Yes.
I don’t go out of my way to look at accidents anymore.
3-5 percent?
One car can do it.
Geex, that’s horrible. My condolences. I hope the cop was punished severely.
I believe you. I’ve always thought that Chicagoans were especially bad in this regard. buttonjockey308 captures it perfectly.
Let X be the moment when traffic loosens in front of a particluar driver D, so that D could (in theory) begin accelerating back to normal driving speed. Let Y be the moment when driver D in fact begins to do so.
If nothing is taking place on the side of the road–for example, if an earlier disturbance has already been cleared, the interval (Y - X) will be between zero and one second, with the slight delay due to human reaction time.
But if anything is taking place on the shoulder–even something as innocuous as a drooling goon standing next to a parked, stalled beater–Y minus X immediately increases (in the Chicago area) to three to five seconds, as driver D rubbernecks.
If a policeman is involved–chatting with the goon, even in a non-threatening manner–Y minus X is five to seven seconds.
If there is any smoke involved, as in a car fire, or (God forbid) any crumpled metal, even from a minor fender-bender, all bets are off. Seven seconds, ten seconds, fifteen–the sky is the limit.
In one sense, this is no big deal. You’ve already sat in a traffic jam for ten minutes. Driver D rubber-necking increases your time loss to 10:05, or 10:07, or 10:10.
But it’s the cumulative effect of a thousand Driver D’s that caused the jam in the first place, and cause it to lengthen continuously until the shoulder is cleared. Blast the horn at those fuckers.
You’re telling me, after I’ve waited so long to get to the front of the line, that I shouldn’t get a turn at rubbernecking? I’m right there. The crash is right there. I’ve waited so long! Heck, I’ve paid my dues and I at least want a look at what I paid for. That said, I try not to look as well but I understand the people that take a bit too long to accelerate away.
Worse is those cases when you get to the front of the line and there’s nothing… No cars on the side, no lights, no wreckage, no reason for the hold up yet also no traffic ahead. Then the car in front of me has to take a really long look.
Really, as soon as one person slams on the brakes for any reason, that’s it. All of us following behind are going to have to stop at some point.
My wife and I came up on a very serious accident, involving three fatalities, just last week. When the L.E.O. saw that the bodies would have to be loaded in pieces they put up screens. This caused a bigger rubbernecking/traffic jam as people were going extra slow trying to catch a glimpse through a break in the screens or when the wind moved them a little.
The problem with this theory is that you’re just making it up.
Personally, I slow down when I go by an accident scene or a traffic stop so that I won’t hit any police officers or other people who may be out in the street. Also I’ll move out of the right lane if I can, when I’m going by a traffic stop on the shoulder.
Rubberneckers? Maybe, just maybe, they can be excused because after all they are only responding to the natural urge of curiosity.
What really pisses me of are those idiots who apply brakes if anyone else in a one mile radius applies theirs. I’ve seen it happen so many times. There are vehicle on the road and everyone is moving along smoothly. For some reason the guy way up ahead in the rightmost lane( and this on a three lane highway), decides to slow down for whatever reason. I see his brake lights come on, and then immediately for no apparent reason the guy in the lane next to him applies brakes and when his brake lights come on the guy in front of me applies brakes and suddenly it is red flashing brake lights all around. It’s like – “Hey look brake lights there!! I should show mine too!”
It always blows my mind when someone disagrees with me and then supports their disagreement by completely agreeing with me. It seems to only happen on message boards but it happens quite often.
I just want to say that I hate the term “gapers.” It should not be as popular as it is, nor is it an acceptable replacement for the far superior “rubberneckers”/“rubbernecking.”
So, you are trying to make the case that delayed acceleration out of the FRONT of a traffic jam is what prolongs these things.
Your example completely ignores the fact that on busy highways, jams propagate due to cars coming into the back of the jam.
Let’s “best case scenario” your traffic accident. There’s been an accident, and now there are 100 cars in a line going 10 miles per hour – a jam. Now, imagine they all think to themselves, “hey nothing here to look at” and they all stomp on their accelerators at the exact second. No rubbernecking. . .guess what: cars travelling at normal highways speeds will still pile up behind the row of accelerating cars. Because a guy going 20->25->30 is still going to cause cars going 65 to hit their brakes.
