BaltACDWhat I find curious among all the states that have RFID Transponder system - Why in the name of Sam Hell aren't they all compatible? I have EZ-Pass that Maryland and a number of other East Coast states use, but it is not compatible with Sun Pass in Florida or K-Tag in Kansas.
In the Dallas area they started to diverge and someone got your idea and now the toll pass works at the Airport for Airport parking, on both private and public toll roads. I agree they should have one that is nationwide.
ATLANTIC CENTRALThe adaptive cruise control on my FLEX has been reliable and predictable in the 80 mph range.
Thats great but the OP stated unlimited speed AND we were also comparing to the autobahn. How far in advance do you think that little weak radar behind your grill works (on the mercedes it's behind their large emblem on the grill). 90 mph 130 mph, 160 mph, 180 mph. Seems to me the higher speed you go the more harsh the brake application would be as you approach a slower moving vehicle and close the distance fast, depending on how fractional it is your current speed. I'm not an engineer but I have noticed when someone merges into my lane and they are moving slower and not at the safe distance.......the brake application made automatically is rather more forceful.
DeggestyAnd if you are a tourister from way out of state driving your own car or a rental car, how do you pay if you do not have a compatible transponder?
Rental car companies you sign an agreement in your rental agreement they have the right to deduct from your Credit Card after final settlement for tolls incurred while you had the vehicle under rent. It usally happens when the bill arrives to the rental car company........they nick your bill.
If your in Illinois beware because the very nice people in Northern Illinois include a fine on top for not renting the tollpass collection with the rental car. It can be hefty if you skip multiple booths because they expect you to stop and pay if you do not have a toll device, their computer and scanning equipment is not smart enough to determine the difference between licenses of a rental and privately owned car. So in Northern Illinois they will fine you like a resident if you skip a booth without paying.....and of course the fine increases as you skip multiple booths.
Thanks for the information about toll collections. I'm glad that I do not drive any more. When I did drive, I avoided toll roads as much as possible, though I did not mind payung to drive from the Norfolk area to the Delmarva Peninsula 12 years ago.
Johnny
Where I live, we have few toll roads, and where they exist, I generally don't venture. But I have visited San Francisco, and received a bill in mail from the Golden Gate Bridge (no more toll booths there) after I got home. Which was fine. They charged a couple of extra $ for having to do it by mail.
The Bay Bridge still has cash toll lanes, with traffic backed up to Berkeley.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL BaltACD High Speed Rail is actually building something. Changing highway speed limits isn't. But the question is, do we need it? Will it make things better? For whom? At what cost? And who will pay? As I illustrated above, I can, and have, driven from Harford County, MD to Farmington, MI as fast as you can fly there, negating the value of air travel in my view. I'm looking to be shown who will benefit from high speed rail and how? I think the government should invest in rail passenger service, I'm just not sure we need high speed rail. I don't think airlines should be allowed to charge one person $500 and another person $50 for the same product. I don't think the tax payers should support the airlines infrastructure, unless we do the same with rail service and we can show the economic and social benefit of both. Sheldon
BaltACD High Speed Rail is actually building something. Changing highway speed limits isn't.
High Speed Rail is actually building something.
Changing highway speed limits isn't.
But the question is, do we need it? Will it make things better? For whom? At what cost? And who will pay?
As I illustrated above, I can, and have, driven from Harford County, MD to Farmington, MI as fast as you can fly there, negating the value of air travel in my view.
I'm looking to be shown who will benefit from high speed rail and how?
I think the government should invest in rail passenger service, I'm just not sure we need high speed rail.
I don't think airlines should be allowed to charge one person $500 and another person $50 for the same product. I don't think the tax payers should support the airlines infrastructure, unless we do the same with rail service and we can show the economic and social benefit of both.
