A road system with no traffic rules - what sort of vehicle is best?
$begingroup$
In Britopia there were the Leftists who believed motorists should drive on the left and the Rightists who believed they should drive on the Right. The vote split exactly down the middle and it was finally decided that there would be no rule at all.
In the end it was further decided that there would be no traffic rules of any kind: no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.
Question
In this 21st century country what is the best road vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example.
The laws that pertain to collisions etc. are very similar to those applying in pedestrian areas. There are no rules-of-the road in pedestrian-only areas but you are still not allowed to run around waving a chainsaw and threatening other people.
To those who are voting to close because the question is 'too broad', I'd like to point out that I'm simply asking for the most suitable mode of transport as defined by getting from A to B as quickly and safely as possible. I don't think that could be any clearer or better defined. In fact I'd claim that it is more clearly defined than the majority of the questions on this site. If I left out 'safely' or left out 'quickly' it would be a completely different question.
To those who are voting to close because "answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise", you obviously haven't read the answers because there are facts, expertise (personal knowledge) and references in several of them. Most questions on WB get some answers that are of lower quality but that isn't the fault of the questioner.
law transportation vehicles
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
$endgroup$
|
show 18 more comments
$begingroup$
In Britopia there were the Leftists who believed motorists should drive on the left and the Rightists who believed they should drive on the Right. The vote split exactly down the middle and it was finally decided that there would be no rule at all.
In the end it was further decided that there would be no traffic rules of any kind: no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.
Question
In this 21st century country what is the best road vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example.
The laws that pertain to collisions etc. are very similar to those applying in pedestrian areas. There are no rules-of-the road in pedestrian-only areas but you are still not allowed to run around waving a chainsaw and threatening other people.
To those who are voting to close because the question is 'too broad', I'd like to point out that I'm simply asking for the most suitable mode of transport as defined by getting from A to B as quickly and safely as possible. I don't think that could be any clearer or better defined. In fact I'd claim that it is more clearly defined than the majority of the questions on this site. If I left out 'safely' or left out 'quickly' it would be a completely different question.
To those who are voting to close because "answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise", you obviously haven't read the answers because there are facts, expertise (personal knowledge) and references in several of them. Most questions on WB get some answers that are of lower quality but that isn't the fault of the questioner.
law transportation vehicles
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
$endgroup$
9
$begingroup$
Can you specify: Does everybody have to drive the same kind/class of vehicle or is this a kind of personal "arms race" you are asking about? Are there limitations, such as only existing and/or only road legal vehicles?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
Jan 17 at 12:04
4
$begingroup$
This honestly sounds a lot like how people drive in Cairo - there are road signs, traffic lights, lanes etc. And no one pays attention to any of them.
$endgroup$
– SpoonMeiser
Jan 17 at 16:25
20
$begingroup$
Go to India, take notes, and do the same thing :P
$endgroup$
– only_pro
Jan 17 at 19:33
5
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK Indeed, that's just the point. If someone drives too fast to stop their car before hitting someone and killing them, is it murder? With traffic rules everybody is supposed to follow, you can have justification for driving at a certain speed for example. Without rules, you don't have the rules to determine what is ok and what is not. Like killing someone with a knife, it takes extraordinary circumstances to not make that a manslaughter at the very least. With car, if you drive according to the rules, you are reasonably safe from being convicted as a killer.
$endgroup$
– hyde
Jan 17 at 20:01
2
$begingroup$
Would privately operated roads be a possibility? I would thing that after enough Chaos the Leftists, and/or Rightists would just spend the money and build their own privately administered transport systems with strict rules and fees.
$endgroup$
– Zoredache
Jan 18 at 0:23
|
show 18 more comments
$begingroup$
In Britopia there were the Leftists who believed motorists should drive on the left and the Rightists who believed they should drive on the Right. The vote split exactly down the middle and it was finally decided that there would be no rule at all.
In the end it was further decided that there would be no traffic rules of any kind: no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.
Question
In this 21st century country what is the best road vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example.
The laws that pertain to collisions etc. are very similar to those applying in pedestrian areas. There are no rules-of-the road in pedestrian-only areas but you are still not allowed to run around waving a chainsaw and threatening other people.
To those who are voting to close because the question is 'too broad', I'd like to point out that I'm simply asking for the most suitable mode of transport as defined by getting from A to B as quickly and safely as possible. I don't think that could be any clearer or better defined. In fact I'd claim that it is more clearly defined than the majority of the questions on this site. If I left out 'safely' or left out 'quickly' it would be a completely different question.
To those who are voting to close because "answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise", you obviously haven't read the answers because there are facts, expertise (personal knowledge) and references in several of them. Most questions on WB get some answers that are of lower quality but that isn't the fault of the questioner.
law transportation vehicles
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
$endgroup$
In Britopia there were the Leftists who believed motorists should drive on the left and the Rightists who believed they should drive on the Right. The vote split exactly down the middle and it was finally decided that there would be no rule at all.
In the end it was further decided that there would be no traffic rules of any kind: no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.
Question
In this 21st century country what is the best road vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example.
The laws that pertain to collisions etc. are very similar to those applying in pedestrian areas. There are no rules-of-the road in pedestrian-only areas but you are still not allowed to run around waving a chainsaw and threatening other people.
To those who are voting to close because the question is 'too broad', I'd like to point out that I'm simply asking for the most suitable mode of transport as defined by getting from A to B as quickly and safely as possible. I don't think that could be any clearer or better defined. In fact I'd claim that it is more clearly defined than the majority of the questions on this site. If I left out 'safely' or left out 'quickly' it would be a completely different question.
To those who are voting to close because "answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise", you obviously haven't read the answers because there are facts, expertise (personal knowledge) and references in several of them. Most questions on WB get some answers that are of lower quality but that isn't the fault of the questioner.
law transportation vehicles
law transportation vehicles
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
edited Jan 18 at 14:36
chasly from UK
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
asked Jan 16 at 19:12
chasly from UKchasly from UK
16.3k773146
16.3k773146
9
$begingroup$
Can you specify: Does everybody have to drive the same kind/class of vehicle or is this a kind of personal "arms race" you are asking about? Are there limitations, such as only existing and/or only road legal vehicles?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
Jan 17 at 12:04
4
$begingroup$
This honestly sounds a lot like how people drive in Cairo - there are road signs, traffic lights, lanes etc. And no one pays attention to any of them.
