- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/13/19 at 4:19 pm to CharlesLSU
quote:
I am unaware of vehicle detection tech that is currently available to do this
It is VERY easy to detect, both with cameras and radar, whether a vehicle is decelerating, and by how much, with current tech. This has been possible for a couple decades, at least. Problem is, preventing people from running lights isn't profitable. quote:
Applying James Cameron-type ideas doesn't mean they are possible....at least not currently.
You serious? All you have to do is detect speed and distance. It is absolutely trivial to detect a possible light-runner far in advance with minimal equipment. Your car probably already alerts you if it detects a possible collision. Why is this so far-fetched? quote:
Naïve is you thinking the field of Traffic Engineering has snazzy ideas for everything.
Attempting to reduce accidents is a snazzy idea, eh? Hey, you know how RR crossings flash lights, make a noise, and lower barriers when a train is coming? What a snazzy idea! This whole argument is absurd. Of course the technology exists! Radar works by line of sight, so it knows how fast you're going from hundreds of feet away all the way to the intersection. And there are multiple ways to detect range, from sensors across the road (these are everywhere counting traffic), to beam breaks, to optically via the camera. It is dead simple to detect possible light runners hundreds of feet in advance, with decades-old tech. It is similarly easy to take appropriate action in response to these situations. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that these intersections with cameras couldn't also prevent cross traffic green, flash the red rapidly, and sound an alarm to get a driver's attention in plenty of time for them to react. Well, except that it's not profitable to prevent people from running a light.
Posted on 5/13/19 at 4:20 pm to Smart Post
quote:Also addressed earlier, I couldn't care less if you fine these people $10k.
That's a good idea, but is this coupled with eliminating any punitive action against the red-light runner?
If so, then this gives red-light runners carte blanche to run lights with impunity, without fear of anyone entering the intersection.
Posted on 5/13/19 at 4:23 pm to CharlesLSU
quote:Sure they can. But my argument is that saving lives isn't usually the deciding factor in these decisions, as it should be. Further, I argue that the methods used (mailing out citations) is not nearly as effective as my entirely feasible suggestions would be in preventing injuries.
I will give you this: a blanket application for the cameras is misguided. yes.
BUT, for certain intersections, they can save lives.
Posted on 5/13/19 at 4:39 pm to CharlesLSU
quote:I've observed my fair share of them.
Are you at all familiar with how an automated, traffic signal controller operates?
I am also quite familiar with various programming and systems control methods. A given intersection might have static timing, or it might be dynamically timed based on time of day or traffic patterns. Some detect vehicle presence. It might be a standalone system, or it might be centrally controlled.
quote:The light's programmed timing would only be disrupted when a vehicle will potentially run a red. This can be easily tuned to be more or less aggressive in detecting these situations. We don't have to make a change every cycle. We don't have to disrupt the normal flow of traffic 100% of the time. However, to use your own logic, would it not be a net win to inconvenience some people to prevent a fatal crash?
Explain to me how you are going to determine a potential red light runner (approach velocity vs distance)in a way that holds all traffic for a time that doesn't become problematic.
quote:Well hey, here's another hair-brained idea. The same system that detects a possible light runner can also detect whether there is NOT a possible light runner. All-reds are probably quite effective, but such a system can be improved by varying the all-red time, whether shortening or lengthening, while maintaining or improving safety. As you said, if the all-red is too long, people start running reds anyway.
That's effectively what an ALL-RED interval already does. However, it has been shown that beyond 2.0s drivers become doubtful of the controllers operation and begin advancing….
quote:Then when the all-red is extended, flash the lights to alert the cross traffic to the situation, as well. These are not hard problems to solve. You're really reaching here.
This idea you propose would extend a 2.0s ALL-RED in most cases which studies show some cars would then still advance.
Posted on 5/13/19 at 4:42 pm to Korkstand
Your application of the tech is misguided.
red light runners HUNDREDS OF FEET in advance?!?! Outside of doing 100+mph, how in the hell are you going to determine a red light running vehicle?!
I am a licensed PE specializing in Traffic Engineering.....you are taking ideas and running with them like a child with scissors.
And, you miss to boat on how it would be used to control cars already under ALL-RED conditions.
As far as Advance Vehicle Detection (what you are so knowledgeable of), it is typically accomplished with inductive loops, radar, microwave, or video. This advanced vehicle detection is utilized to extend green times as need to ensure an advancing vehicle has adequate time/space to stop under a clearance indication (i.e. yellow light). What is NOT feasible due to the operating dynamics (and driver habits) is a clear determination of a "red light runner" and the ability to hold side street vehicles to avoid a collision. However, in implementing the 2second ALL-RED interval does mitigate this exact circumstance....going beyond the 2seconds is wasted/useless tech and/or extending a time frame that is already proven hazardous.
