Thoughts on driving in America

[Lootman]

I've been in the US for a little over 2 months, and of necessity driving a lot more than I normally would in the UK. A few observations based on what I think works better here:

1) You can make a right turn (equivalent to a left turn in the UK) at a red light as long as you stop first and your path is clear. This seems like such a common sense thing that could easily be implemented in the UK.

2) You can overtake on either side. Takes a bit of getting used to but after a while it feels natural and normal.

3) As a result of (2) above, and the greater number of lanes on many highways, there is no need for UK-style "lane discipline". You pick a lane, pick your speed and then you can tune out. Nobody comes up behind you flashing their lights because they think you are in the wrong lane. There is no wrong lane. It follows that there is no real imperative to be in the "slow lane" if you going more slowly, although trucks tend to do that and there is a general advice about "slower traffic keep right".

4) No speed cameras. There are signs saying "speed checked by plane" but I suspect those planes are about as common as TV detector vans. There are a few red light cameras but they require a clear shot of both your license plate and your face, so many get thrown out apparently. A vehicle owner is under no obligation to rat out another person driving in that case, unlike the UK.

5) If there are five or more vehicles behind you on a 2-lane road then you are required by law to pull over and let them pass.

6) Journey times are predictable, to the point where if you ask how far somewhere is, you will be told in terms of time rather than distance. For example I have driven about a dozen times between San Francisco and Los Angeles, which is about 400 miles. It has always taken almost exactly six hours. I can't imagine the same reliability driving a similar distance in the UK, say from London to Glasgow, because of road works, congestion, accidents etc

7) Even people with very moderate incomes have nice cars. In LA you spend so much time in your vehicle that you want something superior, either a BMW/Merc or some type of van, truck or sports vehicle. And you do not see many old bangers, perhaps because of the strict emissions test. There is more traffic but the air smells better than London, to my nose anyway.

One downside is the absence of roundabouts. They have 4-way stops instead but they are not as efficient. American drivers just cannot do "traffic circles", as they call them here.

[9873210]

One downside is the absence of roundabouts. They have 4-way stops instead but they are not as efficient. American drivers just cannot do "traffic circles", as they call them here.

More efficient for who? A 4-way stop has the implicit equivalent of four zebra crossings; they are much more efficient for pedestrians.

IN any case there are many roundabouts in many parts of the US and they work just fine.

US traffic engineers consider "traffic circles" and "modern roundabouts" to be two different things. Traffic circles are decorative layouts from the horse and buggy era. They were laid out for aesthetics rather than function. Traffic tends to be somewhat chaotic, they cannot handle high volumes. OTOH roundabouts are scientifically designed to handle modern traffic.

There are a lot of detailed differences such as the widths of lanes, splitter islands, deflection of traffic entering and leaving and the radius of the circle. All of these need to work together to channel traffic, control speeds and provide sightlines for a roundabout to function as intended. Roundabouts are not laid out by an arts student with a compass.

[bluedonkey]

My recollection of driving in the USA was less speeding than in the UK. OTOH, there was a greater presence of cops driving around looking to penalise an offender, so that may be the cause. There were some roundabouts in Mass., I think they called them rotaries, though natives didn't seem to particularly like them.

[Lootman]

One downside is the absence of roundabouts. They have 4-way stops instead but they are not as efficient. American drivers just cannot do "traffic circles", as they call them here.

More efficient for who? A 4-way stop has the implicit equivalent of four zebra crossings; they are much more efficient for pedestrians.

IN any case there are many roundabouts in many parts of the US and they work just fine.

From the point of view of vehicles a roundabout is better as there is no need for a vehicle to stop if the path through is clear, whereas with a 4-way stop every vehicle has to come to a dead stop regardless of traffic. Sure I can see from a pedestrian's point of view you would always prefer all vehicles to stop at any point where you might want to cross. But traffic engineers typically regard throughput as an important metric. And in many part of the US there are hardly any pedestrians anyway.

Yes, I have seen traffic circles in New England and a few other places, but they are sufficiently rare that many American drivers have never seen one and so have no clue how to navigate them. In one case I know of, the local residents successfully lobbied to get them removed!