Sheldon
In this case HSR would have benefited most the people that live in the Central Valley and drive anywhere from 2 - 4 hours to and from work in Silicon Valley and the rest of the SF Bay Area. There are people that live as far away as Fresno and work in Silicon Valley. With HSR that long commute would've been gone in an instant, what would take you 4 hours to do driving could be done in an hour to 90 minutes, a significant savings and improvement in quality of life. So basically your average worker would benefit, and there are average workers still in SV, they're not all techies.
Everyone should also remember this line: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". In this case I don't consider 10% of the U.S population as being the needs of the few, especially since roughly 50% of the Federal budget is funded by just 5 states.
I think we need to redo the allocation alotment of the Federal budget, just set it so that states get back the percentage they put in. We need to be completely fair to everyone, sorry if that sucks for those Southern states that input nothing.
GERALD L MCFARLANE JR ATLANTIC CENTRAL BaltACD High Speed Rail is actually building something. Changing highway speed limits isn't. But the question is, do we need it? Will it make things better? For whom? At what cost? And who will pay? As I illustrated above, I can, and have, driven from Harford County, MD to Farmington, MI as fast as you can fly there, negating the value of air travel in my view. I'm looking to be shown who will benefit from high speed rail and how? I think the government should invest in rail passenger service, I'm just not sure we need high speed rail. I don't think airlines should be allowed to charge one person $500 and another person $50 for the same product. I don't think the tax payers should support the airlines infrastructure, unless we do the same with rail service and we can show the economic and social benefit of both. Sheldon In this case HSR would have benefited most the people that live in the Central Valley and drive anywhere from 2 - 4 hours to and from work in Silicon Valley and the rest of the SF Bay Area. There are people that live as far away as Fresno and work in Silicon Valley. With HSR that long commute would've been gone in an instant, what would take you 4 hours to do driving could be done in an hour to 90 minutes, a significant savings and improvement in quality of life. So basically your average worker would benefit, and there are average workers still in SV, they're not all techies. Everyone should also remember this line: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few". In this case I don't consider 10% of the U.S population as being the needs of the few, especially since roughly 50% of the Federal budget is funded by just 5 states. I think we need to redo the allocation alotment of the Federal budget, just set it so that states get back the percentage they put in. We need to be completely fair to everyone, sorry if that sucks for those Southern states that input nothing.
Are you serious here? Who told them to live 2 or more hours from their job?
How much do these jobs pay? Why would anyone in their right mind live that far from their work?
If I pick a job two hours from my house, do I get this special consideration?
As for the federal budget, I can think of a lot that should be changed..........
Better yet, how about the federal government just take less, and leave it to the states to solve their own problems with their own money?
Why do we have to send money to Washington to get their "blessing" on how to spend it? And beg them to give it back with instructions?
ATLANTIC CENTRALAre you serious here? Who told them to live 2 or more hours from their job?
On average a rush hour typically adds an hour each way in commute time for most major cities. In Milwaukee there are folks that live in Downtown Milwaukee that work in downtown Chicago and thats a 90 min commute just on the train probably 2+ hours each way with waiting time. The salaries downtown Chicago are approx 20-33% greater than what you can get paid in Milwaukee because the cost of living in Illinois is so much. If you can spend the time on the train, pack a lunch and commute into Chicago, your comming out ahead.
By living near the train station in Milwaukee vs the suburbs of Milwaukee they are only adding perhaps 30-40 min to their daily commute by taking the train to Chicago. On top of that some employers have green transit programs and will subsidize a METRA, Amtrak or City Bus system monthly pass instead of having employees drive into work.
If they are a consultant making the commute they can bill the 90 min on the train in each direction and count it as part of their 8 hour workshift, just by opening their laptop and doing work on the train using wi-fi or a portable hot spot.
I work an hour and a half flight time from my employer's city, they allow me a 3 hour allowance on Mondays and Fridays to bill towards work and cover the time of the flight. When I have to fly in. I can fly in as many weeks as I see fit or not at all if I see that is the case. They pay for everything while I am out of state and on their work site, meals, lodging in a 3-4 star hotel, per diem, and transportation costs. It's a good deal for me because they threw in a full pension on top which I would have relied entirely on my 401k prior. So with the 401k and pension I will retire slightly above what I am getting paid now with COLA's until age 90.
