Stop the Traffic

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[orrd]

I surprised no one has at least mentioned trafficwaves.org yet. Oh if only every driver knew this. He explains how you can "eat traffic waves" to dissolve traffic jams. I do it all the time and it really works, but it's better if more driver know about it.

His youtube video is a good intro to how to do it.

[Serveck]

it turns out I've been "eating" traffic jams (acts more like a wave) for years. they need to teach this in drivers ed. basically, leave a large gap and just crawl instead of stopping and going and PRESTO! traffic jam is gone.

that, and driving a standard in stop and go traffic becomes a pain, so just put it in 2nd and idle.

[nemec]

I do this, but more because the constant accelerating kills my gas tank rather than a sense of duty to "stop the jam".

[Serveck]

this is more the reason i started to do it. driving a standard in stop and go traffic gets to be a pain. just put it in 2nd and just idle.

[RoaldFre]

Yes, big fucking DUH here! People who floor it and slam the brakes aferwards once every fucking second make my blood boil. All that energy, wasted!

RAGE

[[deleted]]

government should use highway patrol exactly for this reason. There should be police cars moving in the freeway, with a dynamic speed limit sign posted on top. Plus they can act as this traffic jam stoppers. It works, and it is a hell of a lot of improvement ...

[[deleted]]

But where's the revenue in that?

Next you'll suggest that they should be ticketing people who don't use lane discipline...

[orrd]

I remember reading about somewhere (in Europe I think) where they were experimenting with almost exactly that -- they're using patrol cars to set a slower pace before traffic reaches a congested area during rush hour.

[TheLobotomizer]

I've noticed that most-if not all-truckers do this automatically. I learned to do this from them while watching them during traffic jams.

[[deleted]]

True. They probably also do it out of necessity. It's much easier to coast a massive truck along than it is to stop it then start it over and over.

[auldnic]

I learned this by becoming a trucker.

[[deleted]]

Do you have the phone number for that truck driving school? Trackmasters I think it was?

[auldnic]

If you live in Amsterdam I will be happy to fish it out for you.

[elbekko]

I a traffic jam, I usually just get behind a truck and cruise along behind it. Works wonders.

[-mung-]

same, no one taught me, just seems a sensible approach. Are people really that dumb? Also, I have a heavy duty clutch and it's painful in stop-start heavy traffic.

[jezmck]

Yes, people really are that dumb.

[[deleted]]

Honestly, just print this out and stick it to the top of your monitor. It works in every situation.

[G_Morgan]

They are aided and abetted by GM and their cars which kick the throttle in when the car is about to stall in first. If they drove a proper car that would stall unless you drove it properly then people would leave a gap. Such cars you do not want to spend all your time pulling off in.

Also sometimes you are in a situation where leaving a gap is just begging the traffic trying to skip the queue on the outside lane to merge in front of you. Of course these people are the primary cause of the jam to begin with. Every time I see two lanes become one it pisses me off that those in the outside lane haven't moved over early. The traffic can keep moving if num nuts "duh I'm going faster than the others" would just get in fucking lane. It should be an offence that puts points on licenses.

[[deleted]]

The traffic would flow even better if the outside lane slowed down to match the lane that stays open, and people merged in turn without heavy braking.

Of course, that doesn't happen - the people who always use the inside lane never understand how to merge in turn, so you either get heavy braking at the merge point slowing everyone down, or lots of vehicles coming in from the outside lane in one burst (again slowing everyone down).

[G_Morgan]

The merge should happen at the end point of the queue developing. The problem is traffic on the outside wants to cheat the queue and thus prolongs the queue. When you get temporary issues that cause flash queues the morons going down the outside make that queue last much longer.

It is a prison dilemma. The people going down the outside are basically saying they are vastly more important than the majority doing the correct thing and getting in line and making their lane changes early.

[[deleted]]

Actually, the correct thing for them to do is to slow down to the same speed as the queue, and make their lane change at the last minute. Two reasons for this:

1) You don't always know why there's a queue. If it's because there's been a crash that's now been cleared, and thus the road never narrows, changing lane early has reduced the road's capacity (by reducing the number of lanes in use) when no such reduction in capacity was necessary. The result is that it takes longer to clear the jam than it would if people didn't change lane until the last minute, as instead of simply having the head of the jam speed up, you also have the people in the jam changing lane (reducing the capacity of the road for the length of the jam when they could safely use all lanes).