$endgroup$
– SpoonMeiser
Jan 17 at 16:25
20
$begingroup$
Go to India, take notes, and do the same thing :P
$endgroup$
– only_pro
Jan 17 at 19:33
5
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK Indeed, that's just the point. If someone drives too fast to stop their car before hitting someone and killing them, is it murder? With traffic rules everybody is supposed to follow, you can have justification for driving at a certain speed for example. Without rules, you don't have the rules to determine what is ok and what is not. Like killing someone with a knife, it takes extraordinary circumstances to not make that a manslaughter at the very least. With car, if you drive according to the rules, you are reasonably safe from being convicted as a killer.
$endgroup$
– hyde
Jan 17 at 20:01
2
$begingroup$
Would privately operated roads be a possibility? I would thing that after enough Chaos the Leftists, and/or Rightists would just spend the money and build their own privately administered transport systems with strict rules and fees.
$endgroup$
– Zoredache
Jan 18 at 0:23
|
show 18 more comments
9
$begingroup$
Can you specify: Does everybody have to drive the same kind/class of vehicle or is this a kind of personal "arms race" you are asking about? Are there limitations, such as only existing and/or only road legal vehicles?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
Jan 17 at 12:04
4
$begingroup$
This honestly sounds a lot like how people drive in Cairo - there are road signs, traffic lights, lanes etc. And no one pays attention to any of them.
$endgroup$
– SpoonMeiser
Jan 17 at 16:25
20
$begingroup$
Go to India, take notes, and do the same thing :P
$endgroup$
– only_pro
Jan 17 at 19:33
5
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK Indeed, that's just the point. If someone drives too fast to stop their car before hitting someone and killing them, is it murder? With traffic rules everybody is supposed to follow, you can have justification for driving at a certain speed for example. Without rules, you don't have the rules to determine what is ok and what is not. Like killing someone with a knife, it takes extraordinary circumstances to not make that a manslaughter at the very least. With car, if you drive according to the rules, you are reasonably safe from being convicted as a killer.
$endgroup$
– hyde
Jan 17 at 20:01
2
$begingroup$
Would privately operated roads be a possibility? I would thing that after enough Chaos the Leftists, and/or Rightists would just spend the money and build their own privately administered transport systems with strict rules and fees.
$endgroup$
– Zoredache
Jan 18 at 0:23
9
9
$begingroup$
Can you specify: Does everybody have to drive the same kind/class of vehicle or is this a kind of personal "arms race" you are asking about? Are there limitations, such as only existing and/or only road legal vehicles?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
Jan 17 at 12:04
$begingroup$
Can you specify: Does everybody have to drive the same kind/class of vehicle or is this a kind of personal "arms race" you are asking about? Are there limitations, such as only existing and/or only road legal vehicles?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
Jan 17 at 12:04
4
4
$begingroup$
This honestly sounds a lot like how people drive in Cairo - there are road signs, traffic lights, lanes etc. And no one pays attention to any of them.
$endgroup$
– SpoonMeiser
Jan 17 at 16:25
$begingroup$
This honestly sounds a lot like how people drive in Cairo - there are road signs, traffic lights, lanes etc. And no one pays attention to any of them.
$endgroup$
– SpoonMeiser
Jan 17 at 16:25
20
20
$begingroup$
Go to India, take notes, and do the same thing :P
$endgroup$
– only_pro
Jan 17 at 19:33
$begingroup$
Go to India, take notes, and do the same thing :P
$endgroup$
– only_pro
Jan 17 at 19:33
5
5
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK Indeed, that's just the point. If someone drives too fast to stop their car before hitting someone and killing them, is it murder? With traffic rules everybody is supposed to follow, you can have justification for driving at a certain speed for example. Without rules, you don't have the rules to determine what is ok and what is not. Like killing someone with a knife, it takes extraordinary circumstances to not make that a manslaughter at the very least. With car, if you drive according to the rules, you are reasonably safe from being convicted as a killer.
$endgroup$
– hyde
Jan 17 at 20:01
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK Indeed, that's just the point. If someone drives too fast to stop their car before hitting someone and killing them, is it murder? With traffic rules everybody is supposed to follow, you can have justification for driving at a certain speed for example. Without rules, you don't have the rules to determine what is ok and what is not. Like killing someone with a knife, it takes extraordinary circumstances to not make that a manslaughter at the very least. With car, if you drive according to the rules, you are reasonably safe from being convicted as a killer.
$endgroup$
– hyde
Jan 17 at 20:01
2
2
$begingroup$
Would privately operated roads be a possibility? I would thing that after enough Chaos the Leftists, and/or Rightists would just spend the money and build their own privately administered transport systems with strict rules and fees.
$endgroup$
– Zoredache
Jan 18 at 0:23
$begingroup$
Would privately operated roads be a possibility? I would thing that after enough Chaos the Leftists, and/or Rightists would just spend the money and build their own privately administered transport systems with strict rules and fees.
$endgroup$
– Zoredache
Jan 18 at 0:23
|
show 18 more comments
20 Answers
20
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Horses
They are smart enough to not crash themselves on others, even if their riders are completely drunk.
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
$endgroup$
28
$begingroup$
So speaks a person who has never ridden a polo pony
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 16 at 19:43
8
$begingroup$
@Separatrix polo ponies are trained to do so when made to by players.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
Jan 16 at 21:20
62
$begingroup$
Only if all drivers are using the same transportation type...since there's no regulation, this seems unlikely. Horses are fantastic, but will not help you much if someone else drives a semi into you.
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:52
13
$begingroup$
@immibis Not that much if you're going slowly--but it will definitely terrorize the horse. (Source: Drivers who helpfully sound their horn when they are right behind me.)
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 22:30
15
$begingroup$
Car with some horses in computer will work too.
$endgroup$
– val
Jan 17 at 7:36
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
While the scenario painted may seem quite bizarre and downright deadly, the fact of the matter is, minimal traffic regulation does not necessarily mean you need to drive an Challenger 2 Tank just to make it home from your downtown office park every day!
