How Much Road Capacity is Wasted Due to Poor Driving?

>
> Unfortunately for that suggestion, most drivers are better able to
> drive a car than any computer. In the "Grand Challenge 2004", a DARPA
> initiative to develop an unmanned ground vehicle, no team was able to
> pass the challenge. And that's _without_ traffic. It's a
> surprisingly difficult problem.

It could be a LOT easier if it didn't have to conform to DARPA rules. For
example, the DARPA vehicles have to have no remote link to anything outside
the vehicle, EXCEPT the emergency kill switch (or whatever they call it)
that allows the vehicle to be shut down if required for safety reasons. Any
wonder then that no vehicle has passed DARPA yet? You basically have to
have a supercomputer on board to process all the information being fed to
the vehicle from CCTV, radar or whatever else is being used to "guide" it.
That's because the car ITSELF has to make all decisions about
acceleration/braking/steering with nothing at all outside the car to guide
it. (YIKES!)

But a self-driving car could be really EASY to make, in comparison, with
less electronic gadgetry than that which powers most modern calculators.
The real hurdle is building the infrastructure needed to support
self-driving vehicles. Like retro-fitting all roadside signs (even the mile
markers) with RFID or something that the car can sense. Then installing
sensors in the roads and bridges to allow automated steering (something to
aim at, or steer AWAY from). ETC. It will be a major headache. But the
car itself, will be really rather simple, as long as it doesn't have to
conform to DARPA. -Dave

Jim Yanik wrote:
>
> Scott en Aztlán > wrote:
>
> > Anyone want to take a guess as to how much of our existing road
> > capacity is wasted by LLBs, poor mergers, Sloths, rubberneckers,
> > people who don't speed up when the traffic ahead of them does, etc.
> > etc.?
> >
> > I'd say the waste is at least 40%, i.e. that our roads never achieve
> > more than 60% of their true capacity due to incompetent drivers.
> >
> > What's your guess?
>
> Your estimate sounds about right to me.
>
> However,
> I do not believe there is any way of fixing that,though,even with better
> driver training.There will always be the clueless,slothful,elderly,people
> on cellphones,eating,shaving,reading,sightseers,etc.
> In fact,I believe it will get worse.
>
> Political Correctness alone would be an impossible hurdle.

And yet they want to punish freeway snipers...

--
Cheers,
Bev
01010101010101010101010101010101010101010101010101 01010
Q. What's the difference between Batman and Bill Gates?
A. When Batman fought the Penguin, he won.
-- J. Levine

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 10:39:04 -0400, "JohnH" >
wrote:

>Until cars are computer controlled and linked to a central controller,
>driving will be horribly inefficient.

Agreed.

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 14:19:02 -0500,
(Matthew Russotto) wrote:

>>>> Until cars are computer controlled and linked to a central
>>>> controller, driving will be horribly inefficient.
>>>
>>> Because centralized decision making has worked SO WELL in society as a
>>> whole.
>>
>>Who's talking about society? I'm simply suggesting cars are in essence
>>machines better controlled by computer(s) than moody, differeing and
>>sometimes drunk humans.
>
>Unfortunately for that suggestion, most drivers are better able to
>drive a car than any computer. In the "Grand Challenge 2004", a DARPA
>initiative to develop an unmanned ground vehicle, no team was able to
>pass the challenge. And that's _without_ traffic. It's a
>surprisingly difficult problem.

Difficult != unsolveable.

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 10:39:09 -0400, "C. E. White"
> wrote:

>> Anyone want to take a guess as to how much of our existing road
>> capacity is wasted by LLBs, poor mergers, Sloths, rubberneckers,
>> people who don't speed up when the traffic ahead of them does, etc.
>> etc.?
>
>Don't forget to add in the waste that is caused by rude and
>inconsiderate drivers who jump lanes at intersection, who
>squeeze people out who are trying to merge, and who
>constantly switch lanes in an attempt to get ahead in slow
>traffic situations.

I noticed how you used the opportunity to forward your Arrogant Sloth
agenda, but couldn't even be bothered to answer the question.

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:44:20 +0000 (UTC), (Kenneth
Crudup) wrote:

>>Rather, it's those big rigs that occupy the two right lanes that effectively
>>turn a 4-lane interstate into a two-lane interstate. Notice how freely
>>traffic flows during time periods where trucks are NOT on the road in
>>masses?
>
>Yabbut truckers are professionals, and will do as little as they can,
>size notwithstanding, to reduce traffic flow. At least you know what's
>going thru the mind of a trucker

Yeah:

"Oh ****... gotta hurry... gotta hurry... gonna be late with this
delivery... can't stop to ****... i'll just go in this here jug and
throw it out the window... damn, I gotta pass this slower truck NOW,
faster traffic be damned! Gotta hurry... The whole damn economy is
going to collapse if I don't make this delivery on time..."

On 21 Jun 2005 00:00:02 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:

>> I'd say the waste is at least 40%, i.e. that our roads never achieve
>> more than 60% of their true capacity due to incompetent drivers.
>
>Your estimate sounds about right to me.
>
>However,
>I do not believe there is any way of fixing that

Sure there is. Ever ridden a train? Ever notice how all the cars of
the train move together in unison? When the car in front slows down,
your car slows down; when the car in front speeds up, yours speeds up
with NO lag. Of course, rigidly coupling automobiles together is not
particularly practical, but suppose the couplings were VIRTUAL, and
computers coordinated the entire "train?"

