HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jimiii@nimbus.com (Jim Warford)
Subject: Re: Car-to-car contact at high speeds
Reply-To: jimiii@nimbus.com (Jim Warford)
Organization: Nimbus Technology, Santa Clara, CA USA
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:19:37 GMT

In article <p6#r8h-@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:
>tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen) writes:
>
>>In article <-#h2caq@rpi.edu> kaminl@aix.rpi.edu (Matt Garretson) writes:
>
>>if you're driving a callaway sledgehammer corvette, stomp the gas.
>>if you're driving a more mundane car, hit the brakes.
>>the tailgaters are going to have to take care of themselves.
>>countersteering after contact has been made is a good idea, but
>>it's better to get your car out of the immediate vicinity.  if he's
>>moving into your lane, it's probably because you're in his blind
>>spot (which means your car will be further back than his).  it takes
>>only a fraction of a second of hard braking to put your car behind his.
>
>This is really dumb advice.  Neither accelerating nor braking will
>get you out of the way of a lane changer in time.  
>
>To answer the question, situations vary of course, but assuming a quick 
>toot on the horn does not stop the move, the safest thing to do is to 
>steer INTO the oncoming vehicle.  This is about the first thing you 

If you have enough time to toot the horn, then judge the moment of 
impact, and then steer into the clown, I would think that should be
sufficient time to hit the brakes and avoid the accident entirely.
I do like the idea of spinning the clown off the road though.  Maybe
next time they will turn their head just a little bit and see if
anyone is there.

In reality every situation is different.  Sometimes swerving will
avoid the accident, sometimes braking or accelerating is the best
maneuver.  The best plan is still to plan ahead.  Don't get into
situations where you have no escape.  Watch other drivers when you
are overtaking their cars.  Don't drive in someones blind spot.

Around here they seem to have an overabundance of people who 
slooooooowly start edging over.  Rather than looking they assume
that everyone else will make room for them if they just drift
into the other lane over the next mile.

The other end of the spectrum are the people who drive the same route
to work everyday and still space out, almost miss their exit, and
try to traverse 4 lanes in the last 200 yards.

--jimiii

-- 
Faster Horses
Younger Women
Older Whiskey
More Money!
From: awds_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Adam Edwards)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: Driving in Vermont
Date: 16 Dec 92 03:53:05 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Dec15.214309.21089@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu> jmoreau@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey P. Moreau) writes:

>I plan to do a lot of driving through Vermont this month (mainly the 
>interstates) and was wondering if anyone knows what to watch out for
>concerning poilce etc...Are there lots of speed traps?  Are the police
>there really strict about the speed limit (being able to drive 10mph 
>over the speed limit (65 I assume?) without having to worry about it.
>  Just wondering.. not too urgent.. it is just that there are lots of
>very straight open highway on the interstates..



I occasionally rideshare with a fried at Dartmouth College.  We drive through
parts of Vermont, Route 4 through Rutland, on to Hanover, NH, then North
to St. Johnsbury.  I believe it's I 91 connecting Hanover, NH to St. Johnsbury,VT, a 60 mile stretch of great highway.  Last time traffic was non-existent, we
did the stretch in 32 minutes!  I hear from locals that speed enforcement
haunts 91 south of Hanover, though.  Have fun, but watch road conditions
especially in the winter!


Slowpoke

u
..
-- 
		'Fast...
				...what to drive '
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,misc.legal
From: kckbxr@next09wor.wam.umd.edu (Robin Hood)
Subject: Re: Cars, tape recorders, and the police...
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:47:52 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.212408.19697@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu>  
john@picasso.ocis.temple.edu (John Romanski) writes:
> I remember seeing sonething on a documentary about police cruisers being  
built with video cameras built in to the roof console (on the inside of  
the car) so    that the traffic stops can be videotaped.
> 
> I think that police are doing this for there own protection, physical,  
as well   as legal.