Moral of the story is, when someone interviews you in your home town for an out of state position or a position that requires travel. You should always look into it instead of saying NO.
Also on the early morning Monday flights and afternoon Friday flights back there are approx 7-8 BNSF Managers with laptops. So I kind of think BNSF has a similar program for it's Fort Worth, TX employees to suppliment shortages in other parts of their network. Could be just coincidence but I have a suspicion as it seems to be the same faces.
People are ALREADY going 100 MPH on Highway 5. If it becomes legal, they can spend less time looking in the rearview mirror, and more looking ahead. Although, when they're looking for cops, they're at least spending more time being aware of traffic than SOME people I've seen driving.
The article talks about more lanes. Oh, yeah! For some reason, there's a goodly number of drivers who think, if they're going a long way, they should be in the left lane, no matter what speed they're going. When one of those catches up to a person who just wants to drive slowly (perfectly acceptable), it turns into a rolling roadblock (Highway 5 is mostly 4 lanes). I don't know about other states, but in California, if you've got 5 cars on your tail, it's the law that you must pull over to let them pass. There appears to be a lot of people IN the state that don't know that.
Ed
CMStPnP ATLANTIC CENTRAL Are you serious here? Who told them to live 2 or more hours from their job? On average a rush hour typically adds an hour each way in commute time for most major cities. In Milwaukee there are folks that live in Downtown Milwaukee that work in downtown Chicago and thats a 90 min commute just on the train probably 2+ hours each way with waiting time. The salaries downtown Chicago are approx 20-33% greater than what you can get paid in Milwaukee because the cost of living in Illinois is so much. If you can spend the time on the train, pack a lunch and commute into Chicago, your comming out ahead. By living near the train station in Milwaukee vs the suburbs of Milwaukee they are only adding perhaps 30-40 min to their daily commute by taking the train to Chicago. On top of that some employers have green transit programs and will subsidize a METRA, Amtrak or City Bus system monthly pass instead of having employees drive into work. If they are a consultant making the commute they can bill the 90 min on the train in each direction and count it as part of their 8 hour workshift, just by opening their laptop and doing work on the train using wi-fi or a portable hot spot. I work an hour and a half flight time from my employer's city, they allow me a 3 hour allowance on Mondays and Fridays to bill towards work and cover the time of the flight. When I have to fly in. I can fly in as many weeks as I see fit or not at all if I see that is the case. They pay for everything while I am out of state and on their work site, meals, lodging in a 3-4 star hotel, per diem, and transportation costs. It's a good deal for me because they threw in a full pension on top which I would have relied entirely on my 401k prior. So with the 401k and pension I will retire slightly above what I am getting paid now with COLA's until age 90. Moral of the story is, when someone interviews you in your home town for an out of state position or a position that requires travel. You should always look into it instead of saying NO. Also on the early morning Monday flights and afternoon Friday flights back there are approx 7-8 BNSF Managers with laptops. So I kind of think BNSF has a similar program for it's Fort Worth, TX employees to suppliment shortages in other parts of their network. Could be just coincidence but I have a suspicion as it seems to be the same faces.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Are you serious here? Who told them to live 2 or more hours from their job?
So if you don't mind, what is it that you do?
I have been to Milwaukee, I have a good sense of how far it is from Chicago. I would no sooner live in Milwaukee and work in Chicago than I would live here north of Baltimore and drive/commute to Washington DC every day.
But others do it.....good for them.
Still does not explain fully why others should pay to build them transportation.
I'm not the corporate type, been locally self employed most of my life, really hate the idea of travel for work like describe.
Now at age 61, I can keep doing what I'm doing for a few more years and be fine.
We all make choices, what works for one does not work for all. I actually worked in an office when I was young, got tired of that fast.