As a matter of fact, we in the Traffic Tabulation Bureau have conducted a comprehensively exhaustive study of various traffic patterns around the world and have come to the conclusion that, contrary to all expected laws of physics, a small motorcar is every bit as effective as a tank when it comes to negotiating the ebb and flow of every day Britopian traffic. We therefore recommend that Britopian Royal Commission for Travel encourage the use of diminutive, and above all, cute motorcars and furthermore, recommend an advertising scheme encouraging all Britopians to obtain at least one motorcar per adult per household and the use said motorcar for every conceivable use, from commuting to work, to long distance travel to going down to the shops or even everyday leisure drives. The more cars Britanopians place on the nation's motorways, the more crowded, and thus slower and safer, every Britanope shall be! (Cue patriotic music!)
And the reason is quite simple. Our Bureau have determined that a simple law of physics applies: the denser the traffic, the slower the flow. What this means is that, even when an entirely chaotic, semi-brownian, system is implemented, a much more organic flow is created. As you can see, it is quite possible for large lorries, busses, jeepneys, pedicabs, scooters, hand carts, random animals, pedestrians, rickshaws, trams and motorcars to interact quite safely at lower speeds. Sure, it may take you two hours to travel five miles, but the ride will be very manageable and very unlikely to cause major mishap.
Kindly review our Minimal Traffic Regulation test videos:
Cairo
Delhi
Manila
Addis Ababa
As you can see, every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
$endgroup$
12
$begingroup$
"every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!" But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?
$endgroup$
– a CVn♦
Jan 16 at 20:14
3
$begingroup$
Haha! Brilliant. I've extracted a couple of clips from your videos. This youtu.be/VPbUpdmAfck?t=13 is exactly the sort of chaos I was imagining and this youtu.be/l6wb7Sb2lNQ?t=196 shows what happens when things get busy.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 20:16
6
$begingroup$
@chasly I think what this answer is saying is that "anarchy" and "get places quickly" are mutually exclusive, safety or no.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
Jan 16 at 21:23
1
$begingroup$
@aCVn "But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?" - the farther you go East in Russia, the more cars have right-side driver position, having been imported second-hand from Japan. Things have changed a bit now, but ten years ago you could hardly find a car with correct driver placement around Vladivostok, except probably for city buses, police vehicles and such.
$endgroup$
– IMil
Jan 16 at 23:34
2
$begingroup$
@Miech There's a typo in your first sentence. It should be "Abrams is doubleplusunbritopian."
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jan 17 at 14:47
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
It has to be a motorbike...
Having just been to the Philippines (and I imagine many southeast Asian and over populated areas are also like this), Motor bikes are everywhere and small enough to slip between cars, yet large enough that a car won't hit you because your going to damage it.
In particular, I would recommend a Dirt Bike because it has the capabilities for you to perform more stunts which would be great in making everyone in traffic hate you as you drive over their cars.
Firstly, there is no way a Car, Tank, truck or large vehicle would be able to win. While they can force their way through traffic, in dense enough traffic conditions they have to compete with other large vehicles of equal caliber. They will also face problems when turning and have slower acceleration times and speed limits since it takes them so long to accelerate up to speed and slow down (they can't go too fast or they won't be able to stop if they get cut off or make a turn).
For cars in particular you can image that they aren't really going to come out on top. Just go stare at some peak hour traffic and you will understand why.
Animals also aren't going to work well. Animals are smart enough to know how to get out of the way and vehicles could easily force an animale (horses mostly) into a very dangerous situation by slowly pushing up towards them or into the side of them to force their way out. Your horse will also be freaked out by the constant noise and honking. Thats also combined with the fact that a horse isn't going to work over larger distances or be nearly as fast as a normal vehicle and still simply stop walking when it needs to take a piss in the middle of the road.
So it comes down to our 2 wheeled friends, Bikes, scooters and Motor bikes. What about 3 wheeled vehicles? well they are larger than 2 wheeled vehicles which means in dense traffic conditions they will need to be more carefule and can't slip between the gaps a 2 wheeled vehicle will. In addition, most 3 wheeled vehicles end up being modified versions of 2 wheeled vehicles (I swear the only ones I've seen are basically bikes with an additional cart added or the back wheeled switched for two, or the unstable one that falls over from Mr Bean).
Scooters and Motor bikes push out Bicycles simply because they are motorized. They will be able to go faster for longer and while they might not be able to squeeze through the smallest of gaps, your going to be able to comfortably move 10KM, 50KM or 100KM easily on a motorbike when compared to a manual bike (There are no road rules, so bike lanes are basically lanes for any vehicle now).
So out of a Scooter and Motorbike, I would say scooter wins simply because its cheaper. It can make riskier moves because you don't need to worry as much about replacing/repairing it.
I still recommend a Dirt Bike, simply because people use it to perform stunts. You could for example, get yourself ontop of another vehicle and ride over it, or just sit there for the ride while it takes you to the location you want.
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
This. Look at India or any Asian countries, afaik. When the light turns green who gets to go? Everyone on a 'bike' that can pull in front of all the cars.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Jan 17 at 0:35
3
$begingroup$
Britopia sounds a lot like India. Scooters/motorcycles are the best for single riders, and also for families of 6 and their two chickens. It's a bit annoying when it rains, but you can always get a rain shield.
$endgroup$
– MineR
Jan 17 at 4:05
2
$begingroup$
As much as I love my motorbike, it really only has an advantage in very ordered traffic, as soon as people are out of their lanes, or don't leave space, I'm as stuck as anyone else.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 17 at 14:43
1
$begingroup$
@Separatrix But your not as stuck as a car is... I've seen 5 cars squished into 3 lanes... and the motorbikes just slowly weave themselves through the gaps or can tail the car in front just a bit closer than a person in a car can and squeeze in that way.
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 22:03
2
$begingroup$
@Corey Well motorbikes are always going to end up riskier than cars. You don't have a massive metal frame protecting you from other vehicles. The safety is going to be dependent on too many small factors... driving aptitude, road conditions, speed, consequences of injuring/killing, repair costs, traffic density, attitude, etc
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 23:34
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
It seems all the individualists have missed a trick here. You have to get from A to B as fast as possible when there are no traffic laws.
Which means if you want to get anywhere, the only valid answer is not to use the roads at all.
Admittedly it's only a rail"road" in US English, and we're in the UK
The real answer in the average city is of course to walk. Average traffic speed is only 8mph, and it doesn't take much before walking is faster. Removing traffic laws would easily bring the whole system to a standstill and make walking by far the quickest way to get around.
