Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science News Technology

Traffic Lights Worldwide Set To Change (theregister.co.uk) 161

Posted by msmash from the up-next dept.
A Swedish engineer's umbrage at a traffic ticket has led to a six-year legal fight and now a global change in the speed with which traffic light signals are timed. From a report: After Mats Jarlstrom lost an initial legal challenge in 2014, a federal judge in January this year ruled Oregon's rules prohibiting people from representing themselves as engineers without a professional license from the state are unconstitutional. And now Jarlstrom's calculations and advocacy have led the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) to revisit its guidelines for the timing of traffic signals. As a result, yellow lights around the globe could burn for longer -- ITE is an international advisory group with members in 90 countries. Jarlstrom discovered a problem with the timing of traffic lights in Beaverton, Oregon, after his wife Laurie received a $260 ticket for a red light violation from an automated traffic light camera in 2013. Jarlstrom, who studied electrical engineering in Sweden, challenged the ticket, arguing the timing interval for yellow lights fails to account for scenarios like a driver entering an intersection and slowing to make a turn. A slightly longer interval, he argued, would allow drivers making turns on a yellow light to exit intersections before the light turned red. Even a small timing increase would help -- the automatically generated ticket in this case was issued 0.12 seconds after the light turned red.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Traffic Lights Worldwide Set To Change More

Traffic Lights Worldwide Set To Change

Comments Filter:

  • Vastly overstates the effects (Score:5, Informative)

    by TWX ( 665546 ) on Monday October 21, 2019 @02:00PM (#59331712)

    The headline and summary vastly overstates the actual effects of a voluntary standards-body's new guideline.

    The standards-body's revisions almost undoubtedly aren't legally-binding. Even if the are legally-binding, most of the time that sort of requirement is tied to a set revision of the standard, not tied to ongoing changes. Otherwise municipalities would have to scramble to make changes every time a guideline changed.

    And realistically, I don't expect the guidelines to be binding at all. Municipalities set their own rules for light timing, and have even been caught violating their own published rules for things like red-light cameras, where yellow lights have been shaved shorter and shorter in the name of revenue. So don't count on this published guideline amounting to anything at all.

    • The standards-body's revisions almost undoubtedly aren't legally-binding.

      Given that the timing for yellow vary not only between country but even between states in the USA, the standard ... isn't.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by TWX ( 665546 )

        The standards-body's revisions almost undoubtedly aren't legally-binding.

        Given that the timing for yellow vary not only between country but even between states in the USA, the standard ... isn't.

        The timing varies from city to city, and even within cities, even on roads with similar traffic volumes, speed limits, and intersection physical dimensions.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jythie ( 914043 )
      Yeah, but you have to remember that Jarlstrom is a bit of a folk here now, so even if the guideline has no effect, his followers can take it as further proof that he is right while the bureaucracy and civil engineers who doubted him were wrong and corrupt.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by anegg ( 1390659 )

        Yeah, but you have to remember that Jarlstrom is a bit of a folk here now, so even if the guideline has no effect, his followers can take it as further proof that he is right while the bureaucracy and civil engineers who doubted him were wrong and corrupt.

        I don't know whether the entire bureaucracy and civil engineers who doubted him are corrupt, but there was certainly a disproportionate and ill-conceived response to his original communication. Shouting down someone with a valid point using a dubious legal stratagem instead of actually responding to the point raised is at the least cowardly and short-sighted. The verdict was a big F U to those who believe that they are so important that no one not in the priesthood can criticize them. Too bad the individ

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jythie ( 914043 )
          Ahm, they did respond, but he kept contacting them. They then asked him to stop contacting them using his 'engineer' title, but he kept contacting them. I really wish people would get that right, he did not get in trouble for criticizing them, he got in trouble for harassing them repeatedly and claiming to be something he was not in the hopes of catching some unsuspecting clerk into listening to him again. The folk hero myth that has built up around this case does not reflect what actually happened.

        • Using your authority to shut up a troublesome dissenter is pretty much the definition of "wrong and corrupt" to me. The only reason this was relatively small potatoes was because those beauracratic idiots didn't have more authority to begin with. It doesn't matter. I've heard of horror stories about housewives on homeowner association boards. Some people are just born to be petty tyrants, even if they only have a tiny pond to play in.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Yes.

      The only reason this is done is because well, red light camera abuse.

      Red light cameras can be safety enhancing. Unfortunately, in the US, it was proven they are not safety enhancing devices, but revenue enhancing devices. Private companies were operating the red light cameras, and sharing revenue with the town/city/etc. The only reason they got found out was the red light camera companies were caught bribing the officials - to deliberately reduce yellow times below what was safe or recommended. All of w

      • Red light cameras can be safety enhancing. Unfortunately, in the US, it was proven they are not safety enhancing devices, but revenue enhancing devices.

        Actually, red light cameras (especially with short yellows) have been shown to INCREASE accidents.

