Hacker News Reader

Comment by MichaelCollins | Hacker News Reader

Sometimes there isn't much you can do. One I grew up near is a T intersection, between three farm fields. The road that butts into the other crests a hill, and the other road is right behind the crest of that hill, about 20-30 meters. There is a T intersection sign on the hill before you reach the top, but some people didn't see it or heed it. If you're following the speed limit with a dry road, it's probably safe even if you ignore the sign. But if you're speeding and miss the sign, you might t-bone somebody on the other road, or crash into the field behind it. I think the people that died there went into the field, but I'm not sure.

Perhaps they could install some sort of blinking warning light on top of the hill and maybe joyriding teenagers would heed that warning, or maybe not. Otherwise I think you'd have to cut through the hill or move the roads completely, either of which there probably isn't much money for.

View on HN

Replace the T with a roundabout and reduce the speed limit significantly 200 meters before the roundabout.

Rounding off the corners of four productive farm fields is not going to be easy/cheap/popular, especially in areas where large farm equipment needs to use the highway too. And a 200m speed zone will not be respected by much of anyone.

I think the best/cheapest solution would be some rumble grooves 2-300 meters before the intersection to help alert you to it.

Traffic control devices that "alert" drivers and rely on their choice to slow down are pointless IMO. Better to make it almost impossible to drive at an unsafe speed without ruining your car, removing the choice.

> Replace the T with a roundabout

On the side of a hill? That's a ton of earthwork.

Country lanes don't get roundabouts. There's no money for that.

Traffic calming measures is how you tackle things like that. Adding a sharpish S-curve to the roads approaching the T should remove enough speed to make it safer. Won't even need a sign.

A surprise chicane, without even a sign, on a road with a history of speeding cars. What could possibly go wrong?

This also seems to be farm country. Converting productive fields to non-productive traffic calming structures would be about as popular as banning pickup trucks.

We can finally throw ‘think of the children’ back at them then.

It'd not be a surprise chicane. It'd be an obviously visible one. If you're driving in a way where that'd cause accidents you should have your license revoked.

Additional benefit: isolating accidents to only reckless drivers hitting trees rather than t-boning someone else

The counterintuitive thing to do is to make roads "feel" unsafe to make them safe.

A example of this (here done for laugh) is [0], where a single lane muddy curvy hillside road has a speed limit of 80 km/h (50 mph).

The point I would like to make here is that on a street like this is it impossible to joyride and even with low visibility intersections the risk of a T-bone or a fatal crash is minuscule.

This particular example is a strawman of the problem: there are many reasons why most roads cannot be like this, it is just an example of "If the drivers have to pay attention they will pay attention"

[0] https://funsubstance.com/fun/294735/irish-speed-sign/

In the british countryside there are roads barely much better than that with similar speed limits. It's not good, you see people driving some crazy speeds having to brake super hard and then reverse to a passing place when they come up against a tractor.

Speedbumps are inexpensive and last a very long time.

In warm climates. Speedbumps are a problem in cold/rural areas that need continuous plowing in winter.

Rural areas don't normally get plowed. Can you imagine the expense of plowing all of USAs rural roads. An alternative is a little swerve that requires slowing down.

as someone who grew up in a rural area with lots of snow, this is false. The roads absolutely get plowed, just at a lower priority than the main highways.

Not to mention that in such areas its fairly common for locals to own their own plow attachments for their trucks (at least that was my experience in rural MN).

Really? You think the highways through the flyover states just pile up with snow all winter? All those mountain passes that connect east and west? They are in fact a higher priority than any urban street. A fleet of double-lane plows speeding down a prairie highway is a sight to see.

https://youtu.be/lkmBP-ISzKk

Please don't use the term "flyover state". It diminishes the lives of millions of people

Or it is an owned term used by people in such areas (me) when people on the coasts lecture us how things are in our own backyard. By using it we hold a mirror to those with such attitudes re rural areas.

There are a few rural roads that don't get plowed. They have big "Enter at your own risk" signs, often in the best of conditions you need 4 wheel drive (all wheel drive will work, but if you don't understand the difference don't attempt it) to get through them at best.

The vast majority of rural roads get plowed. Everyone who lives in a rural area has at least one plowed route from their driveway to the rest of the world.

I don't think anybody would be able to differentiate the speedbumps from the condition of all the roads in that area.

Sounds like the prudent way of handling your example T-intersection is to rebuild it so it is no longer a T-intersection, or to move it in a way that forces people to slow down (e.g. by turning it 30 degrees, with curves leading into it, or by setting up a roundabout, or by moving it into a position where you see the crossing road more easily).

Curves before intersections are evil for bicycles. They create unanticipated moving blind spots for drivers, blind spots than can hide a bicycle approaching on the cross street.

In all fairness, the situation OP described did not immediately strike the idea of a biking hotspot to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com