I have done a lot of different stuff, and always loved my jobs/businesses or moved on, unlike some people I have known who hated every day at work for 40 years.....
To each their own,
7j43k People are ALREADY going 100 MPH on Highway 5. If it becomes legal, they can spend less time looking in the rearview mirror, and more looking ahead. Although, when they're looking for cops, they're at least spending more time being aware of traffic than SOME people I've seen driving. The article talks about more lanes. Oh, yeah! For some reason, there's a goodly number of drivers who think, if they're going a long way, they should be in the left lane, no matter what speed they're going. When one of those catches up to a person who just wants to drive slowly (perfectly acceptable), it turns into a rolling roadblock (Highway 5 is mostly 4 lanes). I don't know about other states, but in California, if you've got 5 cars on your tail, it's the law that you must pull over to let them pass. There appears to be a lot of people IN the state that don't know that. Ed
Here in Maryland, and most of the east, there are no more "keep right" laws. Many highways have at least a few left side exits.
But most slower drivers do move over if/when they can.
The left lane pace on I-95 is pretty much 80 mph. 90 or agressiveness will get you a ticket. The posted limit is 65.
Well, I certainly know about the 5 cars behind you rule. It's the one question I missed back in 1978 when I first took the driver's test. I thought 3 was a better answer.
But more to the point, yes, people do regularly drive, if not 100, certainly 90 mph on I-5. But only for a while until you get stuck behind a truck or cars going like 70, trying to pass a truck in the right lane that is doing 65. This happens over and over again on a typical trip.
As far as it goes, yes there are people who have 2 hour commutes, and not just in the Silicon Valley area. It's a function of housing prices and wages. But I wouldn't expect a whole lot of them to take he HSR if it were built. The HSR would take some, of course, but mostly it would provide relief for the overtaxed highways and airports on the end points, plus, for the first time, a much better transportation option for intermediate points to the major population centers.
ATLANTIC CENTRALHere in Maryland, and most of the east, there are no more "keep right" laws. Many highways have at least a few left side exits.
Your neighbor to the north has that law (PA). So does NJ. There's exceptions, of course, but generally, stay to the right.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
zugmann ATLANTIC CENTRAL Here in Maryland, and most of the east, there are no more "keep right" laws. Many highways have at least a few left side exits. Your neighbor to the north has that law (PA). So does NJ. There's exceptions, of course, but generally, stay to the right.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL Here in Maryland, and most of the east, there are no more "keep right" laws. Many highways have at least a few left side exits.
And they have become the exception to what was once the rule. A rule that largely defeats the purpose of multi lane highways. And even in NJ and PA, from what I see, it is seldom enforced.
I can be in PA in 15 min, and NJ in 25 or 30, I've driven more than a couple miles in those states........
Maryland does have posted "slower traffic keep right" areas, and trucks are restricted from left lanes on sections of many highways.
But the idea that you should keep moving over to the right after you pass each slower vehicle is an obsolete idea, and many states have changed their laws and/or enforcement accordingly.
BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.
Just this evening I made a trip down and back up I-95 to suburban east Baltimore and back to my home in Havre de Grace. I cruised along at 80-85 for the most part, with only one or two cars not respecting the idea of slower traffic keeping right.
ATLANTIC CENTRALBUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.
Just do it BEFORE I have to adjust my speed, please.
zugmann ATLANTIC CENTRAL BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course. Just do it BEFORE I have to adjust my speed, please.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.
Completely agreed!
and I suspect 'adaptive cruise control' will adjust your speed long before you would have adjusted your speed yourself.
