Stopping distance at red lights (Arab: transplants, live in, law)

[chucksnee]

Originally Posted by RocketDawg

Traffic signals that have embedded loops also have a max time they'll stay red. So yes, even without a car there it will eventually cycle. I don't think he implied it would never cycle.

Originally Posted by GrumpyCat View Post
Most Alabama drivers found their licenses in boxes of Cracker Jacks so bad behavior is not surprising.

Lately drivers stop 3 car lengths from the white line. Not smart enough to consider the inductive sensor in the road can not see them, will not cycle the light. This is relatively new, the old behavior was to stop past the white line. Again, past the sensor so possibly the light will not cycle for this driver.

And then there are those who cut the corner turning left driving over the sensor in the left turn lane. Forces the light to cycle for a phantom left-turner while everyone else waits for the nonexistent phantom.

Sorry, read the bold, he very clearly says "will not cycle the light."

[RocketDawg]

Originally Posted by chucksnee

Sorry, read the bold, he very clearly says "will not cycle the light."

But he's correct - it will not cycle because his car is there if he's short of or goes past the sensor, but that doesn't mean it will never cycle. It will cycle because of time.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by RocketDawg

I've noticed that over the past several months that some drivers, when they stop when the light is red, they're two, three, or in some cases even more, carlengths behind the car in front of them. Is there a logical reason for doing so? If everybody did that, traffic would be stacked up for miles at some lights during heavy traffic.

Yes, it's both logical and good defensive driving. Lets say you are the second car at a red light and you stop three car lengths behind the car in front of you. An oncoming speeding truck trying to make a left turn on a yellow light before it turns red fails to negotiate the turn and crashes head on into the car in front of you, pushing it backwards two car lengths. You get out of your car, check on the drivers, give them your contact information, get back in your car and go on your marry way.

Now lets say instead of three car lengths back, you are stopped one foot behind the car in front when the truck crashes head on into it and pushes it backwards into your car. Your car gets totaled and the car infront of you gets sandwiched between your car and the truck and gets crumpled up like an aluminum can, turning a non-injury crash into a fatal crash, which you are involved in.

Do you want to be a witness to that crash, or do you want to be a part of it? And if you don't think that type of thing happens, just go on YouTube and search for dash cam crash videos. Those type of crashes are pretty common.

[djmaxwell]

Originally Posted by pathrunner

I find this interesting. I guess the longer I'm here I might experience that. (The Cracker Box drivers.) I'm from L.A. so Huntsville is heaven for me

One day I was driving south on t̶h̶e̶ 231 and we suddenly had to stop.

Fixed it for you. You aren't in L.A. any more. You don't need to put "the" in front of roads.

[harry chickpea]

Originally Posted by RocketDawg

But he's correct - it will not cycle because his car is there if he's short of or goes past the sensor, but that doesn't mean it will never cycle. It will cycle because of time.

In Athens, it will cycle red even if you are the only car on the road, and it senses you coming.

[Wartrace]

What I hate are drivers that stop 20 or 30 feet from the car ahead and then slowly creep forward. After a minute or so it looks like I stopped 20 or 30 feet from that vehicle. I refuse to play the game of creeping.

[Igor Blevin]

Originally Posted by RocketDawg

I've noticed that over the past several months that some drivers, when they stop when the light is red, they're two, three, or in some cases even more, carlengths behind the car in front of them. Is there a logical reason for doing so? If everybody did that, traffic would be stacked up for miles at some lights during heavy traffic.

The rule of thumb I was trained on back in the 1970s was, you should be able to see the tires of the car in front of you. Most people stop in a queue as if they are pulling into a parking space behind the car ahead - almost bumper to bumper.

Say the first car in line is disabled. Now how are you going to be able to pull around the line if you are parked that close together.

Also, say somebody falls asleep at the wheel and crashes into the back of the line. With all the cars parked bumper to bumper, several cars will be damaged. Leaving a gap means less cars will be damaged if that happens.

Both of the above are completely improbable. I wouldn't plan my life around them, but they are real world examples of benefits to keeping a small distance behind the car ahead.

Multiple car lengths is over doing it. I don't know why people would do that, and I don't see it commonly where I live. Often a line of cars will creep up toward the light after stopping initially, and sometime people don't bother to creep up and just wait for the light to change. That is the only time I see people leaving a huge gap. Or maybe they are playing with their iPhone.

Most peolpe are bumper to bumper most of the time

I follow my training. Always be able to see the bottom of the tires of the car ahead.

[Cloudy Dayz]

Originally Posted by Igor Blevin

The rule of thumb I was trained on back in the 1970s was, you should be able to see the tires of the car in front of you. Most people stop in a queue as if they are pulling into a parking space behind the car ahead - almost bumper to bumper.

Say the first car in line is disabled. Now how are you going to be able to pull around the line if you are parked that close together.

Also, say somebody falls asleep at the wheel and crashes into the back of the line. With all the cars parked bumper to bumper, several cars will be damaged. Leaving a gap means less cars will be damaged if that happens.

Both of the above are completely improbable. I wouldn't plan my life around them, but they are real world examples of benefits to keeping a small distance behind the car ahead.

Multiple car lengths is over doing it. I don't know why people would do that, and I don't see it commonly where I live. Often a line of cars will creep up toward the light after stopping initially, and sometime people don't bother to creep up and just wait for the light to change. That is the only time I see people leaving a huge gap. Or maybe they are playing with their iPhone.

Most peolpe are bumper to bumper most of the time

I follow my training. Always be able to see the bottom of the tires of the car ahead.

Unfortunately that 1970s rule is obsolete nowadays. The way cars are designed today, you don't have anywhere near as much blind spot in front of your car. So if you can only see the tires of the car infront of you, you are way too close. The herd mentality of stopping cars as close together as possible, only causes problems. It does not solve anything. I could come up with dozens of scenarios where stopping too close to the car in front of you is a bad idea.

[harry chickpea]

Originally Posted by Wartrace

What I hate are drivers that stop 20 or 30 feet from the car ahead and then slowly creep forward. After a minute or so it looks like I stopped 20 or 30 feet from that vehicle. I refuse to play the game of creeping.

You may have to get over that.

[RocketDawg]

Originally Posted by djmaxwell

Fixed it for you. You aren't in L.A. any more. You don't need to put "the" in front of roads.

You only refer to a highway as "the something-or-the-other" if the highway is a freeway.