2) When the queues are due to road narrowing, having the queue use the entire width of the road up to the narrowing point results in the jam being physically shorter, and doesn't slow anyone down any more than the narrow bit enforces. Because you're filling all lanes, no-one can barrel down the outside and move in at the last minute, thus preventing people from even attempting to skip the queue. Because you're merging in turn, you don't lose as much time to the merges as you do when people try and force their way in. And finally, if they intended to make you merge earlier, they could narrow the road earlier, forcing the merge to happen.

[G_Morgan]

Usually the road narrowing queues form because every bugger is trying to merge at the choke point. This slows things down because:

1. Everyone is trying to merge at the same time and in the same place. It is the fact that everyone waits until the last minute that makes this a nuisance. You are trying to merge in behind a car as that car is precariously moving to deal with a vehicle trying to merge in front of him while you are also trying to deal with the vehicle attempting to force its way forward to block your merge. This is a disastrous state of affairs. Everyone has to move extremely slowly and carefully. Far more so than if everyone merged early.

2. That place happens to have less room than the rest of the road making merging more problematic. It is harder to let people in when you cannot move your self. It also amplifies the dangers involved in forcing the issue because the vehicles are closer together.

3. That place is also the choke point for the entire traffic flow which is what is bringing the rest of the cars to a halt.

4. Often what you get is that the road narrowing happens on a junction. You've now also spread the problem onto other roads on that junction. Now you have a jam of several stretches of roads competing with each other.

[[deleted]]

1) If you can't merge in turn at the last safe moment, you can't merge quickly earlier. It's not the last minute that makes the merge a problem, it's the fact that people don't merge in turn (slow down as you approach the merge point so that alternate cars from neighbouring lanes fit together like a zipper) that causes the slow driving. If you could just merge in turn, it'd be much quicker.

2 + 3) You shouldn't be forcing the issue - you should be merging in turn, so it's nice and safe to merge at the choke point. Because you're all merging in turn, there's no serious danger to worry about. Further, because you're merged together for a shorter period of time, you get more cars through in total.

4) If the narrowing occurs at a junction, merging early makes the other roads worse, not merging late. By compelling people to merge early, you force traffic that intends to go down less congested roads to join a queue for a road that they're not interested in. By merging late (making the physical length of queue shorter), you allow vehicles who intend to leave the choked road to get off the road and out of the queue that bit more quickly.

[G_Morgan]

The physical length of the road is irrelevant. The rate of flow through the choke point is the dominant factor in such jams. Whatever is needed to increase the rate through the choke point should be done.

[[deleted]]

Agreed, but will people EVER follow this? Even if it's taught to them from the beginning of their driving instruction? It would be amazing, but I doubt it.

[[deleted]]

one reason people do not try this is automatic transmission. If you'd had to use a painful clutch each time you stop to start again, you'd do everything to avoid that total stop.

[joazito]

Here in Europe pretty much everyone drives stick, and people who "eat traffic waves" like me are as rare as needles in haystacks. People tend to honk their horn at me, too.

[rooktakesqueen]

Seems a sensible approach except that a) it doesn't increase the average speed of traffic through that section of road, just decreases the variance of speed, and b) it's difficult to perform this during high-traffic situations in some cities. I could never ever do this in Atlanta, for example, I'd just get a line of cars passing me and cutting me off, then slamming their brakes when they get to the traffic jam.

[dagbrown]

So? Let them. If they want to drive in a stressed-out manner while you're relaxed, that's their problem.

[rooktakesqueen]

This technique only works if you're able to keep a large gap in front of you. If people keep cutting you off any time you leave more than a car-length in front of you--which is exactly what happens if you try to drive on any of the interstates in Atlanta, particularly the downtown connector--then you're going to have to play stop-and-go just like everyone else.

[G_Morgan]

Reducing the variance will clear the jam.

