Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Safety benefits of roundabouts

theconversation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 409 posts

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#261

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

annica wrote: post #213
2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the uncertainty of who is yielding Same we know red light means stop. You make up a rule. In Australia anyone from the right has right of way.

It’s not the same though. Red means stop. It is ambiguous as to who must yield precisely because there is no red light to indicate it. What would the rule be? Your best guess as to the speed and distance of the other driver?

When you approach a round about you must slow down, check your right, and then proceed. It works the same as a stop or yield sign.

In a 2 lane roundabout both lanes should be free before moving into it.

I mean, you can't rely on stop lights either. I've seen plenty of people run reds. What do you do then?

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#262

Post by xnorswap »

meheleventyone wrote: post #256
rapnie wrote: post #242

In the Netherlands we had a huge phase of replacing regular crossings with roundabouts, which I consider to be an improvement. Now, however this is followed by a re-engineering phase of many of these roundabouts. The 2-lane ones, where a driver needs to pre-select whether they want to go a quarter round (turn right in Netherlands) or select for straight-ahead and 3 quarters round. The lanes on these roundabouts are s…

All the different rules for roundabout are fun. In the UK you’re expected to filter to the outside leave. In Iceland the person on the inside has priority to leave so you can still enter the roundabout but need to watch for someone already on the inside wanting to leave at your first exit. The rules are similar to the Netherlands in that you either go straight or 3rd exit from the inside and should only go first exit…

Careful with terminology too, because "inside" and "outside" don't mean the same thing to different drivers, particularly in the UK compared to elsewhere.

Many people hear "inside lane" on a motorway and think it's the "fast lane" near the central divider but that's actually the "outside lane". ( source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/outside-... ).

But that terminology has been confused over time and so many people get it the wrong way around that the DVLA has stopped using it in the highway code.

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#263

Post by consp »

gnosek wrote: post #257
rapnie wrote: post #242

In the Netherlands we had a huge phase of replacing regular crossings with roundabouts, which I consider to be an improvement. Now, however this is followed by a re-engineering phase of many of these roundabouts. The 2-lane ones, where a driver needs to pre-select whether they want to go a quarter round (turn right in Netherlands) or select for straight-ahead and 3 quarters round. The lanes on these roundabouts are s…

If I understand correctly, you mean turbo roundabouts https://www.ms2soft.com/resources/turbo-roundabouts/ ? If so, IMO they're the best thing that happened to roundabout design ever. You do need to choose a lane before entering but it's similar to how you'd choose a lane on a traditional two-lane roundabout. However, then you don't change lanes while on the roundabout, with ~zero visibility to the other lane while t…

Turbo roundabouts also have a significant bonus in throughput, have significantly less points of conflict than a normal two lane at the expense of longer lead-in roads. A single lane is safer but has a drawback in cars per hour.

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#264

Post by switch007 »

alex-moon wrote: post #247

Amazing to see a "What is a roundabout?" article living in UK. The way they are put in over here you get the idea traffic engineers not only love them, they are in love with them. I largely detest them, if I'm very honest. They can be done really well, but most aren't.

Ditto!

I once had a daily commute that involved 22 roundabouts each way. One every 2.5 miles on average.

The smaller ones with infrequent and low traffic cause a slowdown for everyone unnecessarily - that’s a lot of break dust and fuel to accelerate again

But I’m no traffic engineer so what do I know!

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#265

Post by meheleventyone »

xnorswap wrote: post #262
meheleventyone wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the different rules for roundabout are fun. In the UK you’re expected to filter to the outside leave. In Iceland the person on the inside has priority to leave so you can still enter the roundabout but need to watch for someone already on the inside wanting to leave at your first exit. The rules are similar to the Netherlands in that you either go straight or 3rd exit from the inside and should only go first exit…

Careful with terminology too, because "inside" and "outside" don't mean the same thing to different drivers, particularly in the UK compared to elsewhere. Many people hear "inside lane" on a motorway and think it's the "fast lane" near the central divider but that's actually the "outside lane". ( source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/outside-... ). But that terminology has been confused over tim…

Do you know the origin of the UK use because that always confused me as it’s obviously wrong from the drivers perspective of the road! My wild guess would be that from the drivers seat you look outside to the fast lane and look across the inside of the car to look to the slow lanes.

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#267

Post by Dah00n »

zik wrote: post #224
dtech wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in NL which has a very high number of roundabouts and this is not my experience at all. Granted most have priority pedestrian crossings which people do respects.

It's a documented effect of roundabouts that they tend to result in more pedestrian fatalities than other forms of intersection. But it does depend on the design - it's possible to improve pedestrian safety at the cost of traffic throughput. Guess which choice my country made...

Do you have a link to those numbers? Here in Denmark it is the opposite.

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#268

Post by leni536 »

michaelt wrote: post #253
occz wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The lack of lights and increase in number of crossings (for non-tiny ones) make them pretty terrible to cross as a pedestrian. This can surely be remedied by having the crossings being raised, acting as speed bumps for the cars and providing a better crossing experience for the pedestrian (or cyclist). I'm not entirely convinced that the lack of lights would inherently mean that roundabouts are less safe for pedestr…

Here in the UK, any difficult-to-cross junction will have a roundabout, simply because our road designers love roundabouts. And for large/busy roundabouts, cars will be in constant motion meaning there won't be gaps in the traffic flow for pedestrians to cross. If you try to cross [1] on foot at a busy period, it's not a particularly fun experience. Of course, I'm not sure any road layout could make such a junction e…

Especially that not many roundabouts have zebra crossing for the pedestrians in the UK.

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#269

Post by Dah00n »

dfxm12 wrote: post #33
hristov wrote: post #20

The greatest thing about roundabouts is that they protect against the idiot that goes through an intersection at full speed. He does that either because he is passed out behind the wheel or because he did not notice a stop sign and thought he had the right of way, or maybe because he just does not care. Well with a roundabout if you just go straight ahead you hit the center circle. Good roundabouts always have a slig…

Good roundabouts always have a slight hill and some kind of barrier (a tree or some kind of statue) in the center Interestingly enough, a new roundabout was installed in my neighborhood. We considered something pretty to look at in the middle, but the city said no way. "Emergency vehicles need to be able to go through the middle at full speed". Meanwhile, busses have zero issues negotiating the circle at normal drivi…

That.... sounds insane.

Re: Safety benefits of roundabouts

#270

Post by ajuc »

gambiting wrote: post #229
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of lights and increase in number of crossings (for non-tiny ones) make them pretty terrible to cross as a pedestrian.

Having lived in Poland for a long time - there's no issue mixing roundabouts and pedestrians, if anything they make is super easy - every exit has its own zebra crossing which means people exiting the roundabout have to stop to let you cross, which actually works well with the inherent design of the roundabout, or for really large ones with multiple lanes you just have lights.

Yup, I live in Poland and walk A LOTb(about 8km a day for last 3 years).

The only issue is when the roundabout is huge, and the alternative huge crossing would suck even more. Just make the roads smaller in general and pedestrians will be fine.

Post reply on HN