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bikes. Although humans are not as smart as horses when it comes to not crashing against each other, bikes are cheaper to acquire and maintain, and will generally keep the streets clearer. Drivers can benefit from the exercise.
Also, this being about Britain, I had a certain song from Queen on my mind while typing this.
Bicycle races are coming your way
So forget all your duties oh yeah!
Fat bottomed girls they'll be riding today
So look out for those beauties oh yeah
Edit to address this comment from Julian Egner:
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transportation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
Bikes can navigate parks, squares, people's backyards, sidewalks, shopping malls, food courts, piers, subway platforms etc. with more ease than carscitation needed. Just stick to where it's safe.
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Bikes are a good example since many bike paths have very loose or even contradictory rules about which side bikes should be on so you can encounter an oncoming cyclist on either side.
$endgroup$
– Johnny
Jan 16 at 23:08
2
$begingroup$
Should work even in relatively heavy traffic
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transpotation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
$endgroup$
– Julian Egner
Jan 17 at 12:53
1
$begingroup$
On your marks ... get set ... go!
$endgroup$
– AndyJ
Jan 18 at 16:21
1
$begingroup$
Bikes do surprisingly well if enough drivers use big cars ... commuting in central London in the 80s, the bikes were often the only things moving ... even motorbikes had trouble getting through the gaps. I remember passing an expensive green limo with the Financial Times open across the steering wheel. I can't swear exactly what happened, but I can only guess the driver saw motion in his peripheral vision, only to find out a second later that while the traffic was moving, the cars weren't. There was a peculiarly satisfying crunch somewhere behind me.
$endgroup$
– Brian Drummond
Jan 19 at 12:02
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since this is more or less Britain, I'd vote for the Challenger 2 MBT
It will simply roll over any "normal" automobile, leaving behind a trail of flattened Jags, Bentleys, Land Rovers, Beamers and Morris Minors.
EDIT - And the very occasional Reliant Robin.
EDIT2 - And if "quickly" takes precedence over "safely", the Mythbusters episode suggests that the rocket-powered Reliant Robin should be considered.
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
I think flattening people's cars while they are still in them would violate the 'no murder' rule.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 19:51
11
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - But it's a collision. If they use the main gun, on the other hand....
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 16 at 19:53
5
$begingroup$
What happens when two people have the same idea and a two tanks end up playing chicken?
$endgroup$
– Rob
Jan 16 at 21:43
3
$begingroup$
I'm not sure how well your Challenger is going to stand up to my Bagger 293......
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:56
1
$begingroup$
@John - Frankly, I'm dubious about "didn't even notice". Everybody notices speed bumps when they go over them.
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 17 at 4:11
|
show 14 more comments
$begingroup$
A self driving car, of course!
No need for rules, let the cars work it out between themselves automatically. Or they can automatically work out trajectories of human driven cars and route around them far faster and more efficiently than a human driver.
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
I think this would yield the best results, assuming we had the technology, but I'm not so sure that it fits 'no rules' on a technicality; the self driving code is rather likely to use a rules engine as a part of its decision making.
$endgroup$
– user5151179
Jan 17 at 6:45
3
$begingroup$
I think in this case 'no rules' means 'no enforced traffic laws'. But the cars would be free to communicate between themselves where they can.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 17 at 7:51
1
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB communication is not enough. Self-driving cars need a set of rules to work efficiently. Those rules determine what is safe to do (speed limit in circumstance, safety distance, default position in multi-lane, etc.) and who has priority over who. All those rules and protocols will need to be specified somewhere, enforced on all car manufacturer and implemented in all cars. Those will be the de-facto traffic rules.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 17 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@zakinster The OP is clearly after having no enforced traffic laws. " no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.". Nothing can prevent two people (or vehicles) from communicating with each other if they think its best.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB Yes human can but current computers need an established set of rules and protocols to communicate and make decisions. If you want self-driving cars to work without any established rules, you'll need a real AI which is far from existing with current technology so it may not fit well in a 21st-century context. It may, however, works well if OP can integrate a bit of sci-fi in his world so I did upvote.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 18 at 10:16
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Contrary to popular belief, more traffic laws makes roads less safe (1, 2). Many places are now reducing the amount of signs to make it safer, and to make sure that attention is on the road and other drivers rather than each other.
No rules is taking that to the extreme, but its not completely unimaginable. Ever been to India? I have and it's true: they do not pay attention to any markings on the road or any signs. The only rule they semi-follow is what side of the road they drive on, but whenever the traffic allows that rule is out of the window too. Strangely enough, driving there felt like one of the safest experiences I've had as people constantly communicate with horns and their movement, but I hadn't experienced a situation where there wasn't adequate time to react and safely get through.
So if a leftist leaves the house and he finds himself encountering rightists he'll join them for the time being, or vice versa. Any intersection that cannot be overseen will be slowly approached in case someone from another direction comes at you. comparable to small roads or similar people will decide on the spot who will pass first and who will move aside, or in this case chose who will temporarily change being a leftist or rightist.
In the end the best car isn't going to be the smallest or the biggest, it's going to be the most visible one with the clearest communication of direction and intent, possibly with a set of horns declaring "watchout", "you go ahead" and "I go ahead". So keep those lights on your car in good working order, strap in and drive safe.
Edit: for anyone struggling with the "less rules means more safety", I mention this is up to a point, culture on the road means more and the conclusion remains true: the best car will be the most visible one with the clearest signals of direction and intent.
(1) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/04/removal-road-markings-safer-fewer-accidents-drivers
(2) https://www.drivingtests.co.nz/resources/signage-clutter-what-is-it-and-how-is-it-reduced/
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 19 at 5:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Planes/Helicopters/Gyrocopters.
You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
Edit - added my comment into the answer.
Yes, you have multiple other road users on the ground meeleeing with each other, a character with some level of higher reasoning could take to the sky, however along with your dystopian road rules there's no reason you couldn't also stipulate that privately operated aircraft had to remain within a certain distance from standard road systems, thus creating manageable flight patterns. Clearly not everyone would be taking to the sky, and you can still land/taxi on roads.
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
$endgroup$
– Cyn
Jan 17 at 1:38
$begingroup$
@Cyn the question asks "...what is the best vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy" An aircraft answers this. You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. It's not a critique of the OP and no clarification is necessary, this fits the requirements correctly I believe. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 1:45
1
$begingroup$
How is this safe, especially in bury corridors and around airports?
