What m trying to tell you is not everything can be controlled in life, it’s just the way it is. We have a limited amount of money and you can spend it on feeding people and the basic needs or spend it on the few people killed every year by wrong way drivers. It’s a tragedy that through no fault of their own they got killed but the world is not fair and other priorities are first inline. There is no simple solution that doesn’t have unintended consequences of its own. We just have to accept that. We take our lives in others hands with every thing we do outside. It sucks but it is the way it will always be. Life has never been fair and it can’t be made fair without limiting the freedom of everyone.
Apparently what I am proposing is already being done in Austria. Look at Post #22 here. It would be interesting to see the actual data regarding accidents and injuries from there.
It would be interesting to know the number of people killed by wrong way drivers both before and after the change and how many cars are stopped by the device niw of both impaired and just stupid drivers. Of course Austria doesn’t have one tenth the number of drivers and cars we do in the US. They also go through rigorous drivers training that teaches them the responsibility of driving.
many factors at play but the bottom line is you can’t stop everything from happening despite best intentions.
many factors at play but the bottom line is you can’t stop everything from happening despite best intentions.
Nothing new under the sun. It is already used but not in the highway:
https://newsweek.ro/resize/S1rCFyjG...mNDZkMTQ5ZTEzYmEzMDFjMGQ3YWU5NzcwODIuanBn.jpg
https://autolatest.ro/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/dt7ir576-1068x542.jpg.webp
Last edited:
What should have been implemented & followed long long ago....any overhead bridge MUST be X height minimum, not tall enough?, tear it down, it's illegal.
Building a truck?, trailer?...must not exceed Y in height...get caught driving an overtly tall vehicle? impound and or destroy, an illegal vehicle.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rick...
I don't know of any scientific studies, but the austrian motorway operating company has published some information about the situation in austria here (german):
- only 20 tire-puncture-devices (german: Geisterfahrerkrallen = "ghost driver claws" in literal translation) are operating in austria for a total of 379 motorway ramps
- "tire puncture claws" have shown to be very effective and are installed at ramps that have been prone to wrong entries
- installation and maintenance is expensive
- snowplows are easily damaged by tire puncture claws
- if a vehicle is being stopped it blocks the motorway ramp and needs to be towed
- once activated the existing systems in austria need to be retracted manually
- most "wrong way drivers" do not enter the motorway on the wrong side but either turn around on the motorway (sometimes because of navigation systems telling them to do so!), drive the wrong way at motorway stations, resting areas, or road construction areas
- reasons are usually: being distracted and inattentive, being unable to cope with complex traffic crossings, use of alcohol or other drugs, rarely: health issues or suicide intention
- the "typical wrong way driver" is male and has been abusing alcohol.
- 417 wrong way driver warnings were recorded in austria in 2019. one person died in 2019 due to a wrong way driver. the number of actual wrong way drivers is probably much higher, but most remain unnoticed
- all austrian motorway ramps are equipped with big warning signs
- warning sensors detect vehicles driving the wrong way. the warning from these sensors or eventual alerts from other drivers are forwarded to police, transmitted via traffic information on the radio and shown on traffic information screens on the motorway.
- if evaluation shows sections that are prone to wrong way drivers these are improved with additional signs, better illumination, markings on the road etc.
Last edited:
Nope, the world doesn't work that way. Many, many things are "grandfathered" in. We can't rebuilt the world every time standards change.
On the bridge website there is a FAQ that explains what was done with this bridge.
The practical issues:
Too expensive in installation and maintenance. (A comparison with the Austrian example - may be the same argument I use with the other Services in discussions of standards and upgrades - remember if the Navy has 400 satcom terminals, the Army has >4,000. Similarly, if the Austrians have 400, I would guess the US has more than 4,000.)
Greatly complicates detours or alternate routes (snow, traffic, hurricane, etc.)
Annoying to emergency vehicles (they can drive around, but just another thing).
There are also effectiveness issues:
Only highway on-ramps? What about turning onto the wrong side of a divided 4-lane road (speeds are often comparable)?