        People see the light turn yellow at a camera intersection and slam on the brakes - getting rear-ended by the guy behind who didn't expect this (and may not have as good a view of the light).

        This happens even if they DON'T shorten the yellow (though, of course, w

  • Revenue-generation (Score:2, Insightful)

    by TigerPlish ( 174064 )

    That's what traffic cameras in the US are meant to do -- make money.

    Here where I live in Florida, a commercial 3rd-party runs the system and tickets you.

    Broward and Dade both were caught setting ridiculously short yellows -- to make money.

    And while we're at it, the current Broward government -- go look up what color it is -- has made it their stated goal to turn driving in Broward into a hellhole to push people into public transport -- in a city not really friendly to public transport.

    https://www.sun-sentin [sun-sentinel.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      "Until you make it so painful that people want to come out of their cars, they're not going to come out of their cars," Anne Castro, chair of the Broward County Planning Council, said during a meeting last year. "We're going to make them suffer first, and then we're going to figure out ways to move them after that because they're going to scream at us to help them move."

      Wow. What a great example of putting the cart before the horse.

  • I was thinking of another case with an engineer (Score:4, Insightful)

    by pgmrdlm ( 1642279 ) on Monday October 21, 2019 @02:07PM (#59331750) Journal
    When I read this. Not to do with the time of a yellow light.

    https://reason.com/2019/01/02/judge-confirms-that-oregon-engineer-has/ [reason.com]

    JÃrlstrÃm got on the board's bad side because he tried to challenge a traffic ticket given to his wife by a red light camera in Beaverton, Oregon, in 2013. He challenged the ticket by questioning the timing of the yellow lights at intersections where the cameras had been installed, using knowledge from his degree in electrical engineering and his experience working as an airplane camera mechanic in the Swedish Air Force. His research landed him in the media spotlightâ"in 2014, he presented his evidence on an episode of 60 Minutesâ"and earned him an invitation to present his findings at an annual meeting of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, a trade group.

    Yes, this dealt with a yellow light. But it was specific to the red light camera's where the timings had been shortened to get more money.

    • Both cases are from Oregon? The one I cited and what is in the original article. Makes you wonder, now doesn't it.

  • Fixing the wrong issue (Score:3)

    by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Monday October 21, 2019 @02:09PM (#59331762) Journal

    A slightly longer interval, he argued, would allow drivers making turns on a yellow light to exit intersections before the light turned red. Even a small timing increase would help -- the automatically generated ticket in this case was issued 0.12 seconds after the light turned red.

    Traffic light cameras work differently over here. Dutch traffic law does not exactly require you to be clear of the intersection when the light turns red; it requires you to safely stop in front of the stop line at a yellow light if possible (and carry on otherwise), but not cross that line on a red. The cameras watch you when crossing the line and make a picture (2 in fact) if you cross on a red. There's no issues with drivers slowing down making a turn and still being in the intersection when the light turns red, with any duration of the yellow light, in other words that duration is a non-issue. The only "downside" of this scheme is that when the light turns red, the light for the other direction cannot turn green immediately; there's a 1-2 second delay to allow stragglers to clear the intersection.

    I'm not sure if the law and cameras work like this in many other countries, but to claim that "traffic lights worldwide" are set to change seems a bit of a stretch.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by TWX ( 665546 )

      I don't know of any intersection where the light instantly turns green as the other light turns red. Every intersection that I know of has some duration when it's red for all directions, simply to allow the intersection to clear before letting anyone proceed.

      • Yes, it's smart to have a safety margin. It's also smart to treat the system as if the safety margin is not there; otherwise the safety margin becomes less effective.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jwdb ( 526327 )

        Every single light in LA changes cross-traffic to green without any perceptible delay, in my experience. Doesn't stop people (including me) from sitting in the intersection until it's red and only then turning, since otherwise it'd be impossible to turn left on many streets. Cross traffic is usually polite enough to wait, and I've yet to be photographed by a red light camera.

    • The only "downside" of this scheme is that when the light turns red, the light for the other direction cannot turn green immediately; there's a 1-2 second delay to allow stragglers to clear the intersection.

      One thing I found striking when coming to the Netherlands is that the traffic lights basically immediately change. I understand what you're saying because I've witnessed it in other countries, but basically this is a completely non-existent issue in the Netherlands and I definitely have never seen a 1-2second delay. The safety margin around where I live may be 1/2 a second or so max.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bsolar ( 1176767 )
      In Switzerland the automatic camera must engage at minimum 0.5 seconds after the light turned red. Furthermore the photos need to prove that the car crossed the stop line after the light turned red and that it kept going completely past the stop line (stopping with e.g. half the car past the stop line but not actually crossing completely does not result in a fine).

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by G00F ( 241765 )

      There needs to be 1-2 seconds of all red to allow the safe clearing, mainly the people turning left (in USA) usually have to wait for red light to complete the turn, even for first vehicle.