Already we have vehicles like Kenny's that have adaptive cruise
control; how difficult would it be for each car to tell its neighbors
in the mesh that it's about to brake, or accelerate, or change lanes,
or exit the freeway? When each car knows EXACTLY what the other cars
are going to do, tolerances can be tightened even as overall safety
and efficiency are increased.

I'm looking forward to it.

> There's not a computer system in existence that could handle that
> task. Nor will there be.

"Everything that can be invented has been invented."

Charles H. Duell, Patent Commissioner, 1899

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 10:39:09 -0400, "C. E. White"
> > wrote:
>
>>> Anyone want to take a guess as to how much of our existing road
>>> capacity is wasted by LLBs, poor mergers, Sloths, rubberneckers,
>>> people who don't speed up when the traffic ahead of them does, etc.
>>> etc.?
>>
>>Don't forget to add in the waste that is caused by rude and
>>inconsiderate drivers who jump lanes at intersection, who
>>squeeze people out who are trying to merge, and who
>>constantly switch lanes in an attempt to get ahead in slow
>>traffic situations.
>
> I noticed how you used the opportunity to forward your Arrogant Sloth
> agenda, but couldn't even be bothered to answer the question.

Actually, I am sure you weren't serious when you asked the question. You
were just trying to demonize everyone who doesn't conform to your rule of
the jungle mentality. Why not try to figure out how your driving style is
slowing down the general flow of traffic. By your own posts, it is clear
that you are frequently guilty of causing congestion at on ramps and
intersections. You are always complaining about old people getting in your
way, etc., etc., - for once look in the mirror. There is a very good chance
you are personally responsible for slowing down thousands of you fellow
motorist in your efforts to jump ahead by one more car at an intersection or
cut off one more motorist at an on ramp. Try a little courtesy and respect
for your fellow drivers. For the most part they are not out to get you
(although given your self described driving habits, there may be a few who
are trying to get you). Not one individual "owns" the road. There are
traffic rules for many situations, but not all of them. I find driving a lot
less stressful if I just live and let live on the road and quit
hyperventilating every time someone does not conform to my personal desires.

The next time you jump ahead by one more car at an intersection, why not
figure out how many seconds you saved AND how many seconds you cost the
other drivers. The next time you pinch off someone at an on-ramp why not try
to calculate how many seconds you cost all the other people on the on ramp
who now have to slow down or stop because you just had to get one car
further ahead. The next time you weave through traffic, think about how all
the cars you cut off react and how much time, gas, and brake pad thickness
is wasted because you had to get one car further ahead.

If you want the law of the jungle to prevail, don't be surprised if there
are bigger badder predators out there than you.

Ed

"Dave C." > wrote in message
eenews.net...
>
> "Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Anyone want to take a guess as to how much of our existing road
>> capacity is wasted by LLBs, poor mergers, Sloths, rubberneckers,
>> people who don't speed up when the traffic ahead of them does, etc.
>> etc.?
>>
>> I'd say the waste is at least 40%, i.e. that our roads never achieve
>> more than 60% of their true capacity due to incompetent drivers.
>>
>> What's your guess?
>>
>
> 95% or higher. Definitely not LOWER than that. -Dave

Let me get this straight, you think that on average our roads are only
carrying 5% of their theoretical maximum capacity because of incompetent
drivers? Or do you meant that 95% of our roads don't carry their maximum
capacity at some point in time becasue of incompetent drivers? Or are you
averaging in the fact that many roads are empty for significant periods of
time (which of course is not the result of incompetent drivers)? It is a
poorly worded question and a non-sensical answer. Heck, I suspect many roads
are running at well over their designed capacity during peak traffic hours.
I suppose if everyone drove perfectly, the capacity would be higher, but
unless you know the assumptions, how can you decide the roads are at, below,
or above capacity? If everyone drove at the same speed, say 70 mph, you
would not need more than one lane in each direction, and the capacity for
the road would be directly related to the space between cars. If cars
maintained a 2 sec interval, one car would pass any spot on the road every 2
seconds - right? At 70 miles per hour, 2 second is equivalent to around 200
feet, which is equivalent to 26 cars per mile and 1800 cars past any point
per hour. Is this capacity? I don't think so, but don't know what would be.
I suppose if cars were bumper to bumper in the right lane, all doing 70, you
could have 330 cars per mile, and a car passing a spot every 1.62 seconds -
2,200 per hour. I am assuming everybody is in the right lane, since they are
all driving 70, and no one needs to pass (you know keep right except to
pass). Is this capacity? I am pretty sure I-40 from Raleigh to RTP carries a
lot more than this every morning during rush hour, but then all 3 or 4 lanes
are filled. So do you think capacity for an 8 lane highway (4 in each
direction) would be 4 lanes filled with cars bumper to bumper at 70 miles
per hour? This would be somewhere around 8,800 cars per hour in each
direction, except it makes no allowance for cars changing lanes as they get
on or off the road or for semis, or even medium sized trucks. For my
theoretical 8 lane highway, I suspect maximum capacity is probably less that
3500 cars per hour in each direction. So do you think many 8 lane highways
are only moving 175 cars per hour in each direction (5% of 3500)?

Ed