In my inbox from a friend wondering "how this can be so..." <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicagos-traffic-lights-make-drivers-see-red-faster/> -----8<------8<----- "Since November 2003, Chicago has issued five million red light camera citations and generated more than $520 million in revenue. Now comes word that even more money has been generated by a slight but significant alteration in the time it takes a yellow light to turn red. Chicago has issued 77,000 tickets this year at intersections where the yellow light lasts 2.9 seconds instead of the standard minimum of 3 seconds flat. That's almost $8 million in fines. "Three seconds is way too fast for a yellow light, I think," said driver John Mathy. Indeed, the federal Department of Transportation recommends yellow lights of 3 to 6 full seconds in duration. While the city says the tenth of a second is probably due to variations in electricity, city Inspector General Joe Ferguson says effective enforcement should mean an error-free strategy." -----8<------8<----- Ah, yes! I guess some parts of town have BLUE electrons while other parts have ORANGE ones! Obviously, the BLUE ones spin much faster than the ORANGE! <rolls eyes> Having seen red light cameras introduced, here (IIRC, they are now being *removed* as most of the fines were not payable to the city itself but, rather, the company that installed the cameras), there *is* a very definite reduction in the duration of yellow... "Run the light or risk being ass-ended!"
Electrical variations
Started by ●October 12, 2014
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 07:50:08 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:>In my inbox from a friend wondering "how this can be so..." > ><http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicagos-traffic-lights-make-drivers-see-red-faster/> > >-----8<------8<----- >"Since November 2003, Chicago has issued five million red light camera >citations and generated more than $520 million in revenue. > >Now comes word that even more money has been generated by a slight but >significant alteration in the time it takes a yellow light to turn red. > >Chicago has issued 77,000 tickets this year at intersections where the yellow >light lasts 2.9 seconds instead of the standard minimum of 3 seconds flat. > >That's almost $8 million in fines. > >"Three seconds is way too fast for a yellow light, I think," said driver John >Mathy. > >Indeed, the federal Department of Transportation recommends yellow lights of 3 >to 6 full seconds in duration. > >While the city says the tenth of a second is probably due to variations in >electricity, city Inspector General Joe Ferguson says effective enforcement >should mean an error-free strategy." >-----8<------8<----- >Ah, yes! I guess some parts of town have BLUE electrons while other parts >have ORANGE ones! Obviously, the BLUE ones spin much faster than the ORANGE! > ><rolls eyes> > >Having seen red light cameras introduced, here (IIRC, they are now being >*removed* as most of the fines were not payable to the city itself but, >rather, the company that installed the cameras), there *is* a very definite >reduction in the duration of yellow... "Run the light or risk being >ass-ended!"It's all about the money. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 07:50:08 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:>In my inbox from a friend wondering "how this can be so..." ><http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicagos-traffic-lights-make-drivers-see-red-faster/>(...)>Indeed, the federal Department of Transportation recommends yellow lights of 3 >to 6 full seconds in duration.Section 3.6 STANDARDIZATION OF YELLOW AND ALL- RED INTERVALS FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS <http://www.dot.state.fl.us/trafficoperations/Doc_Library/PDF/3%206r6_10.pdf> Derivation of the Yellow Change Interval Formula <http://redlightrobber.com/red/links_pdf/Yellow-Light-Duration-Derivation.pdf> -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 07:50:08 -0700, Don Y wrote:> In my inbox from a friend wondering "how this can be so..." > > <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicagos-traffic-lights-make-drivers-see-red-faster/>> > -----8<------8<----- > "Since November 2003, Chicago has issued five million red light camera > citations and generated more than $520 million in revenue. > > Now comes word that even more money has been generated by a slight but > significant alteration in the time it takes a yellow light to turn red. > > Chicago has issued 77,000 tickets this year at intersections where the > yellow light lasts 2.9 seconds instead of the standard minimum of 3 > seconds flat. > > That's almost $8 million in fines. > > "Three seconds is way too fast for a yellow light, I think," said driver > John Mathy. > > Indeed, the federal Department of Transportation recommends yellow > lights of 3 to 6 full seconds in duration. > > While the city says the tenth of a second is probably due to variations > in electricity, city Inspector General Joe Ferguson says effective > enforcement should mean an error-free strategy." > -----8<------8<----- > Ah, yes! I guess some parts of town have BLUE electrons while other > parts have ORANGE ones! Obviously, the BLUE ones spin much faster than > the ORANGE! > > <rolls eyes> > > Having seen red light cameras introduced, here (IIRC, they are now being > *removed* as