      • There needs to be 1-2 seconds of all red to allow the safe clearing, mainly the people turning left (in USA) usually have to wait for red light to complete the turn, even for first vehicle.

        No there doesn't - and in a large fractions of US intersections there isn't.

        What is needed is for drivers, upon receiving the green light, to refrain from entering the intersection if any cross-traffic vehicles from another part of the cycle are still in the intersection, rather than just flooring it when the green appear

  • The word "global" in the article is probably taken from ITE's website where "global" means US+Canada+Australia+New Zealand.

    I assume that the timings already vary due to local considerations, such as average speed, width of roads, neighbourhood, etc.

    I think the headline is slightly exaggerated.

  • A slightly longer interval, he argued, would allow drivers making turns on a yellow light to exit intersections before the light turned red.

    I was under the impression that the law was that you can legally enter an intersection when the light is yellow, but the moment it turns a steady red, you must then stop. Vehicles IN the intersection after the light turns red legally have the right of way and are allowed to proceed. So as long as you enter the intersection before the red light is shown, regardless of if you are accelerating or slowing down, you may proceed.

    So I get where adding some time to the yellow light might be a good idea, I don't

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by b0bby ( 201198 )

      I get where adding some time to the yellow light might be a good idea, I don't see how this engineering argument changes the law or negates the woman's ticket. IF she entered after the red light was displayed, the ticket was legit as the law is written.

      I think the argument is that if you make the yellow too short, it's not possible for someone approaching the intersection to stop before the red in time under certain circumstances.

  • With a longer light time more people will run the light which will mean an increase in accidents.

    Congrats. You've just made the body shops happy with all the work they'll be getting and hospitals for all the money they'll collect treating those injured in accidents.

    • Studies repeatedly show that a longer yellow light is safer. Safer still would probably be to have a countdown clock like crosswalks have.

    • Simpsons did it:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sjames ( 1099 )

      No. It is made possible for people who intend to drive lawfully to do so without being ticketed. The ones who do not intend to drive lawfully will need to be ticketed, which is fair once it is made reasonable and possible to obey the law.

  • They've done studies, and yellow lights at anyplace where the red light cameras are have been found to be shorted on their timing by a significant amount in around 70% of the lights they checked.

    It's almost as if someone is violating the law to get more traffic ticket money....

    Yes, there are actually rules and guidelines on the length of those yellow lights.

  • Well, I would hope so (Score:5, Funny)

    by Chris Mattern ( 191822 ) on Monday October 21, 2019 @02:41PM (#59331970)

    Traffic lights that don't change aren't much good, are they?

  • No where in the article does it justify the global impact of this. The rest of the world are likely to see the stupidity in this as it is never ending. If you make the yellow light longer today, tomorrow people will want it even longer... Just keep to the law.

  • A libertarian victory of the pragmatic kind (Score:3)

    by Applehu Akbar ( 2968043 ) on Monday October 21, 2019 @03:14PM (#59332152)

    If the outcome of this case really is a worldwide change, it represents a notable victory for the pragmatic libertarianism pushed by Reason Foundation, EFF and Institute For Justice, as opposed to the society-means-nothing Randian theoretics that most people think of first when they hear that term.

    These organizations attack the sort of abusive, money-grab regulation that Oregon's requirement for an irrelevant certification represents, and which the worldwide shrinkage of the yellow light interval when cameras are in use represents.

  • Yellow light is useless in my city (Score:3)

    by The Snazster ( 5236943 ) on Monday October 21, 2019 @03:35PM (#59332270)
    In the city where I drive most, the yellow light is so short as to be useless on the intersections that have cameras.

    The only way to be relatively safe from being ticketed is to watch the crossing walk timer ticking down as you approach and plan to be stopped before it hits 0 (and the yellow light comes on briefly . . . VERY briefly).

    Of course, while it can decrease your chance of getting a ticket, that probably comes as the cost of less safety for everyone else, as it is a distraction for a driver in an already busy place.

  • I've only ever once encountered a light with a non standard timing, I don't know if it was faulty or not but it resulted in coffeee being spilt by the passenger in the car I had to brake so hard.

    They should all definitely have the same timing, there should be no "oh this one is short because of X" - no. This needs to be something predictable and timed safely.

    If we knew, with certainty, that there was NOT a money hungry red light camera attached to the lights, AND we knew that the green, for the opposing

  • The MORE people that will try to "fudge" and get through the intersection. How I was taught, is you keep your vehicle behind the white "stop bar" at the intersection (when making a turn on a yield to oncoming solid green light) until it is safe to enter the intersection. It doesn't mean putting your car halfway in the intersection, the light turns yellow, you wait for the traffic to clear, then make a left, at which time the light turns red.

Slashdot Top Deals

No skis take rocks like rental skis!

Close