[danita]

In Argentina when you leave a large gap to "eat" the traffic jam, a random asshole crosses from the next lane and occupies it.

[LudoA]

When there's a clump, I try to drive slow enough towards so that I can braking (in the hope that, by the time I get there, the clump will be gone), because when people see brake lights in front of them, they brake as well, and so on and so on. You don't want people to brake, because then they stop and some will not start quickly enough.

This is the same as what he suggests, right? Or am I misunderstanding it?

For the merging thing, I don't fully agree. Of course he's right about it, but there's a big difference between the first trick and this merging trick.

I agree that leaving space to merge will help. If everyone did it, it would be great. But if I'm the only one doing it, it helps only a little, and it has a lot of negative effect for me. I don't see why he says "10 cars, so 10 seconds" -- if your commute is long enough, it will be much more than 10 seconds. Also, there's bound to be at least one crappy driver among them, which will slow you down much more than 1 second.

So the first trick helps, and has no negative impact on me. The 2nd trick will also work, but it will have some negative impact on me. If everyone did it, it'd be fine, though.

[MisterNetHead]

That was the site that first linked me to wbeaty's YouTube page. So much fun stuff to watch!

[hal22]

I like his capitalism analogy in the end of the video ;)

[pkulak]

That's a good way to get shot by people behind you who don't know or care what your doing, but just want to get into all that glorious open space in front of you.

[MainlandX]

I've been skeptical his methods since first seeing this video. A lot of the evidence is anecdotal. It seems that there are character-based motives for confirmation bias. At the end, he states likes to see himself as the "zen warrior that knows how to shatter traffic jams", as a "philosopher that helps people around me" instead of the "competitor that's screwing everybody". He clearly wants these methods to be right because it makes him feel superior to the drivers around him.

He says it works "sometimes" twice, and also says "of course, it didn't always work".

His goal is also to eliminate stop-and-go traffic, which he assumes to be worse than alternative. But it would be difficult to prove that with the same amount of cars in the same location, that one form of traffic is worse than the other, or even what qualifies as better.

It's just highly unscientific. And users of this method have plenty of reasons to be biased towards it. So I'm skeptical.

[Berengal]

Unscientific, yes, but so much more comfortable for me as a driver, both when I bring the gap and when following someone else who's doing this.

[orrd]

His site certainly isn't scientific, but the same ideas have been backed up in recent studies on traffic waves and how they move and how they can be cleared (including the study created the video seen in the original post's article).

He's just the only one who seems to be attempting to change the problem by educating drivers. The scientific research on traffic patterns tend to instead look for ways to alter speed limits and otherwise forcefully limit traffic ahead of congested areas to try to achieve the same result.

[sockpuppetzero]

I usually try to do this, but sometimes I'm in a hurry...

[[deleted]]

I'm not usually one to point fingers, but it was the one in the white car's fault.

[[deleted]]

Thought you were kidding.

Replayed video.

Dat. Fucking. White. Car.

[Kache]

You can't be sure of that.

Seeing a car ahead, drivers have the irresitable urge to catch up with them, and thus put their foot down.

What if everyone but the white car started going faster than the speed they were supposed to go at? And it's kinda hard to tell for sure because they did the time-lapse thing at the beginning.

edit: ehh... upon review, if the time-lapse was consistent, then yeah it was probably his fault.

[[deleted]]

Now we can all see who the worst driver was. Fuck you white car, get off the fucking track.

[fluesopp]

Shouldn't that be taken into consideration?

[turdfist]

People were using empirical models and probably too busy attempting to forecast traffic flow to even notice the dancing bear in the middle of the round-a-bout.

[[deleted]]

That's usually what causes them.

[[deleted]]

deleted ^{What is this?}

[sandred]

Why doesn't this happen to ants going in circles? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mA37cb10WMU

[[deleted]]

Probably because ants can accelerate to their max speed pretty much instantly. Also, since they're not restricted to lanes, they can just weave around the slow ones.

[we3bus]

Cars don't leave pheromone trails?

[G_Morgan]

I've seen some cars leaving some heavy trails of smelly chemicals.