$endgroup$
– Vincent
Jan 17 at 2:00
$begingroup$
@Aaron Lavers - I did specify "road system" so, unless your planes are rolling along the road, they don't actually qualify. An airborne mode of travel would be a different question.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:23
$begingroup$
Fair enough, however everyone here's added a variation of the same answer, so maybe some out of the box thinking might improve your prose. Also added my comment into the answer.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 3:57
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
In addition to other good answers like bikes, I'd say the Knight Bus would make a good choice. I read somewhere that J.K. Rowling has spotted it in Britain already ;-).
The Knight Bus is a triple-decker, purple AEC Regent III RT that assists stranded individuals of the wizarding community through public transportation. It operates at a very fast speed and obstacles will jump out of its way. To hail the bus, a witch or wizard must stick their wand hand in the air in the same manner that a Muggle might do while hailing a Muggle Bus in the UK, though it is possible to book tickets for travel on the bus in advance.
Also, many country roads in modern Britain are pretty much one-lane, two-way roads that people drive down the middle of, and only slow down/go off to the side when traffic is approaching in the opposite direction. If there was uncertainty about which side somebody would go toward, a convention of using turn signals to indicate this could alleviate the problem.
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The mythbusters have your answer, two of them actually.
The biggest problem you have is there's only so much space on the road and you are creating a perfect storm for traffic jams. The only way to guarantee getting from A to B is to be able to clear the road as you go.
the cow catcher serves the same purpose it did on trains, to push anything in front of them out of the way with the minimum energy.
You can't get from A to B in a timely fashion without moving other cars out of the way. If someone gets hurt. Oh well, that's what they get fro driving something as unsafe as a car on the road. This society clearly doesn't care much about personal safety.
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
"Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." Hitting people & vehicles so hard that they literally fly out of your way, like the mythbusters vehicles were designed to do, sounds tantamount to murder
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
no one says you have to hit them that fast.
$endgroup$
– John
Jan 17 at 20:36
$begingroup$
GTA logic says this is legit.
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Lam
Jan 20 at 16:27
$begingroup$
If there are many people with these trucks, it wouldn't be possible to shove other cars out of the way, though.
$endgroup$
– 2015oceanview
Jan 21 at 6:41
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 I don't think this is murder as you are not deliberately hitting anyone. You are just on your way from A to B and they are in the way. that may sound strange, but every accident happens because someone is on his way from A to B and suddenly someone else or something is in his way. That doesn't make it murder, unless you deliberately aim for a car that you want to hit.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 21 at 9:50
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The question is describing a common situation in town fairs: bumper cars, or dodgems. A chaotic traffic situation, without traffic rules, sudden changes in general flow, etc...
It works, and to memory, it is less lethal than standard regulated traffic.
Apparently, in England, someone has already started thinking about taking the dodgem on the road. Also, for the skeptics, just remember that most of the UK can be considered flat compared to other European countries, hence no real terrain issues for these lovely little contraptions.
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I’ve forgotten precisely where, but there’s a place (really!) where someone persuaded the town to remove ALL stop signs and semaphores. Accident rate decreased
$endgroup$
– WGroleau
Jan 17 at 3:48
1
$begingroup$
@WGroleau I can believe that. However, many areas of the UK are filled with roundabouts, for that matters. That means that you will find on average significantly less stop signs and semaphores compared to some other countries in mainland Europe. Still, traffic laws, precedence rules, right of way, and parking fines apply.
$endgroup$
– NofP
Jan 17 at 10:22
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While someone has already mentioned a tank, its price tag puts it out of reach for the vast majority of the motoring public. The legions of unwashed plebs are Sempletons(pun fully intended) who require a far more economical option, so I present to you the Bob Semple "tank"
An "armoured" superstructure to protect from the chaos a total lack of traffic regulation would produce. Its cheap and shoddyhomemade nature allows for easy DIY fixing on the fly, rather than having to be sent to some workshop or depot. No murder? Remove all the guns or install dummies in their place then, to hang your laundry fromput the fear of God into all those other wankers. Last but not least, low speed and reliability for maximum obnoxiousness towards everyone behind you on the road.
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm not sure if this is the best solution but I definitely want one!
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Okay so this is based on real experience with a real place that was, in a way, very much like Mad Max - had no rules and plenty of danger...its still basically like that - and the vehicles we used. I choose these vehicles as: Though I was a USMC, I know all of these vehicles are available to UK groups (except possibly the MRAP); All drive like regular vehicles so not much special training involved in their operation; They are vehicles primarily not weapons (like a tank) so if some of the liability standards we currently use continue over (even though no "road rules") these could still be classified in the same manner as driving a truck (or car with HMMV):
Option 1: HMMV (up-armored if possible)
"Speed is life, stopping is death" <- first words about driving in a combat zone I ever heard and they are true. As the rules state "you can't just shot or kill people" and cities (like London) would have very heavy foot, vehicle, and other traffic it seems to me that this would be a great option. One, it allows for "bumping" cars and other objects out of the way. Two, you don't have to kill people when hit with it (like a tank would likely do) Three, you can actually buy at least the un-armored version of this (and armor yourself if needed).
Note - that thread is from 2006, the video is real, and there are some opinionated anti-military answers within.
Option 2: Country roads? Use a 7-ton
The 7-ton is my favorite option (when I was deployed) - fast, was nearly impossible to get stuck, could drive over ridiculous terrain, ford full rivers, and it goes on. Beside that this would allow you to safely drive a much larger crew (10-15 people vs. HMMV's 4-6) or a lot of equipment around. In this case it has an added bonus, though armored versions are restricted the actual military vehicles can be purchased and many parts if repairs are needed. Only downsides to HMMV - not as small and "bumping" something with these will cause more damage.
Option 3: MRAP
Okay, this is the last vehicle I have personal experience driving and it has one massive advantage - and that is, well...the picture explains it better than words can. This thing will not stop (without resorting to full on tank killer weapons). It is also now being offered to government (i.e. law enforcement) groups in the US so it is technically possible to get it but not really for civilians. However, it has two huge disadvantages - its heavy and doesn't do well off-road. Why is heavy in bold? Cause these things had so much weight they would (and did a few times on me) collapse the road you were driving on. The V-shape made them get stuck on dunes and bad terrain a lot more than the earlier vehicles too. Still if the goal is an urban road and point A to B quickly and safely - they'd be an awesome option.
