SPEED KILLS?? OR...??

BasePX

I find this commentary on today's United Daily News. There are a few very interesting view points. One in particular is that about the speed limit:

" ... 眾所皆知，台灣駕駛執照考取制度的八股與不合時宜，造成了台灣駕駛者駕駛技術、駕駛道德與觀念良莠不齊的情形，加上道路設計與相關法規的落後，道路亂象時有所見。正確的路權觀念，與近年來所倡導的防禦駕駛觀念，難以充分徹底的落實與教育，所造成的意外難以計數外，往往於交通意外事故中，容易有大車欺小車的印象，並會有著路權丟一旁、速度快者為錯的錯誤觀念。也因如此，當雪山隧道發生如此重大意外時，各方學者專家於第一時間丟出的解決建議，往往也是因循過去，以「慢」為解決之道..."

全文網址: 降限速就安全？ 隧道意外探究 - http://mag.udn.com/mag/car/storypage.jsp?f_ART_ID=388509

BasePX

Traffic jam starts with ONE slow vehicle that was doing below the speed of the flow (not 限速), then every other vehicle will need to go around this slower vehicle, that constant lane-changing behind/around the slow vehicle will have an ill-affect on the smooth flow of the traffic. The more the number of the vehicle on the road, the more pronounced the ill-effect will be. Walla!! there is the "traffic Jam."

dingding

最後決議是拉長大車的安全距離

johnshuetw

您是說,肇事多為快之結果,但其前因為相對其他車"過慢"所造成的,

BasePX

dingding 發表於 2012-5-18 06:42
最後決議是拉長大車的安全距離

They had me worried for a while. I am so glad they did not touch the speed limit.

BasePX

johnshuetw 發表於 2012-5-18 06:48
您是說,肇事多為快之結果,但其前因為相對其他車"過慢"所造成的,

No, I did not say 肇事多為快之結果. Nor did I say 因為相對其他車"過慢"所造成的. I did not say any of that. I was just quoting a passage from the news paper, I do not make judgement nor I will ever say who or what was the cause of any accident.

One slower vehicle will have an ill-affect on the smooth flow of the traffic. As a rock in the middle of a river. But the nature has its way to cop with the blockage of the flow by increasing the speed around the blockage. thus no water jam will every form.

In a man-made environment, like a slow car in the traffic, unlike the water flow in the nature, the traffic flow will slow down around the obstruction instead of speeding up, thus the "traffic jam" forms.

ketsu019

johnshuetw 發表於 2012-5-18 21:48
您是說,肇事多為快之結果,但其前因為相對其他車"過慢"所造成的,

他的意思是肇事主因不見得全是快

但是塞車是因為前面有慢車造成的蝴蝶效應

所以台灣不應該再降低速限了

這很明顯的火燒車起因是未保持安全距離

台灣卻一味的只想要放慢速限

根本就不是對症下藥的解決之道

不過台灣官員從來也不是以解決事情為主要

是以怎樣不挨罵能應付過去為上策

否則拉大安全距離有甚麼意義

現今規定的安全距離難道會不夠嗎??

問題是駕駛人有沒有遵守

這才是政府要避免下次發生同樣事件要解決的問題...

BasePX

ketsu019 發表於 2012-5-18 19:19
他的意思是肇事主因不見得全是快

但是塞車是因為前面有慢車造成的蝴蝶效應

測速照相 is another reason the traffic flow is #@&* in Taiwan. Everyone slows down at the known camera location to avoid a ticket, and everyone drives at the same 100, leaves passing impossible: "...but in Taiwan the key problem is you often saw cars with low speed but occupied the higher speed lane and never turned to the lower speed lane. You have to drive to the right side for overtaking the car you want to pass but sometimes there were cars on the next lane as well and you couldn't move and jamed in the middle....".

If you put speed cameras in major artery in LA or Houston, there will be NO TRAFFIC JAM, the cameras will turn the freeway into a giant parking lot.

Speed does not kill, most fast drivers are ones who pays attentions to the driving environment and the road conditions, and they only drive as fast as the conditions allow. When the fast drive was said to "...waving through the traffic..", there were simply follow what the nature would do - speed up around obstacles.

"Speed up around obstacles" is what make the world go around, the river flow with no flood and the plane fly. Here is a simple aerodynamic of a wing:

BasePX

ketsu019 發表於 2012-5-18 19:19
他的意思是肇事主因不見得全是快

但是塞車是因為前面有慢車造成的蝴蝶效應

Thanks a million, you've clearly stated what I was trying very hard to say.

You are the BEST.

ketsu019

BasePX 發表於 2012-5-19 11:22
測速照相 is another reason the traffic flow is #@&* in Taiwan. Everyone slows down at the known ca ...

想不到您在台灣待的時間不多

對台灣的交通狀況還蠻了解的

台灣交通混亂主因還是用路人的素質

號稱禮儀之邦 方向盤一握甚麼都忘了

在高速公路上自動變文盲

"非超車勿佔用超車道" "非雨、霧勿開霧燈"

這些標語都看不懂是在寫啥

我曾在法國城鎮間的快速道路(非高速公路)

速限90KM 我以110KM行駛內車道

後面仍有車接近對我閃遠燈

我也是乖乖的靠右讓它超車

台灣人的觀念卻會是你要超速請自行想辦法超車

完全以自我為中心 甚至以最低速限行駛內車道

自以為只要不違規就可以打死不讓

在這呼籲大家 如果您不想開太快

上路不會跟上車流速度 又不懂得禮讓

還是多搭乘大眾運輸工具吧

台灣的交通少了您會更美好 感激不盡...