In one of my CJUS classes, the entire class viewed a videotape (I think it  
was taken by the Georgia State Police Dept.) showing a car chase, a  
drunk-driving situation, a few traffic stops, a shooting of a police  
officer, and a drug possession in a car trunk situation.  These were  
definately valuable situations in which a videotape would be incredibly  
valuable for prosecutions, but it can be dangerous for situations in which  
something occurs out of the range of the camera (i.e. behind the police  
car or to its side).  Videotaping would definately help crime control, but  
it may infringe on an individual's due process rights.  I think that if  
police were granted the right to videotape a suspect, a suspect should be 
granted the equal opportunity/right to videotape as well.  

bill
 
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: linley@netcom.com (Bruce James Robrert Linley)
Subject: Re: Cars, tape recorders, and the police...
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, UCLA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 00:23:23 GMT

In a previous article bwalts@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Brandon Walts) spake...
>In Colorado, (and I'm pretty sure this is the way the law works nationwide),
>as long as *one* of the parties involved is aware of and consents to the
>recording, the recording is legal.  This applies to phone conversations,
>hidden cameras, hidden microphones, etc.
>
Telephones are a whole separate issue. I guess the real question is, is there
any reasonable expectation of privacy out on the streets where you're pulled
over at. If not, then you don't have to tell 'em they're being recorded.

-- 
Bruce James Robert Linley | "Well, I tried shoving a weiner in the warp drive,
Comp Sci & Engr, UCLA     |  but it didn't do a bit o' good."
<linley@netcom.com>       | - Star Dreck, c/o Dr. Demento
<linley@seas.ucla.edu>    |
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: waco@cbnewse.cb.att.com (john.l.broughton)
Subject: Staying Alive, Autobahn Speedlimits, Grassy Medians
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 15:09:42 GMT


In article <1992Dec14.044700.29977@samba.oit.unc.edu> Mike.Oniffrey@launchpad
.unc.edu (Mike Oniffrey) writes

### stuff deleted ###
>Early in 1992, a westbound morning commuter, after having been bounced
>around by other vehicles, crossed the grassy median and met oncoming
>eastbound traffic on I-40 at a particularly busy section near the Research
### more4 stuff deleted ###

Isn't it nice how the average U.S. interstate was designed with those smooth
grassy medians, for the most part?  IMHO, if states and the federal government
are interested in reducing deaths on interstates, there would  be barriers
in medians; trees, shrubs, concrete, whatever, to keep vehicles from crossing
over and having head-on collisions with traffic travelling in the opposite 
direction.  This seems to be a very common cause of fatalaties on interstates
and expressways.

If memory serves, and it has been many, many years, one of the best things
about the autobahns in Germany was that most places you could not get
across the median.  There were thick plantings of trees and shrubs that not
only kept you from crossing the median, but shielded you from headlights
of the oncoming traffic.  Also, it is hard to find miles of straight sections
of the autobahns, and this is by design.  A motorist who constantly has to
make slight steering adjustments is far less likely to become bored, unattentive
or fall asleep.  I did manage to fall asleep in broad daylight on the autobahn
once with only minor damage to my car when it hit a metal post supporting a
reflector on the shoulder as it was sliding sideways after I awoke and gave
the wheel a hard left.  An experience I do not care to repeat.

And speaking of the autobahns, I remember speed limits on them in certain
unsafe areas, like a steep hill where I got a speeding ticket in my 55 VW --
but didn't know about it until 2 months later when it showed up in my commanding
officer's hands.  The most appreciated sign I remember on the autobahns was
the one that read "freie fahrt" (free driving a.k.a. no speed limit).  Of
course this had very little meaning to my 55 VW  :-) :-).