Option 4: Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
This one is "if I could pick any vehicle, money is not an option but it should still be car-ish". This thing was just a dream when I was in and only came out last year - so it is certainly not possible to get as a civilian (most military units are chomping at the bit to get a few). However, a few of the guys I know who still work in Green have gotten a chance to at least look at it and say it is like they took all the best parts of the 3 other options and built the car of the future. So if its dream money and wish scenario...
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're still driving on roads, and "Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." It seems like these big wide vehicles would be even harder to maneuver through traffic that can't decide what side of the road to drive on.
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 19:02
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 yes, those were similar laws that we had when in country (no road rules but we had many, many restrictions on when force was authorized) and these can be driven in that regard (particularly 1 & 4) but also give added protection when other people start driving tanks (as is suggested in many other answers) and/or shooting at you. Also, IMHO, one point is if there are no road rules, I would want something that gave me fording/off-road heavy capabilities - beyond the just bad country roads one occasionally finds - to avoid any such problems in the first place (or at least bypass it).
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:40
$begingroup$
Besides if I just wanted to crush stuff - I'd you the only vehicle I know in the USMC which is called Ultra-heavy ;)
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A big "Spot" robot or something alike, big enough for you to be able to climb on its back. It's a boston dynamic robot that can walk through roads, clim sloped terrain, and that will lead you through forests.
Avoid the roads when you can, if you must travel through a city, you can dodge other motorized vehicles by passing through pedestrian places.
https://youtu.be/M8YjvHYbZ9w
On top of that, it's super cool.
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What happens if it goes flat? Can you push them ?
$endgroup$
– Criggie
Jan 21 at 3:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Either a police car or a tank
The "no killing" rule leaves room for interpretation, which needs to be exploited for the best answer. Also the question only asks to get from A to B not what happens afterwards.
First let's look at the tank/bulldozer/anything armored option. Yes it kills people, but since there are no traffic rules, no sidewalk or park is safe for pedestrians and whether you are in a tank or a motorcycle or even horse, if you hit a pedestrian, good chance he will die (horses are dangerous, I have been riding). But in the tank at least you reach B. Who is gonna arrest you anyway? The police is stuck in traffic like the rest. Or are they?
Situation two, the police can move fast through the traffic to stop any offenders. Well in this case the police car is the best means of transportation for you to get from A to B.
Bear in mind the question is about a single person getting from A to B. Most of the other people are going nowhere.
And I agreed that the question is too broad. What means no killing, is it OK to be arrested afterwards, can the police catch you some other way?
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Correct reaction to an emergency vehicle is covered by the traffic laws of a country. Hence it would bring no advantage in this situation.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 9:16
$begingroup$
Most people get out of the way of emergency vehicles based on consideration for the people they're rushing to help, or because they expect the emergency vehicle to run into them rather than stop, not because of the Highway Code - so I think findusl's answer is valid.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 11:49
$begingroup$
@separatix please read the full answer. It also describes and reasons the correct answer if a police car is not the solution.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 18 at 11:54
$begingroup$
@GuyF-W, but how you respond is regional. In some countries you do anything to get out of the way, in some the correct response is to stop where you are and let them go round you. The UK has strict regulations on when you do what, you're not allowed to break any other regulation to make way for example, you will still be fined for bus lane or traffic light offences.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 12:03
$begingroup$
Given the number of people I've seen break traffic laws to let police cars through, that seems to be honoured more in the breach than the observance.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 12:17
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Solution 1 : Though all answers are considering the gravity factor and since its Britopia, there is no need to consider gravity. The best option I think is to just fly. Lets consider it as a space and in Space there is no concept of direction. Something like human carrying drones will be good to go anywhere. and Just like how the current air traffic is managed.
Solution 2 : I recently come across the concept of elevated car here.
So basically we have always either two states, elevated or none.
None Elevated :
And Elevated :
We need to make sure that the when two vehicles are approaching one become elevated and one is non elevated. Also need to manage angel of approach to make sure one can pass another without damaging legs of elevated one.
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Air traffic is definitely not managed like "fly wherever you like, nobody care". That apart, OP is clearly asking about road traffic.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 18 at 8:16
1
$begingroup$
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
$endgroup$
– Spudley
Jan 18 at 11:57
$begingroup$
@L.dutch : I know Air traffic is not managed like "Fly wherever you like, nobody care" But I referenced it here as policy to avoid collision and likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
$endgroup$
– Jaydeep
Jan 18 at 12:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It doesn't answer all the questions but if there's no left / right then having the steering wheel in the middle would be needed. McLaren F1 drivers would all be very happy.
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interestingly the regime of Colonel Gaddafi considered exactly this problem (it is reported that their motivation was that a large number of road users believed in predestination via god's will, so there was no point looking at junctions: if god had determined you would die, you were going to die). They ended up designing a car with a large foam "nose cone". Normally this would be an issue for visibility at junctions, but if one's not going to look anyway, I guess it's fine.
https://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/02/libyan-rocket-colonel-muammar-gaddafi-designs-a-safe-car/#slide-333692
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Based on what the other people have said, I think a motorbike or a horse would work best in a highly populated urban city. You could also use three-wheelers. Because this is a 21st century society, self-driving cars would still not be affordable by everyone. But if the technology were more advanced, it would be a more feasible solution. In less populated areas, I would say agile sports cars like BMW street drifting cars might be best.
However, more than likely a voter would change his or her vote such that there isn't a tie. Because, having traffic laws are better than having none, right? ;)
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136769%2fa-road-system-with-no-traffic-rules-what-sort-of-vehicle-is-best%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
20 Answers
20
active
oldest
votes
20 Answers
20
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Horses
They are smart enough to not crash themselves on others, even if their riders are completely drunk.
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
$endgroup$
28
$begingroup$
So speaks a person who has never ridden a polo pony
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 16 at 19:43
8
$begingroup$
@Separatrix polo ponies are trained to do so when made to by players.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
Jan 16 at 21:20
62
$begingroup$
Only if all drivers are using the same transportation type...since there's no regulation, this seems unlikely. Horses are fantastic, but will not help you much if someone else drives a semi into you.
