|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 12, 2013 6:21:55 GMT
Summertime, and the driving is IDIOTIC.....
Is it just me that is noticing this, or does good weather bring out the complete idiot more?...
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Jun 12, 2013 12:53:46 GMT
No, It's not just you. Last Saturday, the traffic was absolutely chaotic. It's worse than rush hour (3 hours here) because the traffic is heavy all day and NOBODY seems to know where they are going or how to get there. I ran out to the tool store Saturday morning and passed three accidents on the way there and back. And that is only about 5 miles away.
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jun 12, 2013 14:13:02 GMT
My guess is that:
1. More people are on the road due to limited obligations.
2. More people are on the road longer as they try to get to their destinations.
3. Alcohol consumption - and the consumption of other substances - has likely increased.
US Highway 190 runs right through town, and so the stupidity that can happen both in town and in the general area is legendary.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 12, 2013 14:19:27 GMT
Add in the people driving various versions of camping vehicles, which they are not used to driving, (and are sometimes even afraid of driving) and the fact that people from out of the area don't know the local driving customs.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jun 12, 2013 16:13:41 GMT
So how would you go about testing this on Mythbusters?
Remember that you need to make it visually interesting and include the cast as much as possible. (Cost in this case shouldn't be a major problem). This would be the ideal time to think as to how to make this work, as they will start filming again around August and continue through to December which would allow them to 'test' driving in both the Summer and Winter this year...assuming that someone picks this up as a possible idea within the next few weeks.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 12, 2013 16:28:14 GMT
I would think it would have to involve a bunch of montages.
I would envision: driving tests with both familiar and unfamiliar vehicles, to establish what degree of driving error was caused by unfamiliarity with the vehicles. Traffic studies done with both stationary cameras, and route runs (drive from point A to point B in regular and holiday traffic) in both cases, counting "idiotic" infractions. random interviews with people in various areas about unwritten driving rules, to establish how different driving rules lead to "idiotic" infractions. Traffic density studies to see how much increased traffic density affects driving habits.
not sure how interesting that could get...
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jun 12, 2013 17:11:45 GMT
I would think it would have to involve a bunch of montages. I would envision: driving tests with both familiar and unfamiliar vehicles, to establish what degree of driving error was caused by unfamiliarity with the vehicles. Traffic studies done with both stationary cameras, and route runs (drive from point A to point B in regular and holiday traffic) in both cases, counting "idiotic" infractions. random interviews with people in various areas about unwritten driving rules, to establish how different driving rules lead to "idiotic" infractions. Traffic density studies to see how much increased traffic density affects driving habits. not sure how interesting that could get... People will tend to be driving vehicles they know, not something unfamiliar to them. So the driving tests here would be irrelevant. Interviewing people will give you their opinion, not hard data. As such it is not scientific information that MB should or could use to call the myth. Using road cameras might be an option, although this would require permission from the local police/highway patrol. Counting infractions would certainly require an expert to be brought in - and be very time consuming and rather dull - as none of the cast are qualified here. At best they could bring in an expert to show them some of the infractions they should be looking for.
|
|
|
Post by PK on Jun 12, 2013 17:28:39 GMT
People will tend to be driving vehicles they know, not something unfamiliar to them. So the driving tests here would be irrelevant. Not necessarily. I think TLW had it earlier on: A lot of people end up in rented vehicles for summer vacations; either at their destination, a local RV place or the like. In addition, if you're on vacation in a foreign country you may very well be in a rented car you aren't used to and dealing with traffic rules you aren't familiar with. If you take someone who commutes to work every day in a Prius and stick him in a rented RV, it's going to affect how he drives. Especially if he has to copy with lane markings and signage he's not familiar with and/or driving on the other side of the road.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 12, 2013 17:35:53 GMT
I would think it would have to involve a bunch of montages. I would envision: driving tests with both familiar and unfamiliar vehicles, to establish what degree of driving error was caused by unfamiliarity with the vehicles. Traffic studies done with both stationary cameras, and route runs (drive from point A to point B in regular and holiday traffic) in both cases, counting "idiotic" infractions. random interviews with people in various areas about unwritten driving rules, to establish how different driving rules lead to "idiotic" infractions. Traffic density studies to see how much increased traffic density affects driving habits. not sure how interesting that could get... People will tend to be driving vehicles they know, not something unfamiliar to them. So the driving tests here would be irrelevant. Interviewing people will give you their opinion, not hard data. As such it is not scientific information that MB should or could use to call the myth. Using road cameras might be an option, although this would require permission from the local police/highway patrol. Counting infractions would certainly require an expert to be brought in - and be very time consuming and rather dull - as none of the cast are qualified here. At best they could bring in an expert to show them some of the infractions they should be looking for. you tow a travel trailer as your daily driver? in this case, opinions are what you want. where I live, the first person making a left turn goes as soon as the light turns green, and the drivers going straight through lag enough to allow it. in California, the straight through traffic goes immediately, and the left turns wait until the light turns yellow - the straight through traffic stops, and 5 cars turn left, while cross traffic expects that they will still be going after the light changes to red. keep in mind the infractions mentioned are cases of people doing things that don't fit in with normal traffic patterns.