John L. Broughton
AT&T
Naperville, IL
john.l.broughton@att.com
att!john.l.broughton
From: ez012303@hamlet.ucdavis.edu (Mr. Imagination)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: heel and toeing
Date: 11 Dec 92 23:04:23 GMT
Organization: Computing Services, UC Davis

I've been reading several articles about "Heel and Toeing," but only for the 
last week or so.  So I am wondering, What is Heel and Toeing?  Something 
about matching speed  with engine rpm's, I don't know.  I drive an '85 Supra
and thought whatever this is might just improve my driving so could someone
help me by posting or sending me E-mail.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Grant
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: Car-to-car contact at high speeds
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 09:59:13 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.

tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen) writes:

>let's assume that the other car is 17 ft. long, which should take care of
>just about any car this side of a crown victoria.  if he's moving over,
>he probably didn't see you which would mean you're in his rear quarter.
>let's say it's 10 ft. from your current position to a spot immediately
>behind his bumper.  also assume your car has mediocre 60-0 braking
>of 150 ft.  this generates a decceleration of about 26 ft/sec^2.
>but not all drivers are capable of instant threshold braking, so
>reduce that to 20 (about 0.62g).  assuming that you're both traveling
>at the same speed, you'll need half a second.

Why don't we not play any assuming mind games?  The context of the question
is what to do when someone comes into your lane in a manner that is 
going to cause an accident.  You have only a couple of choices.
You can try to evade the idiot, in which case if contact is made, you
will likely crash along with him.  Or you can take the same proactive
steps a race driver would and bend a bit of sheet metal in the 
process of keeping yourself out of a more serious wreck.  Your original
advice was dumb and your hyphthesizing to try to cover it is equally
so.

John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: maessm@rs6203.ecs.rpi.edu (Mathieu J. Maessen)
Subject: Re: What are some common myths about driving?
Reply-To: maessm@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:31:08 GMT

In article <1gsvvbINNci5@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, jrd@po.CWRU.Edu (John R. Daker) writes:
|> Driving is an inalienable right.

This is only a myth if you're talking about driving on public roads.  If you
really want to, you can buy yourself a racecar and race it on your own proper-
ty.  When I was about ten years old, one of my friends (who was also ten) had 
a little Honda Civic that she drove around on her parents' farm.  That's how I
first learned to drive.

If you're not driving on a public road or endangering the safety of other peo-
ple, they can't stop you.
-- 
Mat Maessen   N2NJZ		| maessm@rpi.edu
------------------------------- |-----------------------------------
W2SZ/1 - #1 in the ARRL June VHF QSO Party - again!
--------------------------------|-----------------------------------
The opinions expressed in this message definitely do NOT reflect the
views of RPI, Roland Schmitt, or BAPP
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) 1992 Fake-sig Co., Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jtchew@csa3.lbl.gov (Ad absurdum per aspera)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: Tow chains or slings?
Date: 11 Dec 1992 14:19 PST
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.198
Summary: strap ("sling")
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

> There should NEVER be anyone between the vehicles except when all motion 
> has ceased.

Yes-siree-Bob.  I'd even append "...and one vehicle has closed the distance
a little, putting slack in the chain or strap."  These things can be totally
unfunny when they snap or come off under load.  Like, amputation city, and
you by definition in a situation where medical help is hard to come by.

>A winch is a much better solution than a strap or a chain.  Of course it's
>expensive.  It's worth it.

Looks kinda silly on a passenger car, but anybody contemplating even semi-
serious backwoodsing in a pickup or SUV should have one (and probably knows
it already). Short of that, any recommendations or comments on "come-alongs"?

Now for stupid low-tech ideas.  A spade (even a garden trowel or a little
collapsible camp shovel from the army-navy store is better than nothing),
a couple of boards or pieces of plywood a few feet long and as wide as a
wheel, and a piece of plastic or cardboard to lay or kneel on can make
the rescue of bogged-down vehicles (including your own) a lot more straight-
forward and pleasant.  While you're filling up your trunk with nerd gear,
don't forget something warm that you don't mind getting dirty, a pair of
expendable-quality gloves that give reasonable feel and dexterity, and some
kind of poncho or rainsuit in a visible color.  Oh, and a ski mask or 
stocking cap -- you lose a lot of heat through your noggin.  Might even want
to lay in a couple of those little "space blankets" and some candy bars or
something, just to keep you warm until help arrives or fuel up your rescuees.

You can also feel really stupid without a few basic tools sequestered in
your vehicle somewhere.  I vividly remember lying on my back for 15 minutes
in a blizzard up in the Sierra, samaritanizing some poor schmuck whose
tire chain had made a Gordian knot around the half-shaft and CV joint of
his rent-a-car.  I didn't have the ideal tools, but a screwdriver and a
pair of vise-grips and a lot of colorful language eventually did the job.