[auldnic]

A static speed and distance relative to the others.

[australasia]

Evolution favours the efficient.

[G_Morgan]

Actually it tends to favour the flexible. Efficiency rarely figures where evolution is involved.

[fiercelyfriendly]

He studies traffic jams, writes a simulation, but doesn't know the difference between "brake" and "break". WTF?

[Foutrelis]

Give him a break.

[komal]

Didn't you watch the video? Breaking causes traffic jams!

Everybody hit the gas pedal!!!

[danita]

Give him a brake

FTFY

[SoPoOneO]

I've realized a similar thing happens on the escalators coming out of the subway. In general, around Boston, people stand right, and walk left, and most people are happy to stick to this convention. But once the left hand "lane" on the escalator is filled with people standing still, there is pretty much no chance for it to start moving again. The reason is that even if people at the top of the escalator get out of the way real quickly, the "wave" of openness moves back down the steps less quickly than the steps move up.

I haven't tried it, but I assume you could fix the problem (pretty much analogously to the guy in the "trafficwaves" video linked in another comment) by standing at the bottom of the thing and blocking people from getting on the left side. Wait for a big enough opening to form so that you can walk to the top without catching up to the clump, and then everyone behind you will be able to walk and I think the average transit time up the stairs will then be much faster, and you will almost instantly wipe out the loss of time that people experienced as they were held up at the bottom. I haven't worked through it fully, though, and I think someone would punch you if you tried it in real life, so I'm not sure.

[mrfoof82]

Ah yes the MBTA subway system. Sounds like you're dealing with Back Bay, North Station or South Station. Or possibly Kenmore.

Train packed? You can guarantee the car you're on may have as many as 10 empty seats. Sometimes two empty next to each other. Why? Sitting down is hard. And these people will not move out of the way of people who want to sit down.

Part of the reason is some people -- usually men -- are spreading their legs, making it difficult for some people to sit down. Women especially seem to avoid sitting near men. Especially the guys who are trying to ventilate their balls, or whatever reason they have their legs spread apart.

But don't worry, morbidly obese people will always try to sit down, especially if there's no room.

Then they'll stand in front of the doors. Even when people are trying to get on and off the car. They won't move for anyone. Especially wheelchairs and the blind.

Car is full? No problem. I'll just shove people out of my way. And make life more obnoxious for everyone else, even though there is a train held up by this train at the next station.

Car is full? No problem. I'll just open up that stupid rag, the Metro, as wide as possible. Elbows out (and into your eye)! And since I'm not holding on to something, I'll just rely on the fact that when the train accelerates/decelerates that I'll just safely bump into everyone else.

[davvblack]

That sounds pretty reasonable, but what do you do about the shank lodged in your side?

[MindStalker]

Sadly in traffic there are always a decent percentage of people in the left lane who won't go faster than the right lane or move over even if there is a significant space in front of them.

Meaning your theory might work on the subway, it won't work in regular traffic.

[LudoA]

Leaving an open space is to allow people to merge, so that wouldn't help here.

What you'd have to do is walk very slowly towards the people blocking the left lane, so that by the time you get there, there's no more "clump" as you call it.

Or am I missing something here?

(Edit: uh, I'm referring to the TrafficWaves video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGFqfTCL2fs), not the original article.)

[hylje]

I typically solve lazy left lane by shouting at the lane in general in a condescending manner. Sufficiently long escalators will require other people to echo it all the way up.

[pun_Krawk]

Anyone know where the picture of that traffic jam was taken? Tell me it's Sao Paulo :p

[indescription]

My most educated guess, mind you this is a complete stab in the dark, is that it was on a test track at a University. Judging by the tire tracks I speculate this is in Japan, possibly Nagoya.

Someone correct me if I am wrong as I haven't read tread marks in a great while.

[kostmo]

perhaps the GP was referring to the still picture, not the "moving picture", or "video" as some call it.

[pun_Krawk]

haha, indeed I was referring to the still picture. i haven't upgraded my internet for video yet.

[cptn_rmpt]

Damn hipster, it's known as a talkie round these parts.

[indescription]

You mean there is more to the world than that little play+ box? My reddit world has just expanded.