Oh, one other good thing here. Petrol is about 70p a litre!

[PinkDalek]

Oh, one other good thing here. Petrol is about 70p a litre!

... and (ignoring the old metric signs) speed limits are in English.

[tjh290633]

1) You can make a right turn (equivalent to a left turn in the UK) at a red light as long as you stop first and your path is clear. This seems like such a common sense thing that could easily be implemented in the UK.

One downside is the absence of roundabouts. They have 4-way stops instead but they are not as efficient. American drivers just cannot do "traffic circles", as they call them here.

Turn right on red is not universal. There are some states, I believe, where it is illegal.

The traffic circles in New England have been mentioned above.

The alternative to "Stop 4 ways" is the situation where traffic lights in one direction flash amber and in the other direction flash red. Often done at quieter times.

Canada is different again. I have only driven there a few times, often through the tunnel from Detroit to Windsor and back again, but also around Toronto and Niagara.

You are right that they have a lot of sensible ideas. No parking on the Highway when there is a snow emergency is a good one.

TJH

[Urbandreamer]

Apparently driving in the USA is very different.

Here is a youtube link, posted today, about current market gyrations: by the driver of a car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pcKUMKu6c0

Watch it, it might make you re-evaluate Tesla, Americans, or stock market pundits.

[Lootman]

Turn right on red is not universal. There are some states, I believe, where it is illegal.

The alternative to "Stop 4 ways" is the situation where traffic lights in one direction flash amber and in the other direction flash red. Often done at quieter times.

Yes, New York is one state where you are not allowed to turn right on red, although it gets ignored a lot. It makes more sense in New York City due to the number of pedestrians.

And yes, there is also the concept of a 2-way stop, where one road has priority, which is equivalent to the traffic light case you described.

[MonsterMork]

Roundabouts are not laid out by an arts student with a compass.

You sure about that? The case for the prosecution:

Magic Roundabout in Swindon
Dodgy roundabout of 6 centred around a 7th in Hemel Hempsted (can't remember the name)
A43/M40 Junction close to Baynards Green
I am sure others will chip in with similar traffic travesties

MM

[swill453]

5) If there are five or more vehicles behind you on a 2-lane road then you are required by law to pull over and let them pass.

If you're talking about traffic laws in California (and I assume you are since you mentioned driving from SF to LA), then you need to qualify that rule with "If you are driving slowly ...".

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/ ... e-control/

If you are driving slowly on a two-lane highway or road where passing is unsafe, and 5 or more vehicles are following, you must drive into the turnout areas or lanes to let the vehicles pass.

I wouldn't want this to get confused with the discussion a few weeks back where it was proposed by some that one should pull over to let vehicles past even if one was travelling at the maximum permitted speed for that particular road.

Scott.

[Lootman]

5) If there are five or more vehicles behind you on a 2-lane road then you are required by law to pull over and let them pass.

If you're talking about traffic laws in California (and I assume you are since you mentioned driving from SF to LA), then you need to qualify that rule with "If you are driving slowly ...".

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/ ... e-control/

If you are driving slowly on a two-lane highway or road where passing is unsafe, and 5 or more vehicles are following, you must drive into the turnout areas or lanes to let the vehicles pass.

Yes, California. That is true although of course if vehicles are accumulating behind you then that is a reasonable indicator that you are probably one of the slower vehicles on that road. I do not believe that that law references speed limits specifically, and the situation is complicated if no limit is signposted. The signposted speed limits I see the most are 70 on freeways, 55 on highways and 25 in cities.

It is possible in CA to get a citation for driving too slowly:

https://getdismissed.com/four-major-spe ... california

[swill453]

I do not believe that that law references speed limits specifically

No, but I think we all know what "slowly" means, and driving the maximum speed for the road isn't it.

It is possible in CA to get a citation for driving too slowly

Here too, but it would be under one of the catch-all offences like careless driving.

Scott.

[Lootman]

I do not believe that that law references speed limits specifically

No, but I think we all know what "slowly" means, and driving the maximum speed for the road isn't it.

It is possible in CA to get a citation for driving too slowly

Here too, but it would be under one of the catch-all offences like careless driving.