Happy motoring, and "stop and render aid"!
--Joe
"Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"
From: charles@nybble.acs.com (Charles Green)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: TRANSMISSION FIXED!
Date: 13 Dec 92 03:18:26 GMT
Organization: Loudoun County NetNews

In article <1992Dec3.180501.16312@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) writes:
>jdrout@scott.skidmore.edu (JTD is lost) writes:
>>The thought that AAMCO advertises with "only half of the trannies we
>>see need replacement" horrifies me.  If you think of it one way, that
>>means if my friend and I take in our MR2s for a rattling 1st gear,
>>they will tell one of us he needs a NEW tranny.  That means
>>statistically they replace a MINIMUM  (giving the benefit of the
>>doubt) of 50% of the transmissions they see.  EEK.  Of course, stats
>>can lie.  And so can tranny shops...
>
>IT MUST go something like this:
>
>50% of the transmissions they work on get replaced.
>50% of the transmissions they work on only need tranmssion fluid added.

No, no, no... "only half ... NEED a new transmission,"
*NOT* "only half ... GET a new transmission."  *Big* difference. (:-)
-- 
Charles Green				"The...fireworks...have just...begun!"
charles@c3pe.tfd.com						-Captain Zilog
signature virus 2.1c - Copy me into your .signature if you love Jesus!
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen)
Subject: Re: Car-to-car contact at high speeds
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 22:18:43 GMT

In article <-#h2caq@rpi.edu> kaminl@aix.rpi.edu (Matt Garretson) writes:
>   Suppose I'm going along in the left lane maybe 70mph, and a car to my
>right starts to come into my lane where I already am (i.e. to bump into
>my right side). There is no shoulder to the left to swerve into safely-
>only a guardrail (or oncoming traffic! :( ).  I don't want to end up 
>bouncing all over the place like the car above. And I can't brake quickly
>since there are cars on my tail (%^*&@! tailgaters). So, is it a good idea
>to steer into the car, with the intention of keeping it from pushing me
>where I don't want to go? I don't mean swerving into it, but trying to
>exert enough pressure once contact is made to maintain my own position,
>and hopefully give the other driver enough time to correct his steering.
>Will side-to-side contact between cars be disasterous at 70mph?  It
>seems to work ok in the movies, anyway.  What is the best thing to do in
>a situation like this? I know there are many variables, but any
>comments would be appreciated.

if you're driving a callaway sledgehammer corvette, stomp the gas.
if you're driving a more mundane car, hit the brakes.
the tailgaters are going to have to take care of themselves.
countersteering after contact has been made is a good idea, but
it's better to get your car out of the immediate vicinity.  if he's
moving into your lane, it's probably because you're in his blind
spot (which means your car will be further back than his).  it takes
only a fraction of a second of hard braking to put your car behind his.

depending only on countersteering is risky.  if you don't do it right,
you could get shoved right into the cement divider and end up doing
barrel rolls.  or if there isn't a divider, get shoved into oncoming
traffic.  i would rather get tagged from behind.  another
reason to brake is that you can do it RIGHT NOW rather than waiting for
the impact to start countersteering (unless you want to swerve into him
which would not be a good idea).

they do it in the movies because it makes for a more action-packed
sequence, not because it works better.  remember, it's only in
the movies that a limo full of bad guys can catch up with a guy
in a corvette.