|
|
|
Post by PK on Jun 12, 2013 17:38:20 GMT
Well, to be fair, in California it's common for that first person to jump the gun a bit and race through the left turn, forcing the opposing straight-through traffic to jam on their brakes.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 12, 2013 17:50:47 GMT
Well, to be fair, in California it's common for that first person to jump the gun a bit and race through the left turn, forcing the opposing straight-through traffic to jam on their brakes. not the part I was in.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 12, 2013 18:11:56 GMT
on a sideline - my community now has severe traffic jams at peak times in the summer - one person, the year it first started, wrote a letter to the local newspaper claiming that the jams were the result of people speeding. perhaps the mythbusters could do a mini myth to determine whether a person going faster than the legal speed limit makes all the cars in town go slower than the legal speed limit.
(or whether it is even possible for someone to drive 35 MPH when you are in bumper to bumper traffic, all going 15-20 MPH)
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 13, 2013 6:54:22 GMT
Test One.
Get a cast member who has had NO experience of towing a caravan, or even a trailer, and get them to tow a large trailer....
Get them trained.
Repeat first route, and see how much they have improved.
Test Two.
Give someone a route to drive containing [X] number of pedestrian lights, right turns at lights, left turns, etc.... in the general area where they live....
Repeat for a similar route in a different area that they do not know..... Compare time it takes to make the journey, time it takes to navigate(on average) each right/left junction, and how confident they are whilst driving.
Test Three...
Repeat Two whilst towing large trailer.
Just a couple of ideas.... if anyone know a better one?.....or can improve on above?....
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jun 13, 2013 14:36:01 GMT
driving alertness test -
This one operates on a similar principle to the "power nap" myth from the Deadliest Catch episode.
Give someone a pre-planned round trip with an estimated completion time of around 4 - 6 hours. Tell them that they must make this trip in one long run, stopping only to get gas if needed. Have cameras (and maybe even chase vehicles) monitor their performance.
Follow this up with a second round trip. Tell the person that they are to stop every hour or so and pull over to stretch. As with the above, have cameras (and perhaps a chase vehicle) monitor their performance.
The idea would be to see if stopping periodically would contribute to better driver alertness and therefore better, safer driving during a long run.
As far as the 4 - 6 hours, I live in Central Texas. From where I am, it's 3 - 6 hours (give or take) to such cities as Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio, and so for me at least that's how long I would be on the road at a stretch to get to them.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jun 13, 2013 15:01:51 GMT
driving alertness test - This one operates on a similar principle to the "power nap" myth from the Deadliest Catch episode. Give someone a pre-planned round trip with an estimated completion time of around 4 - 6 hours. Tell them that they must make this trip in one long run, stopping only to get gas if needed. Have cameras (and maybe even chase vehicles) monitor their performance. Follow this up with a second round trip. Tell the person that they are to stop every hour or so and pull over to stretch. As with the above, have cameras (and perhaps a chase vehicle) monitor their performance. The idea would be to see if stopping periodically would contribute to better driver alertness and therefore better, safer driving during a long run. As far as the 4 - 6 hours, I live in Central Texas. From where I am, it's 3 - 6 hours (give or take) to such cities as Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio, and so for me at least that's how long I would be on the road at a stretch to get to them. Maybe a better way might be to have a group of people driving a certain route**, but to give some of them a time limit* (nothing that would require speeding, maybe the time needed at the speed limit plus 10-20 minutes). I'm guessing that a lot of bad driving comes from people simply not giving themselves enough time to get to their destination or otherwise just getting stressed out if they think they will be late and driving more aggressively that would normally be the case. This might also make sense as to why (if true) you are more likely to see bad driving during the summer and holidays - unlike say driving to work you are using a route you are not familiar or as familiar with and therefore unable to predict exactly how long it is really going to take. (*Maybe telling them that they will get some sort of reward if they arrive by a certain time - with the proviso that if they speed or otherwise break the law the deal is automatically off.) (**Ideally a route that they don't know. They could either be working from directions handed to them or allowed to work out their own route to a destination as they see fit.) Come to think of it this *may* be a slightly more viable way of looking at the basic idea. As it stands they would have to test twice, both in winter/fall and also in the summer. This way of looking at the idea could be tested at any time of the year.