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:52
13
$begingroup$
@immibis Not that much if you're going slowly--but it will definitely terrorize the horse. (Source: Drivers who helpfully sound their horn when they are right behind me.)
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 22:30
15
$begingroup$
Car with some horses in computer will work too.
$endgroup$
– val
Jan 17 at 7:36
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
Horses
They are smart enough to not crash themselves on others, even if their riders are completely drunk.
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
$endgroup$
28
$begingroup$
So speaks a person who has never ridden a polo pony
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 16 at 19:43
8
$begingroup$
@Separatrix polo ponies are trained to do so when made to by players.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
Jan 16 at 21:20
62
$begingroup$
Only if all drivers are using the same transportation type...since there's no regulation, this seems unlikely. Horses are fantastic, but will not help you much if someone else drives a semi into you.
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:52
13
$begingroup$
@immibis Not that much if you're going slowly--but it will definitely terrorize the horse. (Source: Drivers who helpfully sound their horn when they are right behind me.)
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 22:30
15
$begingroup$
Car with some horses in computer will work too.
$endgroup$
– val
Jan 17 at 7:36
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
Horses
They are smart enough to not crash themselves on others, even if their riders are completely drunk.
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
$endgroup$
Horses
They are smart enough to not crash themselves on others, even if their riders are completely drunk.
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
answered Jan 16 at 19:36
Caio NogueiraCaio Nogueira
9831313
9831313
28
$begingroup$
So speaks a person who has never ridden a polo pony
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 16 at 19:43
8
$begingroup$
@Separatrix polo ponies are trained to do so when made to by players.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
Jan 16 at 21:20
62
$begingroup$
Only if all drivers are using the same transportation type...since there's no regulation, this seems unlikely. Horses are fantastic, but will not help you much if someone else drives a semi into you.
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:52
13
$begingroup$
@immibis Not that much if you're going slowly--but it will definitely terrorize the horse. (Source: Drivers who helpfully sound their horn when they are right behind me.)
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 22:30
15
$begingroup$
Car with some horses in computer will work too.
$endgroup$
– val
Jan 17 at 7:36
|
show 9 more comments
28
$begingroup$
So speaks a person who has never ridden a polo pony
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 16 at 19:43
8
$begingroup$
@Separatrix polo ponies are trained to do so when made to by players.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
Jan 16 at 21:20
62
$begingroup$
Only if all drivers are using the same transportation type...since there's no regulation, this seems unlikely. Horses are fantastic, but will not help you much if someone else drives a semi into you.
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:52
13
$begingroup$
@immibis Not that much if you're going slowly--but it will definitely terrorize the horse. (Source: Drivers who helpfully sound their horn when they are right behind me.)
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 22:30
15
$begingroup$
Car with some horses in computer will work too.
$endgroup$
– val
Jan 17 at 7:36
28
28
$begingroup$
So speaks a person who has never ridden a polo pony
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 16 at 19:43
$begingroup$
So speaks a person who has never ridden a polo pony
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 16 at 19:43
8
8
$begingroup$
@Separatrix polo ponies are trained to do so when made to by players.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
Jan 16 at 21:20
$begingroup$
@Separatrix polo ponies are trained to do so when made to by players.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
Jan 16 at 21:20
62
62
$begingroup$
Only if all drivers are using the same transportation type...since there's no regulation, this seems unlikely. Horses are fantastic, but will not help you much if someone else drives a semi into you.
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:52
$begingroup$
Only if all drivers are using the same transportation type...since there's no regulation, this seems unlikely. Horses are fantastic, but will not help you much if someone else drives a semi into you.
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:52
13
13
$begingroup$
@immibis Not that much if you're going slowly--but it will definitely terrorize the horse. (Source: Drivers who helpfully sound their horn when they are right behind me.)
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 22:30
$begingroup$
@immibis Not that much if you're going slowly--but it will definitely terrorize the horse. (Source: Drivers who helpfully sound their horn when they are right behind me.)
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 22:30
15
15
$begingroup$
Car with some horses in computer will work too.
$endgroup$
– val
Jan 17 at 7:36
$begingroup$
Car with some horses in computer will work too.
$endgroup$
– val
Jan 17 at 7:36
|
show 9 more comments
$begingroup$
While the scenario painted may seem quite bizarre and downright deadly, the fact of the matter is, minimal traffic regulation does not necessarily mean you need to drive an Challenger 2 Tank just to make it home from your downtown office park every day!
As a matter of fact, we in the Traffic Tabulation Bureau have conducted a comprehensively exhaustive study of various traffic patterns around the world and have come to the conclusion that, contrary to all expected laws of physics, a small motorcar is every bit as effective as a tank when it comes to negotiating the ebb and flow of every day Britopian traffic. We therefore recommend that Britopian Royal Commission for Travel encourage the use of diminutive, and above all, cute motorcars and furthermore, recommend an advertising scheme encouraging all Britopians to obtain at least one motorcar per adult per household and the use said motorcar for every conceivable use, from commuting to work, to long distance travel to going down to the shops or even everyday leisure drives. The more cars Britanopians place on the nation's motorways, the more crowded, and thus slower and safer, every Britanope shall be! (Cue patriotic music!)
And the reason is quite simple. Our Bureau have determined that a simple law of physics applies: the denser the traffic, the slower the flow. What this means is that, even when an entirely chaotic, semi-brownian, system is implemented, a much more organic flow is created. As you can see, it is quite possible for large lorries, busses, jeepneys, pedicabs, scooters, hand carts, random animals, pedestrians, rickshaws, trams and motorcars to interact quite safely at lower speeds. Sure, it may take you two hours to travel five miles, but the ride will be very manageable and very unlikely to cause major mishap.
Kindly review our Minimal Traffic Regulation test videos:
Cairo
Delhi
Manila
Addis Ababa
As you can see, every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
$endgroup$
12
$begingroup$
"every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!" But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?
$endgroup$
– a CVn♦
Jan 16 at 20:14
3
$begingroup$
Haha! Brilliant. I've extracted a couple of clips from your videos. This youtu.be/VPbUpdmAfck?t=13 is exactly the sort of chaos I was imagining and this youtu.be/l6wb7Sb2lNQ?t=196 shows what happens when things get busy.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 20:16
6
$begingroup$
@chasly I think what this answer is saying is that "anarchy" and "get places quickly" are mutually exclusive, safety or no.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
Jan 16 at 21:23
1
$begingroup$
@aCVn "But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?" - the farther you go East in Russia, the more cars have right-side driver position, having been imported second-hand from Japan. Things have changed a bit now, but ten years ago you could hardly find a car with correct driver placement around Vladivostok, except probably for city buses, police vehicles and such.