-teddy
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: jmoreau@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Jeffrey P. Moreau)
Subject: Driving in Vermont
Organization: Northeastern University
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:43:09 GMT

I plan to do a lot of driving through Vermont this month (mainly the 
interstates) and was wondering if anyone knows what to watch out for
concerning poilce etc...Are there lots of speed traps?  Are the police
there really strict about the speed limit (being able to drive 10mph 
over the speed limit (65 I assume?) without having to worry about it.
  Just wondering.. not too urgent.. it is just that there are lots of
very straight open highway on the interstates...
From: mike@gilligan.East.Sun.COM (Mike Roncadori)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: Staying Alive, Autobahn Speedlimits, Grassy Medians
Date: 16 Dec 1992 07:35:28 -0500
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Vienna, Va.
NNTP-Posting-Host: gilligan.east.sun.com

In article <1992Dec14.151650.1471@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com> c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) writes:
>
>The purpose of the median is that it provides a permanent U-turn lane for
>cops cruising with the radar on on the other side, or a nice HIDING place
>for speed traps...
>
>:-)

We actually have a section of interstate here N. Va that is really
well-done!

I-66 west of I-495 has either large shrubbery or a concrete barrier
for about 15 miles. Over the years, I've seen these shrubs stop many
a car. The shrubs do have gaps, so that the RCOs can pull U-turns
to chase insolent uncaring lawbreakers, though...

[That last sentence was sarcasm, but there are gaps in the "filler"]

The only problem with I-66 is that most of the time, the speeds are
too low to need even a haybale to stop a car. Way too much traffic
for the road. I only go on it when I can't avoid it, or in the mid-
dle of the night.

Of course, now that they're adding in HOV lanes on it, the shrubs
will likely go bye-bye. Boo-hoo... They're really pretty in the
spring and summer.

-- Mike

-------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions - not my employer's
Xref: sparky rec.autos.driving:7261 misc.legal:21489
From: K.Buck@ma30.bull.com (Ken Buck)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Cars, tape recorders, and the police...
Date: 18 Dec 92 13:00:31 GMT
Reply-To: K.Buck@ma30.bull.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bull HN Information Systems Inc.
Originator: buck@granite.ma30.bull.com

In article <1992Dec17.234752.6508@wam.umd.edu> kckbxr@next09wor.wam.umd.edu (Robin Hood) writes:
>[re: police video tapes] [...] definately situations in which a videotape
>would be incredibly valuable for prosecutions, but it can be dangerous for
>situations in which something occurs out of the range of the camera (i.e.
>behind the police car or to its side).

i dunno about "dangerous", i'd say "just not helpful".

>Videotaping would definately help crime control, but it may infringe on an
>individual's due process rights.  I think that if police were granted the
>right to videotape a suspect, a suspect should be granted the equal
>opportunity/right to videotape as well.  

true, but i don't know of anything that legally prohibits "suspects"
(probably mostly just speed-trap victims) from videotaping incidents.
the problem is that the ratio of police cars to everybody else is low,
so it's much easier/affordable to fit each police car with a video
camera than it is to put one in everyone else's car.

i'd say that while video cameras can be misused, there may be some
advantages to having them, and the disadvantages seem to be relatively
few/minor.
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
From: eu507dac@pts.mot.com (DOUG CHRISTENSEN X3915 P6818)
Subject: Re: Car-to-car contact at high speeds
Reply-To: eu507dac@pts.mot.com
Organization: Paging and Wireless Data Group
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 14:30:49 GMT


>PS- What would be the implications of being rear-ended on the highway at
>high speed? Someone said it wouldn't be too bad (relatively speaking). But
>I'm sure that my car would stall in such a case. Might this cause other
>problems?

Given the choice of being hit on the side or the back, I would choose the
back for two reasons.  Most cars have more padding in the front and back.  
A hit in the back will only result in a slight forward motion (please resist
the urge to stand on the brakes). Your car will still maintain its direction
of travel, provided your tail gater hits you square in the back.

The second and better reason.  The accident will always be the tail gater's
fault.

You should be able to survive 5 to 10 mph delta in a rear end collision with-
out much fuss.  There is a technique called bump drafting used in racing where
the drafing car will hit front car to transfer his speed to the front car.  Works
great at Daytona.  It's good for about 10mph greater speed on the straights.

---
Doug Christensen    SCCA SSB Scirocco 16V
doug_christensen@pts.mot.com
     _____
   _/_|__|\__
  | _ |61| _ \
 <-(_)----(_)-^       "When I'm racing, I'm alive.  Everthing else
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^    is just waiting."  Steve McQueen, Le Mans.