If you are no actively passing or visiblily overtaking cars in the right lane - get in the right lane yourself. If there is enough space betweeen cars in the right lane for someone to come up behind you and then pass you on the right and complete the pass by getting ahead of you in the left lane - YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE RIGHT LANE ALL THE TIME.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD zugmann ATLANTIC CENTRAL BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course. Just do it BEFORE I have to adjust my speed, please. and I suspect 'adaptive cruise control' will adjust your speed long before you would have adjusted your speed yourself. If you are no actively passing or visiblily overtaking cars in the right lane - get in the right lane yourself. If there is enough space betweeen cars in the right lane for someone to come up behind you and then pass you on the right and complete the pass by getting ahead of you in the left lane - YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE RIGHT LANE ALL THE TIME.
Agreed, but typically like my trip tonight, as I cruised along at 80 plus in the left lane, I was consistantly overtaking cars/trucks in both right lanes.
If I saw a car gaining on me, I would speed up and/or find a hole to move over into.
When and if traffic volume reaches a lower level, I always move to the right if I can maintain my desired cruising speed.
My FLEX has adaptive cruise control, but I seldom use it for trips this short.
BaltACDand I suspect 'adaptive cruise control' will adjust your speed long before you would have adjusted your speed yourself.
I don't have that high tech stuff.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL But the idea that you should keep moving over to the right after you pass each slower vehicle is an obsolete idea, and many states have changed their laws and/or enforcement accordingly. BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane - of course.
The latter seems to contradict the former.
But, yes: I WAS today in the #2 of 4 lanes. Traveling briskly. No one coming up behind. I could have moved to the right, but didn't.
So what.
But when you have FIVE cars behind you, as California law says, you have no excuse. And, if other states have had similar laws and changed them, it's a sorry commentary on those states. FIVE cars? And the drivers are so clueless that they don't even know? Or care? Big ticket, in my world!
5 cars? Frankly, one is too many. Get over.
7j43kBUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane
If the car coming up behind you has no respect for the speed limit laws, then what objection should they have to passing on the right?
Convicted One 7j43k BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane If the car coming up behind you has no respect for the speed limit laws, then what objection should they have to passing on the right?
7j43k BUT, does it make sense to move over if the way is clear and you see a car coming up behind you as you drive along in the left lane
If they are the only two cars on the road - no problem.
If there is a moderate amount of traffic - being slower in the left lane than overtaking traffic creates a 'ripple' in the right lane as the faster left lane traffic reaches your rolling road block. Most in the left lane will slow to give YOU an opportunity to move right, which then slows the entire left lane until it is felt by the first following driver that YOU are a road block and a right pass is done. Vehicles further back in the left lane may read the situation quicker and 'pull the trigger' on a right pass before car one behind the YOUR road block makes his decision. By being the road block in the left lane you are creating decisions among other drivers that don't need to be made if YOU were properly in the right lane. This applies to dual lane highway.
Where there are three or more lanes in your direction a different ettiqute applies.
ATLANTIC CENTRALSo if you don't mind, what is it that you do? I have been to Milwaukee, I have a good sense of how far it is from Chicago. I would no sooner live in Milwaukee and work in Chicago than I would live here north of Baltimore and drive/commute to Washington DC every day. But others do it.....good for them. Still does not explain fully why others should pay to build them transportation. I'm not the corporate type, been locally self employed most of my life, really hate the idea of travel for work like describe. Now at age 61, I can keep doing what I'm doing for a few more years and be fine. We all make choices, what works for one does not work for all. I actually worked in an office when I was young, got tired of that fast. I have done a lot of different stuff, and always loved my jobs/businesses or moved on, unlike some people I have known who hated every day at work for 40 years..... To each their own, Sheldon
I'm in Information Technology Big Data / Analytics is about as far as I can go. My specific area is in heavy demand right now and they cannot find enough people to fill it anywhere in the country. Demand even greater in fly-over country.
So outlining my personal experience with job search. Also ties into this discussion because it is also a key point in California's reasoning to putting in the HSR system in the first place. Silicon Valley is always tight with ability to hire good tech workers even with their current collusion with India to abuse the H1b VISA program to keep tech workers salaries low. If Silicon Valley could tap the cheap living conditions of the valley and potentially cheap labor as well. It could cut some of the paperwork costs with cheating our immigration system and instead use American property values in the Valley and potentially American labor to hold costs down instead of relying so heavily on Asia.
