Traffic is the fault of drivers' behavior? Roads? Or both? Arrived in Italy in these days the best seller "Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us)" by the American writer Tom Vanderbilt. The book shows how the behavior of those who are behind the wheel affect the code and how its consequences are amplified with the increase of cars on the road.
It also indicates the psychological mechanisms that trigger when you are in the car is completely different from when you are on foot or in other "social". There's also a reference to the famous "Murphy's Law" on the performance of code: it is proved that under conditions of heavy traffic on each lane of the motorway journeys the same number of vehicles, travel times are essentially identical.
So it's no use hoping to constantly change lanes to move more quickly (it is advisable to maintain the free lane on the right). Vanderbilt's work also bears some effective numerical example of the phenomenon is not commensurate progress "traffic". A 5% decrease in traffic on a road to "bottleneck" can reach 50% increase in the speed of the vehicles involved.
If, however, in a metropolis like London 1% of users of public transport would use their car, the volume of cars would increase by 5%. And the parking? Better to stay put and wait for a seat instead of wandering around the block. But psychologically, to stand still "makes us feel victims of the situation and we tend to overestimate the distance they covered on foot after leaving the car." The author of the book also puts in connection the high risk of accidents (which he prefers to call "clashes", since there are never random) with the factors that seems to enhance security: the excessive care of the signage or lighting Street and the large size of the roads that, paradoxically, make it more safe and secure drivers, then lowered the alert level.
According to his research, for example, you pass closer to cyclists wearing the helmet to what you do with those without a helmet, and thus considered most vulnerable to defend. The speed bumps on the asphalt? Hazardous psychologically, in fact, tends to accelerate from one to the other for lost time slowing to overcome them.
'Most likely to invest a person on the strips in front of the usual supermarket we frequent every day, rather than doing it on a winding road below Machu Picchu, "the writer says, pointing out the danger of the roads you ride regularly. Solutions to make the streets safe? "Abolish signs, traffic lights, sidewalks, railings, zebras, stripes and separation of beds, and spreading on this surface flat benches and trees that the machines should be avoided." A rather odd and drastic solution, supported by a Dutch engineer, whose philosophy has been adopted in various streets of the continent such as the High Street Kensington in London, which later saw a very low rate of fighting and investment. 
It also indicates the psychological mechanisms that trigger when you are in the car is completely different from when you are on foot or in other "social". There's also a reference to the famous "Murphy's Law" on the performance of code: it is proved that under conditions of heavy traffic on each lane of the motorway journeys the same number of vehicles, travel times are essentially identical.
So it's no use hoping to constantly change lanes to move more quickly (it is advisable to maintain the free lane on the right). Vanderbilt's work also bears some effective numerical example of the phenomenon is not commensurate progress "traffic". A 5% decrease in traffic on a road to "bottleneck" can reach 50% increase in the speed of the vehicles involved.
If, however, in a metropolis like London 1% of users of public transport would use their car, the volume of cars would increase by 5%. And the parking? Better to stay put and wait for a seat instead of wandering around the block. But psychologically, to stand still "makes us feel victims of the situation and we tend to overestimate the distance they covered on foot after leaving the car." The author of the book also puts in connection the high risk of accidents (which he prefers to call "clashes", since there are never random) with the factors that seems to enhance security: the excessive care of the signage or lighting Street and the large size of the roads that, paradoxically, make it more safe and secure drivers, then lowered the alert level.
According to his research, for example, you pass closer to cyclists wearing the helmet to what you do with those without a helmet, and thus considered most vulnerable to defend. The speed bumps on the asphalt? Hazardous psychologically, in fact, tends to accelerate from one to the other for lost time slowing to overcome them.
'Most likely to invest a person on the strips in front of the usual supermarket we frequent every day, rather than doing it on a winding road below Machu Picchu, "the writer says, pointing out the danger of the roads you ride regularly. Solutions to make the streets safe? "Abolish signs, traffic lights, sidewalks, railings, zebras, stripes and separation of beds, and spreading on this surface flat benches and trees that the machines should be avoided." A rather odd and drastic solution, supported by a Dutch engineer, whose philosophy has been adopted in various streets of the continent such as the High Street Kensington in London, which later saw a very low rate of fighting and investment.
No comments:
Post a Comment