most of the fines were not payable to the city itself but, > rather, the company that installed the cameras), there *is* a very > definite reduction in the duration of yellow... "Run the light or risk > being ass-ended!"That tenth second difference being due to electrical variation is total BS, and if they WERE using such poorly built and antiquated equipment that it suffered from such variation, the responsible thing would be to set the yellow interval a bit high. Someone is just spewing out horse manure. -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On 10/12/2014 12:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 07:50:08 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote: > >> In my inbox from a friend wondering "how this can be so..." >> <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicagos-traffic-lights-make-drivers-see-red-faster/> > (...) >> Indeed, the federal Department of Transportation recommends yellow lights of 3 >> to 6 full seconds in duration. > > Section 3.6 STANDARDIZATION OF YELLOW AND ALL- RED INTERVALS > FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS > <http://www.dot.state.fl.us/trafficoperations/Doc_Library/PDF/3%206r6_10.pdf>Note 3 seconds for 25MPH. IIRC, 25 is the default (unposted) speed limit in residential areas. 35 in business areas. Often 40 and more in most of the "in town" roads, here!> Derivation of the Yellow Change Interval Formula > <http://redlightrobber.com/red/links_pdf/Yellow-Light-Duration-Derivation.pdf>Ha! This last reference is excellent! Though I'm not sure how well it would hold up as a defense in traffic court (against a judge who probably failed "Math") :-/
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 13:43:36 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:>> Derivation of the Yellow Change Interval Formula >> <http://redlightrobber.com/red/links_pdf/Yellow-Light-Duration-Derivation.pdf> > >Ha! This last reference is excellent! Though I'm not sure how well it >would hold up as a defense in traffic court (against a judge who probably >failed "Math") :-/That assumes that the judge has time to read your calculations. One of my friends is a local judge pro tem. He fills in ocassionally in traffic court. If you've ever been to traffic court, it's organized confusion, where the main goal is to get as many cases settled as quickly as possible. I don't believe you would be allowed sufficient time to have calculations or derivations read and understood by a hurried judge. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On 10/12/2014 2:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 13:43:36 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote: > >>> Derivation of the Yellow Change Interval Formula >>> <http://redlightrobber.com/red/links_pdf/Yellow-Light-Duration-Derivation.pdf> >> >> Ha! This last reference is excellent! Though I'm not sure how well it >> would hold up as a defense in traffic court (against a judge who probably >> failed "Math") :-/ > > That assumes that the judge has time to read your calculations. One > of my friends is a local judge pro tem. He fills in ocassionally in > traffic court. If you've ever been to traffic court, it's organized > confusion, where the main goal is to get as many cases settled as > quickly as possible. I don't believe you would be allowed sufficient > time to have calculations or derivations read and understood by a > hurried judge.A friend, here, was cited for running a red light (photo enforced). He brought in measurements of his truck, the markings on the street, times involved, etc. and had his ticket dismissed. I think the fine is $250/300 so worth a bit of effort. From last year (summarizing the ~6 years prior): - 41,000 violations dismissed because people avoided being served. - 37,440 violations accepted ("paid") - 63,000 violations filled up seats in defensive-driving classes In that time, city netted ~$6M while the "contractor" reaped $5.3M and the *state* $6.2M
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On 10/12/14, 5:27 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 13:43:36 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote: > >>> Derivation of the Yellow Change Interval Formula >>> <http://redlightrobber.com/red/links_pdf/Yellow-Light-Duration-Derivation.pdf> >> >> Ha! This last reference is excellent! Though I'm not sure how well it >> would hold up as a defense in traffic court (against a judge who probably >> failed "Math") :-/ > > That assumes that the judge has time to read your calculations. One > of my friends is a local judge pro tem. He fills in ocassionally in > traffic court. If you've ever been to traffic court, it's organized > confusion, where the main goal is to get as many cases settled as > quickly as possible. I don't believe you would be allowed sufficient > time to have calculations or derivations read and understood by a > hurried judge. >If a person approaches the Judge and makes the simple statement that the ticket is invalid because the signal does not meet the state/federal requirements, and the Judge does not stop to listen to the case (or just throw the ticket out at that point), you have grounds for appeal, and possible to seek discipline on the Judge. Just showing up with regulations and some numbers that show some evidence of being incorrect, and the Judge will likely just dismiss, as there won't be anyone ready to rebut your statement.