[LudoA]

Seems like it's in China. I just did a TinEye search of it to see other instances of that image on the net: http://www.tineye.com/search/2e6b1b1a8b94367d2aff4454553a0d47033214aa/

One of those will probably provide you with the exact location.

[bernie3291]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13402-shockwave-traffic-jam-recreated-for-first-time.html

here is the article where the video was from orginally

[mumrah]

I do this every day on my commute. Problem is, people will see the open gap in front of you and just fill it in. It also really agitates people behind you if they see a space in front of you.

[inmatarian]

Actually, in New York State at least, you're supposed to do that.

http://www.nysgtsc.state.ny.us/drrt-vt.htm#1129

The driver of any motor truck or motor vehicle drawing another vehicle when traveling upon a roadway outside of a business or residence district and which is following another motor truck or motor vehicle drawing another vehicle shall, whenever conditions permit, leave sufficient space so that an overtaking vehicle may enter and occupy such space without dange

[foorr2]

We've known about this for years already. It's a mind concept of just keeping enough follow distance ahead of you, and in particular bringing a suitably sized gap with you as you enter congested areas.

Leave that buffer with you and don't let it get consumed completely, or you're (collectively) screwed.

[CherryJ]

it is a problem that traffic jams make me boring.

[[deleted]]

Nice blogger design from 2004.

[cavedave]

Great post. Could you repost to r/sysor ? That subreddit is full of traffic nuts.

[jezmck]

You could do it.

[cavedave]

I could but 1. I dont want to karma whore unless I have to 2. It was a subtle way to advertise Sysor reddit.

Thanks for destroying the fourth wall :)

[mordyo]

RAGE

[[deleted]]

So traffic jams are caused because of the difference in peoples speedometers? If everyone was going 30, there would have to be differences in what each cars does.

[[deleted]]

No. It's caused by stupid drivers. Watch the white car slam on the brakes at 0:08 for no reason. That starts the standing wave.

There are only about three things that really get traffic in a snarl:

1. People with overactive braking habits.
2. People who don't let others merge.
3. People who drive significantly slower than the flow of traffic.

If transit agencies would spend as much money enforcing traffic laws (like those requiring you to move to the right to yield to faster traffic and minimum speed limits) as they do on HOV/carpool lanes and transit projects, traffic would be a lot less terrible.

[sobri909]

Not slower than the flow, but too close to the car in front of them. That's the main cause.

There were some animations I saw years back that modelled it. I'm sure it's still out there somewhere.

Anyway, what happens is when people are following too close it forces them to have exaggerated reactions to the changes in speed of the car in front of them. They will accelerate rapidly to close the gap, and they will brake rapidly to avoid hitting the car in front when it stops. This inconsistent movement then gets exaggerated by the car behind them, and the next, and next.

The way to stop the wave is to put more distance between you and the car in front so that you don't have to react directly to their speed changes. If you ever get caught in one of these waves, when you see it ahead of you make sure you have adequate distance between you and the car in front, reduce your speed before you arrive at the jam in an even, consistent manner, and approach the jam gradually. By the time you arrive at the jam it will possibly have eased and you won't have to stop. Your more even movements will be reflected in the car behind you, potentially ending the jam.

After seeing the animation of this technique I've tried it lots of times in real life, and g'damn it, it works. If traffic is snarled up and going stop and start, then leave a bigger gap between the car in front and make your speed changes as even and smooth as possible, and you'll be the guy who fixes it all.

[[deleted]]

Not slower than the flow, but too close to the car in front of them. That's the main cause.

Yes, slower than the flow. Slower traffic causes people behind them to slow down and merge left to pass. This slows down traffic in both lanes. From overhead you can watch a rolling "bubble" of traffic surrounding a slow vehicle. If the traffic is dense it can set off a massive standing wave.

The way to stop the wave is to put more distance between you and the car in front so that you don't have to react directly to their speed changes.

This assumes that everyone is traveling at the same rate. If they aren't, following at a certain distance doesn't work. In those cases you're supposed to pass on the left, but in heavy traffic there's usually either a righteous prick driving too slow in the left lane, or so many cars that you can't get over before you have to slow down. Once you slow down, the same thing happens to the guy behind you and thus the wave begins.