Now, I’ll grant you this: that jam will dissipate faster than they normally do because it’s ideal acceleration. But, you know that even going from a routine stop light, that’s not how cars accellerate. The fifth car at a red light doesn’t start moving until several seconds after the first car. Same thing coming out of a jam. You might think it’s rubbernecking, but it’s the same phenomenon.
There’s no good way to solve a jam without a delay. One can “smooth out” a jam and avoid stop N go by slowing and leaving space before hitting the jam, but that car can still never get through the jam any faster than the car in front of him.
Jams happen and exist because of the initial slowdown.
I think at the point where this happened, there were four lanes of traffic in each direction. As I posted earlier, there was a substantial, concrete divider between them, so the cars weren’t going to land in our lanes, nor were rescue workers in our path etc.
I would have understood it better if the far left lane(s), i.e. the ones nearest the accident, had slowed down while the right lanes continued somewhat normally. But no, absolutely everything ground to a complete STOP. I have to conclude that some of the people farthest away were craning their necks for a look. Additionally there are going to be people trying to change lanes and it just becomes a total mess.
I agree there is a domino effect. Example: people reflexively slow down when they see others doing the same. And I agree, it’s harder to unblock when people come to a complete stop. These are a couple of good reasons not to indulge in the activity in the first place. Personally, I don’t like it when people that thinks the misfortune of others is entertainment. I wouldn’t want people gaping at me so I don’t gape at them.
And I’d feel a little better knowing that the jam was caused by someone from out of town…anybody who lives here knows you can be delayed by an hour or more when these traffic jams start.
Is the concept of safe stopping distances not covered, either? :rolleyes:
You’ve never driven in Dallas, have you? There are simply too many cars on the road to leave the recommended distance between all of them at anything near the speed limit.
I’ve driven on plenty of roads like that. Just don’t start complaining that the person in front is responsible for your stopping. They might have a damn good reason to slam on the brakes at any time.
Same in California. Not only that, but if you’re driving 2½ seconds behind someone, it’s inevitable that another car will change lanes to fill that void. Slow down further, and another car will cut in. Keep slowing down and eventually, you’re going backwards.
I assume that you accept that losing a lane due to an accident causes a jam in that direction, right?
Now, in heavy traffic the delay is caused by cars slowing to let other cars in. I’ve gone past blocked lanes in very light traffic where there was no delay at all, since everyone could merge well ahead of the choke point.
At the point of rubbernecking, cars are slowing (just as in the obstruction case) to look. This creates a virtual blockage.
More evidence - traffic after the choke point moves very rapidly, indicating that the traffic is effectively being metered at that point. I drive a very congested freeway - the other day there was an overturn accident, not blocking any lanes, on my side. Traffic was jammed to the point of the accident, but lighter than I’ve seen it anywhere near rush hour after.
So, care to explain why slowing at the accident scene wouldn’t have an effect?
Point taken. OTOH these roads were designed for higher speed limits, with no sharp curves or stop signs etc. Unfortunately they must be also operating over their intended capacity and that means everybody has to have his thinking cap on…slower traffic needs to get to the right, turn signals are useful, blind spots need to be checked, the whole bit. Traffic needs to keep flowing.
I’ve managed to avoid accidents, probably because I was taught not to trust other drivers or even assume they’re paying attention to what they’re doing. The advent of cell phones hasn’t helped a bit. I predict they’ll keep building new roads around here and somehow, that will cause more traffic.
Anyone who has ever stood by the side of the road with any kind of distraction can tell you rubberneckers absolutely do cause traffic jams. You will see a huge pack of cars behind the accident, almost no one in front of it. I’ve watched people stop and stare, leaving 4-5 seconds between themselves and the car in front of them, who are long gone. It only takes maybe 25 percent of drivers taking a long look to keep the jam there. When one person slows down, it creates a jam (sometimes called a shockwave jam) that moves backward down the road.As seen here. The rubberneckers keep the front of the jam in place, increasing its length.