Dude. WTF?
ETA: The red light violations we are discussing are related to those vehicles approaching under a yellow and trying to proceed.....NOT a dumbass approaching the intersection under a red ball. Your logic is more aligned with that than the issue at hand.
Also, educate yourself MUTCD
Some tech
more tech
red light runners HUNDREDS OF FEET in advance?!?! Outside of doing 100+mph, how in the hell are you going to determine a red light running vehicle?!
I am a licensed PE specializing in Traffic Engineering.....you are taking ideas and running with them like a child with scissors.
And, you miss to boat on how it would be used to control cars already under ALL-RED conditions.
As far as Advance Vehicle Detection (what you are so knowledgeable of), it is typically accomplished with inductive loops, radar, microwave, or video. This advanced vehicle detection is utilized to extend green times as need to ensure an advancing vehicle has adequate time/space to stop under a clearance indication (i.e. yellow light). What is NOT feasible due to the operating dynamics (and driver habits) is a clear determination of a "red light runner" and the ability to hold side street vehicles to avoid a collision. However, in implementing the 2second ALL-RED interval does mitigate this exact circumstance....going beyond the 2seconds is wasted/useless tech and/or extending a time frame that is already proven hazardous.
Dude. WTF?
ETA: The red light violations we are discussing are related to those vehicles approaching under a yellow and trying to proceed.....NOT a dumbass approaching the intersection under a red ball. Your logic is more aligned with that than the issue at hand.
Also, educate yourself MUTCD
Some tech
more tech
This post was edited on 5/13/19 at 4:51 pm
Posted on 5/13/19 at 5:23 pm to CharlesLSU
quote:Why do you act like the math is so difficult? If you know the speed and distance of a vehicle (and acceleration rate if you take multiple measurements), it is not difficult at all to calculate the probability of it stopping in time. Hell, in most cases all you need to know is simply whether or not the vehicle is decelerating at a distance of about 2-300 feet from the intersection.
red light runners HUNDREDS OF FEET in advance?!?! Outside of doing 100+mph, how in the hell are you going to determine a red light running vehicle?!
quote:
I am a licensed PE specializing in Traffic Engineering...
This is amazing. Are you or any of your peers working on ways to actually reduce traffic accidents?! quote:How so? This seems to be the easiest scenario to make a life-saving adjustment to the signals. Even if people do tend to proceed after a too-long all-red, not everyone does. If your options are give cross traffic a green KNOWING there is a vehicle approaching too quickly, or extend the all-red on the assumption that most people won't proceed, which is preferable?
And, you miss to boat on how it would be used to control cars already under ALL-RED conditions.
quote:
As far as Advance Vehicle Detection (what you are so knowledgeable of)
quote:Well, at least you are aware that there are multiple existing technologies to detect the presence, location, and velocity of a vehicle.
it is typically accomplished with inductive loops, radar, microwave, or video.
quote:Good, good.
This advanced vehicle detection is utilized to extend green times as need to ensure an advancing vehicle has adequate time/space to stop under a clearance indication (i.e. yellow light).
quote:You don't need a "clear determination". All you need is a probability in order to take appropriate action. Even if altering the cross traffic light's timing is out of the question for whatever absurd reason you come up with, at the very least the possible runner could be alerted visually and/or audibly.
What is NOT feasible due to the operating dynamics (and driver habits) is a clear determination of a "red light runner"
quote:Wonderful. Do you have any statistics on whether reducing the all-red time would actually be beneficial when it is know to be safe to do so?
However, in implementing the 2second ALL-RED interval does mitigate this exact circumstance....going beyond the 2seconds is wasted/useless tech and/or extending a time frame that is already proven hazardous.
quote:Same to you.
Dude. WTF?
quote:So who causes most collisions? Vehicles approaching under yellow (where I assume most collisions are prevented by the all-red, as I hinted at on page 2), or dumbasses cruising through a red?
ETA: The red light violations we are discussing are related to thpose vehicles approaching under a yellow and trying to proceed.....NOT a dumbass approaching the intersection under a red ball. Your logic is more aligned with that than the issue at hand.
My argument is simply that red light cameras used to mail citations are mildly beneficial to public safety at best, basically a wash in most cases, and slightly harmful at worst. Meanwhile private companies and some departments are raking in loads of cash under the guise of improving public safety. Further, I argue that these systems could easily instead be integrated into the traffic control system to actually improve safety with little to no downside, but it doesn't happen because it's not profitable.
Posted on 5/13/19 at 5:37 pm to CharlesLSU
quote:Dude, WTF? Again.
