an appropriate speed?

Jeff Witzer (using a friend's account)
1993 Mazda RX-7 R1 Competition Yellow Mica / Pettit Turn Key Terror

---

From: [email-masked] (Steph Greenberg)
Date: 24 Jun 1995 18:29:37 GMT

:    Well, I'm in province of Quebec (in Canada) and drivers here are often
: real morons. When I read someone complaining about bad drivers in the USA,
: it makes me laugh ! They should come here a few days. For instance, I've
: recently went on vacation for about 10 days. We went in Ohio, Pennsylvania
: and New-Yor state. Driving over there was a real plasure. As soon as we
: passed the border, we thought we entered hell, especially as we go nearer
: to Montreal (principal city, about 3M people, including suburbs). In fact,
: the only place I've seen that's worse than Quebec is New-York city. Even
: in Boston, which about about the same size as Montreal, people are much
: more courteous and les dangerous drivers.

Nothing is more frustrating than trying to drive in NY City. My uncle was 
a cab driver there most of his life (one of the few English speaking 
ones) and he died of a heart attack at 60. I'm surprised he made it that far.

I think people in LA are: afraid of Lawsuits that could deprive them of 
everything no matter how much insurance they have (California has a 
slight lawyer population control problem--they have no known natural 
enemies), and there is a genuine possibility that the guy being tailgated 
will shoot you (admittedly not much of one, but it has happened).

: >No offense meant. I've never encountered a tailgater that didn't just 
: >want to go faster than me. I'm pretty responsive to this since I keep an 
: >eye on the rearview alot.

:    I do too ! People who have rode with me usually say that I'm a good
: driver, expect for the fact that I drive a little too fast (always a
: few MPH over the limit, that scare some people :-).

Thanks for the warning about Montreal driving. I might have to go there 
sometime (one of the major Computer Graphic animation software companies 
are there). Other than the tailgating problem, it sounds like a nice place.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steph Greenberg              "No one lies in their deathbed wishing          
[email-masked]            that they'd spent more time at work."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------