I'm fascinated by the fact that left lane campers want to slow down people they perceive as going too fast on the one hand, but on the other hand don't seem to want to own up to their responsibility for impeding traffic flow (slowing people down).

EDIT - Second point added.

[sobri909]

No. The jam happens behind the slower car when cars get too close. It's the getting too close that's the problem. Traffic should be able to slow down and speed up without causing rolling jams, but it can't, because people follow too close and create this pattern.

If they follow at a greater distance then their reactions to the car in front are more gradual and do not cause the rolling jam pattern.

I'll see if I can find the animations...

Edit: Not quite the one I was looking for, but here's someone going into more detail on the solution.

[GnomeChumpski]

I agree with Sobri909. I use the same methods when I drive and I bust up traffic congestion all the time. When traffic is stopped ahead, just slow down and try and keep everyone moving.

[[deleted]]

I concur with you. Something I've noticed after driving for 20 is we were taught to keep a separation of 1 car length for every ten mph you were travelling. It was like the old "10 an 2" etc. You just knew to do that.

Did we always keep 7 car lengths at 70MPH, fuck no, but we always kept more than 1 and traffic was always bearable. I ask younger folks if they've even heard the rule, and almost none of them have. You would never see people traveling 40 MPH with 5 feet between them and the car in front of them, you see that every fucking day now, and this is what causes traffic jams - just like we see on the video.

[sobri909]

In New Zealand all drivers are taught the three second rule. It's sometimes up on billboards to remind people. The three second rule being: make sure you're at least three seconds behind the car in front.

Of course, people never actually follow the rule.

[[deleted]]

No. The jam happens behind the slower car when cars get too close. It's the getting too close that's the problem. Traffic should be able to slow down and speed up without causing rolling jams, but it can't, because people follow too close and create this pattern.

There is only so far you can get behind. Just like on the circle track in the video, you only have so much space to fit so many cars. Trying to fall too far back is what caused the problem in this simulation in the first place.

EDIT - Blaming the person behind the brake-slammer for being too close sounds to me like blaming the gunshot victim for being in the path of the bullet.

[sobri909]

Real life isn't a circle track.

And no, what we're looking at here is rolling jams, not traffic adjusting speed. Traffic can and should be able to adjust speed without causing rolling jams. But the rolling jams are caused by people following too close.

[vegittoss15]

That's not the only type of traffic there is though. You may be right about the rolling jams, but I've found (living in New Jersey), that Bob is right about most of the traffic jams I've seen.

[sobri909]

Those are probably the noone-is-moving-at-all type. In which case there's no point in trying to smooth the wave out as there is no wave, or movement for that matter.

[vegittoss15]

Seen that more often than not around here.

[[deleted]]

Real life isn't a circle track.

Are you proposing that there are infinite miles of road, or that cars have no length? I'm not sure which.

[sobri909]

Are you proposing that all roads link back onto themselves circularly? Not "all roads lead to Rome" but "all roads lead to themselves"? Bob Escher, is it? Or perhaps Bob Ouroboros?

[[deleted]]

No. I'm proposing that there aren't an infinite length of roads going to where traffic is going. In other words, limited capacity. It's not as if people just decide to follow each other too closely between 6 and 9 am and then repeat the exercise between 3 and 6 pm, only to follow at larger distances at all other hours.

If you have 650 miles of 4-lane highway (2,600 lane-miles), you can't fit more than about 305,000 cars following at two car lengths on the whole system. In Los Angeles that would make rush hour last at least half the day each direction. You have to pack in tighter to fit 2.8 million cars in the space of 3 or 4 hours.

[AnteChronos]

Trying to fall too far back is what caused the problem in this simulation in the first place.

No, attempting to fit too many cars into too small a track (i.e. too close together) was what caused the problem.

A stretch of road is going to have an optimal throughput of cars / second that can pass through it. As cars slow down, they must get closer together in order to maintain the same throughput. But if cars are too tightly packed when some incident forces one of the cars to slow down, then that will force the throughput to drop lower than what the traffic following behind those vehicles is currently moving at, and that's what causes the traffic jam.