In both countries the interesting case would be where the prevailing speed of the traffic exceeded the speed limit. And whether the cops might consider you were causing a hazard by obstructing others by hugging to the limit thereby preventing others from passing.

I have no desire to repeat the prior debate about this and it remains the case that I would be considerate of other road users regardless of the technicalities of the rules in that jurisdiction. I just thought it interesting that that idea of moving over to help others has been codified here.

[swill453]

I have no desire to repeat the prior debate about this and it remains the case that I would be considerate of other road users regardless of the technicalities of the rules in that jurisdiction. I just thought it interesting that that idea of moving over to help others has been codified here.

It's here too, rule 169 of the Highway Code. The concept of "holding up" other road users in their attempt to break the speed limit would be laughed out of court though.

(Rather than reopen the debate, assume I'm not suggesting anyone should hog an overtaking lane.)

Scott.

[AF62]

1) You can make a right turn (equivalent to a left turn in the UK) at a red light as long as you stop first and your path is clear. This seems like such a common sense thing that could easily be implemented in the UK.

My understanding (and experience from the last time I was in America) was you still have to give way to pedestrians who are crossing whilst you are turning left on red. And everyone driver gives the pedestrians priority when turning left on red.

In the UK if you are turning into a junction and a pedestrian is already crossing then the pedestrian has priority and the driver must give way (Highway Code rule 170). I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of drivers in the UK who give pedestrians priority when turning into a junction.

Allowing drivers in the UK to turn right on red but expecting them to give priority to pedestrians is fanciful.

[Lootman]

1) You can make a right turn (equivalent to a left turn in the UK) at a red light as long as you stop first and your path is clear. This seems like such a common sense thing that could easily be implemented in the UK.

My understanding (and experience from the last time I was in America) was you still have to give way to pedestrians who are crossing whilst you are turning left on red. And everyone driver gives the pedestrians priority when turning left on red.

In the UK if you are turning into a junction and a pedestrian is already crossing then the pedestrian has priority and the driver must give way (Highway Code rule 170). I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of drivers in the UK who give pedestrians priority when turning into a junction.

Allowing drivers in the UK to turn right on red but expecting them to give priority to pedestrians is fanciful.

Yes, UK drivers are terrible at making turns where there are pedestrians. Whereas US drivers are surprisingly considerate towards crossing pedestrians, I have found.

I have seen a number of "no turns on red" signs where pedestrian activity is high. But for other locations I maintain this is a good thing, remembering that it is only legal if you first come to a complete halt and then only make the turn if it is clear to do so. It does not imply vehicular priority - quite the opposite in fact. Also many intersections also have crosswalks and drivers are required to wait until they are clear before turning, regardless.

[GrahamPlatt]

Driving through mythical America. Pete Atkin, Clive James.

https://youtu.be/NrUosW8Z7KE

[9873210]

Yes, New York is one state where you are not allowed to turn right on red, although it gets ignored a lot. It makes more sense in New York City due to the number of pedestrians.

Right on Red is allowed in New York State. It's New York City that prohibits right on red.

While there are more pedestrians in NY City the main issue at the time R-on-R was adopted by the state was that most of the intersections in the city were already highly controlled. If R-on-R was appropriate there was mostly already a green arrow, traffic sensors and control software so you could perform the maneuver as soon as it was appropriate and perhaps without stopping. So they were going to throw "No Right On Red" signs pretty much everywhere. It was easier to just post them at the city boundaries.

Most driving in the UK is far more similar to driving in New York City than it is to driving in say Watertown, NY. There are relatively few intersections where R-on-R would be appropriate. Also note that you do not need to optimize traffic flow at 4:00AM. It's the conditions at peak times that matter most.

[9873210]

Also many intersections also have crosswalks and drivers are required to wait until they are clear before turning, regardless.

Almost all intersections have crosswalks. Markings are not needed. Google "unmarked crosswalks".*

* Depending on where google thinks you are you might need "unmarked crosswalks California".

[Mike88]

I've spent a lot of time in the USA. In various States roundabouts are called Traffic Circles. In fact my USA sat Nav uses the term Traffic Circles. I've not heard of the term 4 way stops.