- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Broke: Car C is being a responsible, safety focused driver
Woke: Car C is holding up traffic for no good reason
Bespoke: Car Pink is whipping around that turn at 80 kmph and going to kill everyone anyone, so don’t sweet it.
Just go right over the center and see if you can clear C and D.
Wait until you see the magic roundabout in the UK. It’s a “close your eyes, pray and hit the gas” type of place.
I’ve seen this so often before and I still don’t understand why they didn’t just build an ordinary roundabout. It’s just six roads that meet there. That’s not beyond ordinary roundabout capabilities. Who said “you know what, let’s just do a circular arrangement of five roundabouts here, that’s so much better than what people are used to”?
That roundabout needs a speaker constantly playing Entry of the Gladiators on repeat
No one will ever be able to invade the UK, they’ll get stuck in this horror.
It’s really five regular roundabouts circling one central roundabout.
Then you see the cars completely ignoring the sub-circles and driving over them or backwards to the arrows.
People will unironically see this and proclaim that it’s actually not that complicated…
Holy hell
Left side driving should be illegal
It is in the most places on earth.
Good.
I drove through that one, not easy. I prefer the turbine design we use in Germany.
Car C is really just waiting for the pink car to arrive so that they can slam the gas as soon as it does.
I knew a girl who was instructed to turn left at a roundabout, so she proceeded to turn left when merging into the roundabout.
Poor girl, fortunately everything was fine (she did fail, but no accidents) but that’s a special kind of ‘too literal’ that loops back around to being dumb.
And that’s why turn-by-turn navigation systems phrase it as “take the third exit from the roundabout” these days.
One of the work trucks used to have one that said “Go straight through the roundabout”. It was pretty tempting sometimes to take it at its word…
The hard part is when back to back traffic for 15 miles worth of cars is coming from one direction and everyone else is either too scared to zipper merge or they allow the one direction to have perpetual right of way.
At some point of heavy traffic, the circle right of way must yield for zipper merging, else face my ass aggro merging and beeping at everyone who doesn’t.
Replace the pink car with a bicycle an A is suddenly not being in the mood to yield anymore.
I was going straight once and had to go back in and do a full turn (180° + 360°) because of that.
All cars will yield to a bicycle in the UK, because less protected members of the road traffic always take priority.
All cars should yield.
When I used to cycle, I’d just go on the pavements at large roundabouts. Not much point in being right but dead.
I personally never had any issues. British drivers are very polite and cautious.
Welp, I’m not in the UK.
Over here, people go with - what is the most threatening to themselves - and it really feels weird that people who have presumably passed the driving exam are worse at roundabouts than me.
I’m a daily cyclist and I think I’d be terrified to bike through a full roundabout. They’re absolutely marvelous designs for throughput that doesn’t require complex signal automation, but the flip side of that is they’re pretty hostile if you’re not a motor vehicle. Any truly good roundabout design should include pedestrian and cycle paths along the periphery that have priority when crossing the circles entrances.
The lion does not concern himself with car C. Car D should plough straight through them.
As the circle enlarges, the system approaches four T-intersections. What I want to know is: at what size circle to people lose their minds and become unable to comprehend how T-intersections work.
Fair play to people confused about multi-lane roundabouts though.
When I have a Car D behind me, it’s because they overestimate my car’s acceleration capabilities.
Useful, but incomplete.
I’m always the pink car but get cut off by car A who decides to gun it soon as I’m right where pink car is
ITT: People road raging over imaginary traffic.
Drivers seem to love complaining about drivers
Those small green pissing pyramids are blocking the road.
Not everybody is cut out to drive (i.e. to operate dangerous heavy machinery in a fast-changing environment with others depending on you handling the situation correctly). The problem is when we structure our societies requiring everyone to do so to participate.
requiring everyone to do so to participate.
Bus, taxi, bike, walk, whatever.
I vehemently disagree that everyone has a ‘right’ to have a license, as so many argue.
They never said that everybody has a right to drive. The reality is that, at least in the US and similarly planned countries, cars are priced like a luxury and treated like a necessity by the powers that be. Anything that isn’t driving a car is an afterthought.
That infrastructure is majorly lacking if you live in the US.
This is what I do. It is not a universal solution. You are sugar coating your answer by leaving out the final option that makes it universal: give up.
My partner wants to be a social worker. They are quite talented in their profession and help a lot of people. They are not a good driver and it would be better for everyone if they did not have to drive. However, you cannot do the work they do unless you own a car, have a valid license, and are willing to drive around. The choice offered to them is: drive poorly, or give up your life’s ambition.
@AllNewTypeFace is exactly correct that there is a problem where we have structured society such that everyone is expected to drive, and your comment does not successfully refute that. The problem exists.
It’s not as binary as “drive or give up life’s ambition”. Uber exists, busses (maybe not in USA and some areas of Canada). Still we are setup as car-centric and it sucks
Yes, actually, it is. Sometimes, for some people with some perfectly ordinary ambitions, those are the only two options. It is absolutely binary.
Uber and busses are not solutions for people who need to move their clients around, for example. Even if it were remotely practical to attempt it, even if it were safe for their clients, it’s simply not permitted.
If you’ve never run into a situation where you had to give things up because you don’t have a car, that’s extremely fortunate. To claim no one ever does is wildly delusional.
I gave up my car. I bus to clients. I understand there are circumstances where it may not be always be the case but there are handy transit out here for moving clientswhoo need support, and other services. I have even seen US shows documenting social work where they use taxis.
I gave up my car. I bus to clients. In our professions, we had that option. Other people in other professions and other localities don’t. My partner has to be able to transport vulnerable individuals like foster children with trauma as part of their career. Obviously we could design things in such a way that there are other options, but we haven’t. Sometimes people can fill in or work around those gaps. Some times, it is not possible, for example with my partner. Fuck off now, you’re just being deliberately obtuse.
That username LOL
I hate getting stuck behind the “I won’t move until there are no cars anywhere on the planet” drivers.