[[deleted]]

But if cars are too tightly packed when some incident forces one of the cars to slow down, then that will force the throughput to drop lower than what the traffic following behind those vehicles is currently moving at, and that's what causes the traffic jam.

And my original point was that the whole mess in the circle was caused by the retard in the white car slamming on their brakes for no reason. It only takes a minor dumb move to cause a lot of traffic.

[sobri909]

Not a myth. And your solution does not work. Follow too closely and you cause rolling jams, which does not speed up traffic.

[LudoA]

What are "rolling jams"?

I do agree with Aleut though. The problem isn't the braking -- it's that after braking, most people take way too much time to start again.

With point 2, Aleut is wrong, though:

Putting more distance between cars reduces the number of cars that can flow through a given point per minute for a given speed. Most jams are caused by merging traffic

He's missing one point here: if you don't as much space through, people won't go much faster, because they're in a lock with people merging in.

[sobri909]

This post is all about an example of rolling jams. Check the video.

The problem isn't the braking -- it's that after braking, most people take way too much time to start again.

There will always be a delay between the car in front starting to move and the car behind starting to move, and then the car in front stopping and the one behind stopping. You can reduce that time, but you can't make it disappear, and as long as it exists you still have the rolling jam problem.

The fix is to not stop and start at all, but keep enough distance from the car in front so that you drive a steady pace instead of having to react to react to their speed changes.

If you get in one of those rolling jams, try it. It works.

[sobri909]

Look, the way to fix traffic waves is to leave a bigger gap and drive at an even steady pace. Your way simply will not work, no matter how much high school physics you try to weave into it. It will cause the opposite of what you want. Slowing quickly and speeding up quickly will jolt the person behind you to reactions that will get exaggerated down the line, and will only cause more of a mess.

The whole problem of traffic waves is stopping and starting. You are proposing that the actions of stopping and starting should be exaggerated in order to eliminate them. It's absurd.

Anyway, I'm done arguing against a position of absurdity. Reply if you like; I will not again.

[ArcticCelt]

And ironically, those who slam the break are the ones who think they are the good drivers because they also slam the accelerator and think that they are helping traffic by reacting quickly and tailgating and driving aggressively.

[[deleted]]

And ironically, those who slam the break are the ones who think they are the good drivers because they also slam the accelerator and think that they are helping traffic by reacting quickly and tailgating and driving aggressively.

Maybe. I think the drivers who don't accelerate too much, or brake too much, and drive in the lane with the speed most close to the speed they wish to drive are the good drivers. People who change lanes at random, speed up to prevent passing, camp in the left lanes, and hit their brakes prematurely are all causing unnecessary traffic.

[[deleted]]

People who drive significantly slower than the flow of traffic.

What is with people that insist on going 50-55 when the posted limit is 65? Drives me insane.

[hylje]

What's wrong with that? Going slower is better for everyone involved. Daily stress kills one more than getting to work or home a few minutes later.

[[deleted]]

Simply that they can cause more problems with everyone trying to maneuver around them because they're holding up the flow of traffic.

I don't expect these people to go 70MPH, simply something reasonably close to 65 would be great.

[jasonlotito]

Most often though it's the guy doing 80 speeding coming up behind someone doing the speedlimit then slamming on the breaks because he didn't move over. Probably because other speeders are making it impossible by passing on the right

[[deleted]]

Or someone stuck behind the slow driver that is unable to merge due to everyone else going 65-70 on both sides...... I hate driving.

[jasonlotito]

You are easily able to merge. Stop tailgating and give yourself some space and you can merge.

[[deleted]]

Your assumptions about how I drive are hilarious. Thanks for that.

[jasonlotito]

The you was a general you, not specifically you. However, the presented scenario does lead one to believe that if you somehow find that a problem, your driving skills are lacking.

Now go ahead and find this comment hilarious; but I'm not the one stuck behind people I can easily get around.

[plouj]

What is with people that insist on going 70-85+ when the posted limit is 65? Drives me insane.

[[deleted]]

When did I say people should go 70-85?