It will stop the inattentive driver - but those are more likely to notice sooner and avoid collisions anyway.
IMO, not likely to stop the most dangerous - an impaired driver much more likely to drive on. Actually, drunks tend to drive toward shiny flashing lights (at night), so radar-activated attractive flashing lights on the side might work better anyway. Heck, it might get someone off the phone as well.
So I think the biggest reasons are probably the cost-benefit ratio.
If your thoughts immediately went to "life is priceless and one is too much", I would ask you to consider when in spite of all this investment one drunk drives on four flat tires and causes a fatality -- then isn't the [priceless, no cost is too much] out the window putting you back to calculating the death-avoiding benefits of other uses of the funds?
Too expensive in installation and maintenance. (A comparison with the Austrian example - may be the same argument I use with the other Services in discussions of standards and upgrades - remember if the Navy has 400 satcom terminals, the Army has >4,000. Similarly, if the Austrians have 400, I would guess the US has more than 4,000.)
Greatly complicates detours or alternate routes (snow, traffic, hurricane, etc.)
Annoying to emergency vehicles (they can drive around, but just another thing).
There are also effectiveness issues:
Only highway on-ramps? What about turning onto the wrong side of a divided 4-lane road (speeds are often comparable)?
It will stop the inattentive driver - but those are more likely to notice sooner and avoid collisions anyway.
IMO, not likely to stop the most dangerous - an impaired driver much more likely to drive on. Actually, drunks tend to drive toward shiny flashing lights (at night), so radar-activated attractive flashing lights on the side might work better anyway. Heck, it might get someone off the phone as well.
So I think the biggest reasons are probably the cost-benefit ratio.
If your thoughts immediately went to "life is priceless and one is too much", I would ask you to consider when in spite of all this investment one drunk drives on four flat tires and causes a fatality -- then isn't the [priceless, no cost is too much] out the window putting you back to calculating the death-avoiding benefits of other uses of the funds?
I'd argue that if certain ramps are more prone to wrong entries than others, then there's a more fundamental issue with those ramps. Maybe the entrance ramp is itself confusing, maybe poor signs or reflectors... something is "special" about those ramps and unusual/unexpected isn't good.
Along with the other reasons noted, Naresh mentioned emergency vehicles in post #7. In a number of cases, especially those where there is no shoulder, those vehicles have to enter the freeway going the opposite direction to reach the crash scene as all traffic behind the scene prevents them from accessing from the rear. This happens a fair bit and never makes the news bit just one person causing a cash, or even just driving the wrong way makes the evening news every time. In my small town of 2.7 million, it happens about once a year. I suggest that while the sentiment is there, it is impractical and could be as detrimental to the things such as mentioned above.
We must have hundreds if not thousands of medieval ((or older) bridges which are too low for some trucks and buses.
I and many others would be totally opposed to tearing them down besides most probably have preservation orders on them.
To avoid those bridges we have special truck sat-navs into which you input the height of your vehicle and they then send you on a route avoiding related issues.
We have pillars and cross girders before the bridges, trucks have to pass under those before reaching the passage with low height...bridges, warehouses, ramps, and so on.
That is safer for the structures, which may be aged, and damaged much more than expected due to their fragile condition.
That is safer for the structures, which may be aged, and damaged much more than expected due to their fragile condition.
It never happened to you to hit an unexpected one ?
One in the dark without any signalling for instance.
One so bad it has many traces of hits.
Not really and there are a ton of speed bumps where I live. The bumps are marked and there are signs warning drivers that there will be some before they start. One would have to be willfully ignorant or a very inattentive driver to miss those in which case those people really should not be driving at all.
The device in Post#44 is used to restrict entry to VVIP offices and residences, against terrorist attacks and so on.
Most of the vehicles used for high risk passengers have run flat tires, against bullet and shredding damage.
Not very relevant here.
Most of the vehicles used for high risk passengers have run flat tires, against bullet and shredding damage.
Not very relevant here.