Also, educate yourself MUTCD
Some tech
more tech
You JUST acted like detecting a possible red light runner in advance was just absurd, "James Cameron" tech, and then you link to companies that make systems that seem to do exactly that!
My question is, is this tech used anywhere to signal drivers to an impending dangerous scenario and/or take actions to prevent a collision, or is it generally used as part of a revenue generation program to take photos of drivers and license plates and mail out fines?
Posted on 5/13/19 at 6:47 pm to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:
Except to turn you over to a collection agency and have the non-payment of the fine end up on your credit report.
No, you are dumb. And the website will have a video. If he was over the line while red before coming to a complete stop. It is running the light. Even if he did stop fully before turning.
Posted on 5/13/19 at 7:52 pm to pingman
quote:
Don’t pay it. There are no repercussions
I dont pay them anymore. Theres nothing they can do. It's not on your record and I just throw them away.
Posted on 5/13/19 at 8:36 pm to pingman
Everyone on the OT is a baller until they get a camera ticket.
Posted on 5/14/19 at 8:40 am to eddieray
..I just hate "donating" money when it is unwarranted....Posted on 5/14/19 at 9:57 am to pingman
I'm pretty sure I got one last weekend turning right on college from corporate. I coasted through the light at about 1/2mph and saw the light flash behind me. No way a cop would've ticketed me, it was that slow and nobody was remotely near me coming down college. Can't wait for that to come in the mail so I can roll it up and smoke it. frick those cameras!
Posted on 5/14/19 at 10:02 am to pingman
What about the Speeding camera tickets in NOLA? I got one of those recently
Posted on 5/14/19 at 10:34 am to Breauxsif
quote:
The legality behind this scam is completely asinine. They send you a fine via mail and expect you to pay without mitigation? Completely unconstitutional.
They have on the ticket the signed deposition of a police officer attesting he or she reviewed the video and/or photo evidence. That same evidence is available to you on the website made available to you.
You can imagine some poor cop pulled aside by a boss and given maybe hundreds of cases to "review" and swear to their validity by signing off on them. Thing is, unless they really check the evidence closely before signing off, they have potentially perjured themselves.
Mrs M had a medical procedure in BR that we drove in from Brandon, MS to get done. Because she was affected by the anesthesia, I was driving her van and got ticketed turning right on to College from Corporate in the designated turn lane with the green arrow. Mrs M got the ticket by mail at our home in Brandon. And I'm sure they expected full payment from persons living 165 miles away who could calculate the costs in time, money, and inconvenience required to fight the damn thing.
The "evidence" was a bad photo of our van in the turn lane turning right at a red light. Reviewed and attested by police that she was guilty, guilty, guilty!
But, upon closer review, there are many lights at that intersection and the photo and video showed the van turning under protection of a green arrow.
To clear the thing up, I had to submit an affidavit that I was the driver not Mrs M. She received a mailed notice that her ticket was dismissed the same day I received my ticket in the mail all particulars being the same but naming me the offender.
Rather than formally fight the ticket procedurally, I called the company BR has contracted for the stupid bullcrap and called to their attention that their very own evidence exonerated me from all wrongdoing.
No, she said, clearly you turned right while the light was red AND the police verified it.
Not so, says I, look at your video, I'm turning under the green right turn arrow.
Well, says she, take that up with the local authorities procedurally.
Fine, says I, to do so means I am going to have to impeach the written testimony of a police officer, saying they either didn't really review the evidence like they swore they did or just made a really stupid mistake. Doesn't seem fair that (I was pretty hot at this juncture)
a police officer who probably regularly put themselves in harm's way will have to review this bullcrap ticket a second time and be forced to reverse themselves when you and I can see a ticket should never have been written.
She put me on hold, came back and says her supervisor is going to review it and call back Monday to find out his decision.
I got a dismissal in Monday's mail.
And after all of that I find out today from y'all that I could have shite-canned the whole thing from the gitgo! Dog frick...and rat crap!
Yeah, yeah...holy wall of text...I got it.
Posted on 5/14/19 at 10:52 am to Mr. Misanthrope
Posted on 5/14/19 at 10:55 am to Mr. Misanthrope
Yep they don't do a damn thing if you don't pay it
Posted on 5/14/19 at 11:54 am to Mr. Misanthrope
But if you got an income tax refund you could "possibly" use that money to pay for your ticket. I fricking love that part of the letter.
Posted on 5/14/19 at 1:31 pm to Broke
quote:
But if you got an income tax refund you could "possibly" use that money to pay for your ticket. I fricking love that part of the letter.
Seriously right?!!!
Posted on 6/3/19 at 6:40 pm to LSUcdro
quote:
What about the Speeding camera tickets in NOLA? I got one of those recently
What did you find out about these? I just got one in the mail from Nola
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News