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On 10/12/2014 1:09 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:> On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 07:50:08 -0700, Don Y wrote: > >> In my inbox from a friend wondering "how this can be so..." >> >> <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/chicagos-traffic-lights-make-drivers-see- > red-faster/> >> >> -----8<------8<----- >> "Since November 2003, Chicago has issued five million red light camera >> citations and generated more than $520 million in revenue. >> >> Now comes word that even more money has been generated by a slight but >> significant alteration in the time it takes a yellow light to turn red. >> >> Chicago has issued 77,000 tickets this year at intersections where the >> yellow light lasts 2.9 seconds instead of the standard minimum of 3 >> seconds flat. >> >> That's almost $8 million in fines. >> >> "Three seconds is way too fast for a yellow light, I think," said driver >> John Mathy. >> >> Indeed, the federal Department of Transportation recommends yellow >> lights of 3 to 6 full seconds in duration. >> >> While the city says the tenth of a second is probably due to variations >> in electricity, city Inspector General Joe Ferguson says effective >> enforcement should mean an error-free strategy." >> -----8<------8<----- >> Ah, yes! I guess some parts of town have BLUE electrons while other >> parts have ORANGE ones! Obviously, the BLUE ones spin much faster than >> the ORANGE! >> >> <rolls eyes> >> >> Having seen red light cameras introduced, here (IIRC, they are now being >> *removed* as most of the fines were not payable to the city itself but, >> rather, the company that installed the cameras), there *is* a very >> definite reduction in the duration of yellow... "Run the light or risk >> being ass-ended!" > > That tenth second difference being due to electrical variation is total > BS, and if they WERE using such poorly built and antiquated equipment that > it suffered from such variation, the responsible thing would be to set the > yellow interval a bit high.Here, the kit has microwave links to transmit the photos outbound. Yet, can't resolve 3.0 seconds to better than 3%??> Someone is just spewing out horse manure.Of course! And, the "reporter" acted as little more than a "distribution system" for it -- never questioning (nor consulting a third party to do that questioning!) the pablum he'd been fed. OTOH, he'd be more than willing to expound at great length regarding his OPINION (similarly on something of which he had no first-hand knowledge) and call *that* "news".
Reply by ●October 12, 20142014-10-12
On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 16:59:27 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:>Of course! And, the "reporter" acted as little more than a "distribution >system" for it -- never questioning (nor consulting a third party to do that >questioning!) the pablum he'd been fed. > >OTOH, he'd be more than willing to expound at great length regarding his >OPINION (similarly on something of which he had no first-hand knowledge) >and call *that* "news".You might be amused by where that originated. When broadcast radio was first conceived during the beginning of the 20th century, newspapers had an effective monopoly on news distribution. When radio broadcasters wanted to also provide the latest news, the newspaper industry recognized the potential danger of such competition and decided to do something about it. The FRC (Federal Radio Commission), or maybe the later FCC (Federal Communications Commission), ruled that radio stations could not report the news, but only comment on it, including only what was reported by the newspapers. That's why newspaper people are called "reporters" and the same job in broadcast is called a "commentator". The dividing line has blurred substantially over the years, but the names have stuck. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