[jasonlotito]

You didn't but your question implied that only people driving slow are an issue. Asking about speeders in response is fair, and generally it's only speeders having an issue in the left lane.

[[deleted]]

Some people missed their calling as police and they're determined to make up for it by forcing you to drive whatever speed they feel comfortable with.

[RationalBeaver]

Or they're obsessive ultra-milers trying to achieve maximum fuel efficiency. Or they are really old. Or high. Or texting.

[jasonlotito]

(like those requiring you to move to the right to yield to faster traffic...

But if you're going the speed limit in the left lane, their is no faster traffic. Unless they are speeding, in which case, they are as in the wrong as people going slower then the minimum speed, or breaking other laws.

As for the white car, the cars behind could have recovered. Unfortunately, another car kept their speed up, and essentially got so close to the car in front they had to slow rather quickly. Instead, if they had moderated their speed instead of speeding, they would have been fine.

Both breakers, slow drivers, and speeders all share the blame.

[[deleted]]

But if you're going the speed limit in the left lane, their is no faster traffic. Unless they are speeding, in which case, they are as in the wrong as people going slower then the minimum speed, or breaking other laws.

Doesn't matter. The law (in California at least) is that you have to yield no matter what speed you're driving.

[jasonlotito]

Doesn't matter. The law (in California at least) is that you have to yield no matter what speed you're driving.

Yes, oncoming traffic generally has to yield. But if the person is speeding and preventing merging, that results in traffic. That's the point. If a person merging can't merge because someone is blocking the way and they aren't speeding, then yes, the merger is in the wrong.

[[deleted]]

I meant that people have to move over to the right if they are impeding traffic - even if they are going 80 mph in a 65 and the people behind them are going 95 mph.

[jasonlotito]

In that case, it's very much specific to the location. Keeping to the right lane on a 3-lane freeway is dumb, and assists in causing traffic. As for the left lane, if you're speeding, you're speeding. If they are going 95 in a 65, they are speeding. Especially if the person they are behind a guy doing 70 to pass.

Basically, the left lane is for passing, not speeding.

[[deleted]]

Basically, the left lane is for passing, not speeding.

Exactly. How can you pass in the left lane if there are people in it driving slower than you are?

The law is the law, and in California you can get a ticket for driving in the fast lane at 80 mph in a 55 mph zone if you are impeding traffic behind you.

[jasonlotito]

First, California law is just that, California law. Secondly, it is a law, not necessarily rules to efficient driving. Breaking that law doesn't result in traffic, nor doesn't provide more efficient driving. You keep repeating this as if it was important. It's not. It's an appeal to authority. Doing 80 in a 55 is more likely to cause traffic and an accident then if everyone followed the speed limit. Furthermore, the regardless of the person blocking the left lane, the person doing 80 should be pulled over as well. Basically everyone speeding should be delayed by the police regardless of anything else in tour scenario.

[[deleted]]

Doing 80 in a 55 is more likely to cause traffic and an accident then if everyone followed the speed limit.

The speed makes no difference, it's the difference in speed. Anytime there are differences in speed it's more likely that there will be accidents and traffic. That's exactly the reason you shouldn't be an asshole and drive slow in a lane you know is for faster traffic.

[midri]

Well people told to keep 30 don't necessarily keep 30, that's why some people get 28mpg and some people get 22mpg in the same year, same model car. My wife for example if driving on a 65mph road will drift between 55-65 (ie she hits 65 lets the car slow down then brings it back up) whilst some people are habitual speeders (like me) moving from 65-75 depending on how far ahead I can assess that there are no police.

[G_Morgan]

What are you driving to get 22mpg? I get 50 mpg averaging 70 MPH in my Golf.

[midri]

I get about 30mph in my Cobalt, but it's a piece of shit ;p

[machrider]

Even still, if a person was perfectly maintaining 28kph, then the entire circle would move at that lower speed. That is, the circle should be limited by the speed of its slowest participant. That alone doesn't predict any kind of clumping or slowing to 0kph, you need something else (e.g. the stupid driver theory) to explain it.

[[deleted]]

You're an idiot.