From: Alan Baker on
In article <vj4jt5pn4jjnbv7unqtgivhqs540bo2n9c(a)4ax.com>,
Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> Last time on rec.autos.driving, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net>
> said:
>
> >Everywhere I've ever driven, advisory limits have been set too low for
> >typical passenger vehicles under good driving conditions...
> >
> >...except...
> >
> >...every now and then you find one that is set approximately correctly.
> >
> >And at that point, you're suddenly in trouble, because in your head
> >you've assumed it will be like all the others.
>
> You're only in trouble if you're an incompetent driver. People who
> actually know how to drive can judge the appropriate speed for a curve
> with an incorrect sign or even no sign at all.

Only where you can see all of the curve.

I would rather there were no advisory signs posted than signs that
occasionally mislead me.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
<http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Brent on
On 2010-04-29, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote:
> In article
><eb3cc26e-094c-4b9f-9336-49a3341d43b7(a)s2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
> gpsman <gpsman(a)driversmail.com> wrote:
<usual gpstroll stuff>
> So it would make sense to you if some were capable of being taken at 4
> times the speed posted and some no more than the speed posted at all?

In the gpstroll world you just obey the arbitrary whims of your masters.
Don't think, just obey. It's the thought process of a slave.


From: Brent on
On 2010-04-29, Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/29/2010 16:03, Brent wrote:
>> On 2010-04-29, Alan Baker <alangbaker(a)telus.net> wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <eb3cc26e-094c-4b9f-9336-49a3341d43b7(a)s2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
>>> gpsman <gpsman(a)driversmail.com> wrote:
>> <usual gpstroll stuff>
>>> So it would make sense to you if some were capable of being taken at 4
>>> times the speed posted and some no more than the speed posted at all?
>>
>> In the gpstroll world you just obey the arbitrary whims of your masters.
>> Don't think, just obey. It's the thought process of a slave.
>
> Based on a lot of evidence, California's Highway 17 used to be
> playground for people that knew better than the signs.
>
> Or had a death wish.
>
> One or the other.
>
> I never killed anybody going around a curve at the warning speed. Nor
> scared anybody much.

Missing the point... I hope.


From: Alan Baker on
In article <83ufquFjj6U1(a)mid.individual.net>,
Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> On 4/29/2010 17:00, Brent wrote:
>
> > Missing the point... I hope.
>
> Could be I suppose--it looked to me like the point was to go faster than
> the warning speed by degress until you failed.

No. The point is to go about one's business as expeditiously as possible.

>
> I do not routinely do that--I drive at about the warning speed (or maybe
> less if I'm hauling 8-foot rolls of paper standing on end, or a load of
> copper rod that I didn't get to inspect).

Right. Because you know from experience that those speeds are
appropriate for your truck. Passenger cars can take those same turns
much more quickly, but we don't need separate signs as long as they all
set to consistent standard.

And it would seem self-evident that that standard should be set primarly
to give accurate information to those who are *not* professional drivers.

Professionals would have little trouble if the warning speeds were all
set to indicate what was a reasonable speed for passenger vehicles in
good weather, would they?

>
> But I did lie a little--I have scared myself badly by hitting a curve
> way too fast to get slowed to the warning speed due to inattention or
> something. Usually signals an overdue stop.

And you've never ever encountered a warning speed that because it
actually indicated the correct speed for a *passenger* vehicle and thus
was too fast for your semi?

Please.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
<http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg>
From: Brent on
On 2010-04-29, Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/29/2010 17:00, Brent wrote:
>
>> Missing the point... I hope.
>
> Could be I suppose--it looked to me like the point was to go faster than
> the warning speed by degress until you failed.

The point was blindly obeying nonsense because it comes from
"authority".

> I do not routinely do that--I drive at about the warning speed (or maybe
> less if I'm hauling 8-foot rolls of paper standing on end, or a load of
> copper rod that I didn't get to inspect).

Do you drive the warning speed in your private automobile too?