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Jun 13, 2013 16:35:59 GMT
Give group A a maximum time limit based on an average of 90% of freeway speed. give group B a minimum time limit based on an average of 90% of freeway speed.
in both cases they must obey speed limits and other traffic rules. (with a reasonable allowance for traffic flow - I remember how california freeway traffic can be)
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 14, 2013 6:05:16 GMT
British law (and european) states that 6 hrs is the maximum time you can drive Heavy goods (Or even light goods these days) in one continuous block, then you MUST take a break. (45 mins) This is because its already known that on average, that average driver, of average age, etc, can only concentrate for that long. Maximum driving hours per day are 9hrs (With some exceptions) but any any one given point you cannot drive for more than 6 hrs without taking a mandatory 45min break.
If you were to go for the maximum time it takes for the average driver to loose concentration, you may be in for a pretty long run?.... I cant comment on your average Car driver here, because I am out of that group, being I spend my working day on the road... I am used to long hours of concentration on the road.
Knowing that you are "Under test"?.............. I would say that invalidates the test.
Most people who are being watched and evaluated whilst driving, drive to what they think are driving test conditions?...
Can you just rig a vehicle with camera's, let everyone get used to the idea they MAY be being watched, leave it like that for a month, then run a series of tests "On the quiet" without bringing to attention that these will be the REAL tests?... That way, the drivers will get used to and probably ignore the camera's?...
Compare the video that you get back, from day One of camera's, to the month later's "Can you just nip down the shop and get some coffee"........
And THAT is when you throw in a few challenges.... The "We need [xyz] YESTERDAY" type screamer collections, to the down right annoying stop someone doing something important and give them a pretty meaningless task to go do.... However, I cant at any point agree to letting anyone drive on open roads whilst pure ANGRY..... for obvious reasons?....
I know this cross-topics with Driving Distracted. Distractions DO make a difference, but do people realise just how much?... Just what does it take to make a usually placid driver be a right plonka once in a while?...
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jun 14, 2013 11:45:46 GMT
For the show this would be impractical. In order to get useful data they would need to run tests similar to those they did in the two Battle of the Sexes Episodes - meaning volunteers. They don't have the time or money to fit more than two or so cars, let alone 'hire' cars out for a month to a group. (Besides, having expensive camera equipment sitting on the dashboard of someone's car is just begging for someone to break in to steal it.)
What they can do is what they did with the asking for directions myth - they simply tell them they are testing something else (maybe a revisit of map reading or a myth about following directions). Not perfect, but probably the best they can do.
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Jun 14, 2013 14:15:29 GMT
OK - experiment idea.
Experiment: how people drive under relaxed conditions vs. how they drive under tight timelines
Control: volunteers are told to go from A to B, where a "party" is being held (IE one or more team members with cake and a karaoke machine). they may take as long as they want to.
Variable: volunteers must re-run the same route. however, they are under a tight schedule; they *must* make it from A to B within a certain time period in order to be invited in.
Camera crews will follow the people as they drive each way in order to determine the degree of risky vs. safe behavior they engage in while driving.
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Jun 14, 2013 14:24:16 GMT
OK - experiment idea. Experiment: how people drive under relaxed conditions vs. how they drive under tight timelines Control: volunteers are told to go from A to B, where a "party" is being held (IE one or more team members with cake and a karaoke machine). they may take as long as they want to. Variable: volunteers must re-run the same route. however, they are under a tight schedule; they *must* make it from A to B within a certain time period in order to be invited in. Camera crews will follow the people as they drive each way in order to determine the degree of risky vs. safe behavior they engage in while driving. It would be argued that this is much the same as Driving Angry.
|
|