This would benefit the state of California MORE because it would increase poperty values in the valley.......raising property tax revenue. Residents of the valley would have more job opportunities open to them which they allegedly would be greatful for and it would boost California GDP by increasing mobility as well as reducing inefficiencies by having open jobs in one part of the state and higher unemployment in another part of the state. Thats the theory CA was acting on in part by routing HSR via the valley. Same general theory with LA basin and extending the cheap / fast commute to the Valley from LA.
Having the HSR just be within the borders of the Valley shreds a good part of the former dream of California HSR politicians. Though there might still be benefits to having a Valley only system.
Convicted OneIf the car coming up behind you has no respect for the speed limit laws, then what objection should they have to passing on the right?
And since we were talking about importing the autobahn. Gemans use the flash to pass signal with their headlights and you better abide by their polite request with the headlights because....
This is Federal Law in Germany and you need to pull over to the right and let faster vehicles pass. Same on two lane farmer roads, Germans build "move - over" lanes, similar to rail passing sidings every so often on their two lane bi-directional roads. Failure to move over and let faster vehicles pass is a $$$ fine in Germany and I heard it was steep.
BTW, caught DUI and refuse a sobriety test? German Police can forceibly withdraw the blood roadside for the test.....also the law.
Flip a German Policeman the bird........hauled in for "disrespect" or fined on the spot. Barvaria where our little mustached friend rose to power from (that everyone likes to bring back from the grave) is particularly nortorious for insisting on respect for police folks.
Just a few points that importing the autobahn without some of the German rules of the autobahn might also be messy. :)
Passing on the right is perfectly legal on muti lane limited access highways.
This whole converstation is based around the idea of raising or eliminating speed limits in some places, and to some degree assumes the position that current speed limits are artificially low.
This morning on I-95 I passed a Maryland State Trooper parked in the median, I was going about 83 in a 65 zone, he could not be bothered. Enforcement sets the speed, not the statue.........
Ugh, this thread. 2 pages of nothing related to the actual proposal on the table. A bunch of partisan bloviating and finally on page 3 we start talking actual boots on the ground reality in California.
BaltACD By being the road block in the left lane you are creating decisions among other drivers that don't need to be made if YOU were properly in the right lane
"Properly" is an interesting concept in this case. Am I the only one who sees the paradox in these people crowing about the need for other drivers to observe so called "slowpoke laws" Just so their own desire to break speed limit laws is not interfered with?
Personally, I am not one to languish in the left hand lane, unless I have a left turn coming up, in which case I could care less how big of a hurry the guy behind me happens to believe that he is in. I've had too many instances where other drivers are too busy getting where they are going to allow me to merge infront of them, causing me to miss my turn all together. So, first chance I get within two miles of my turn to occupy the left lane, I'm taking it. Don't care how pretty the driver behind me thinks his hi-beams are.
CMStPnPJust a few points that importing the autobahn without some of the German rules of the autobahn might also be messy. :)
Strictly in the context of autobahn-like unlimited speed highways, I agree completely. The discussion by some had veered into a debate about "existing laws on existing highways" and their seeming perspective that the road somehow belonged to them and they only shared it with others as a courtesy....was what I was responding to.
As to the necessity of making left turns, back when I was in the world of a five day week work, I made use of a three lane limited access highway for the greater part of my travel to and from work--and I made left turns to get off the highway. Knowing the reluctance of other people to let prospective left-turners move to the proper lane, I would move over well in advance.
I was also amused, especially in the morning, by the behavior of many others. Every mile or so, I would come to a cross street and its traffic light. In the morning, the lights would be set for traffic in the direction opposite to mine--and I would be passed by many who did not understand how the lights were set--and I would pass them at the next light without having to even slow down. Think if the wear on brakes and saving on gasoline by traveling as fast as the traffic lights permitted.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.