$endgroup$
– IMil
Jan 16 at 23:34
2
$begingroup$
@Miech There's a typo in your first sentence. It should be "Abrams is doubleplusunbritopian."
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jan 17 at 14:47
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
While the scenario painted may seem quite bizarre and downright deadly, the fact of the matter is, minimal traffic regulation does not necessarily mean you need to drive an Challenger 2 Tank just to make it home from your downtown office park every day!
As a matter of fact, we in the Traffic Tabulation Bureau have conducted a comprehensively exhaustive study of various traffic patterns around the world and have come to the conclusion that, contrary to all expected laws of physics, a small motorcar is every bit as effective as a tank when it comes to negotiating the ebb and flow of every day Britopian traffic. We therefore recommend that Britopian Royal Commission for Travel encourage the use of diminutive, and above all, cute motorcars and furthermore, recommend an advertising scheme encouraging all Britopians to obtain at least one motorcar per adult per household and the use said motorcar for every conceivable use, from commuting to work, to long distance travel to going down to the shops or even everyday leisure drives. The more cars Britanopians place on the nation's motorways, the more crowded, and thus slower and safer, every Britanope shall be! (Cue patriotic music!)
And the reason is quite simple. Our Bureau have determined that a simple law of physics applies: the denser the traffic, the slower the flow. What this means is that, even when an entirely chaotic, semi-brownian, system is implemented, a much more organic flow is created. As you can see, it is quite possible for large lorries, busses, jeepneys, pedicabs, scooters, hand carts, random animals, pedestrians, rickshaws, trams and motorcars to interact quite safely at lower speeds. Sure, it may take you two hours to travel five miles, but the ride will be very manageable and very unlikely to cause major mishap.
Kindly review our Minimal Traffic Regulation test videos:
Cairo
Delhi
Manila
Addis Ababa
As you can see, every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
$endgroup$
12
$begingroup$
"every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!" But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?
$endgroup$
– a CVn♦
Jan 16 at 20:14
3
$begingroup$
Haha! Brilliant. I've extracted a couple of clips from your videos. This youtu.be/VPbUpdmAfck?t=13 is exactly the sort of chaos I was imagining and this youtu.be/l6wb7Sb2lNQ?t=196 shows what happens when things get busy.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 20:16
6
$begingroup$
@chasly I think what this answer is saying is that "anarchy" and "get places quickly" are mutually exclusive, safety or no.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
Jan 16 at 21:23
1
$begingroup$
@aCVn "But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?" - the farther you go East in Russia, the more cars have right-side driver position, having been imported second-hand from Japan. Things have changed a bit now, but ten years ago you could hardly find a car with correct driver placement around Vladivostok, except probably for city buses, police vehicles and such.
$endgroup$
– IMil
Jan 16 at 23:34
2
$begingroup$
@Miech There's a typo in your first sentence. It should be "Abrams is doubleplusunbritopian."
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jan 17 at 14:47
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
While the scenario painted may seem quite bizarre and downright deadly, the fact of the matter is, minimal traffic regulation does not necessarily mean you need to drive an Challenger 2 Tank just to make it home from your downtown office park every day!
As a matter of fact, we in the Traffic Tabulation Bureau have conducted a comprehensively exhaustive study of various traffic patterns around the world and have come to the conclusion that, contrary to all expected laws of physics, a small motorcar is every bit as effective as a tank when it comes to negotiating the ebb and flow of every day Britopian traffic. We therefore recommend that Britopian Royal Commission for Travel encourage the use of diminutive, and above all, cute motorcars and furthermore, recommend an advertising scheme encouraging all Britopians to obtain at least one motorcar per adult per household and the use said motorcar for every conceivable use, from commuting to work, to long distance travel to going down to the shops or even everyday leisure drives. The more cars Britanopians place on the nation's motorways, the more crowded, and thus slower and safer, every Britanope shall be! (Cue patriotic music!)
And the reason is quite simple. Our Bureau have determined that a simple law of physics applies: the denser the traffic, the slower the flow. What this means is that, even when an entirely chaotic, semi-brownian, system is implemented, a much more organic flow is created. As you can see, it is quite possible for large lorries, busses, jeepneys, pedicabs, scooters, hand carts, random animals, pedestrians, rickshaws, trams and motorcars to interact quite safely at lower speeds. Sure, it may take you two hours to travel five miles, but the ride will be very manageable and very unlikely to cause major mishap.
Kindly review our Minimal Traffic Regulation test videos:
Cairo
Delhi
Manila
Addis Ababa
As you can see, every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
$endgroup$
While the scenario painted may seem quite bizarre and downright deadly, the fact of the matter is, minimal traffic regulation does not necessarily mean you need to drive an Challenger 2 Tank just to make it home from your downtown office park every day!
As a matter of fact, we in the Traffic Tabulation Bureau have conducted a comprehensively exhaustive study of various traffic patterns around the world and have come to the conclusion that, contrary to all expected laws of physics, a small motorcar is every bit as effective as a tank when it comes to negotiating the ebb and flow of every day Britopian traffic. We therefore recommend that Britopian Royal Commission for Travel encourage the use of diminutive, and above all, cute motorcars and furthermore, recommend an advertising scheme encouraging all Britopians to obtain at least one motorcar per adult per household and the use said motorcar for every conceivable use, from commuting to work, to long distance travel to going down to the shops or even everyday leisure drives. The more cars Britanopians place on the nation's motorways, the more crowded, and thus slower and safer, every Britanope shall be! (Cue patriotic music!)
And the reason is quite simple. Our Bureau have determined that a simple law of physics applies: the denser the traffic, the slower the flow. What this means is that, even when an entirely chaotic, semi-brownian, system is implemented, a much more organic flow is created. As you can see, it is quite possible for large lorries, busses, jeepneys, pedicabs, scooters, hand carts, random animals, pedestrians, rickshaws, trams and motorcars to interact quite safely at lower speeds. Sure, it may take you two hours to travel five miles, but the ride will be very manageable and very unlikely to cause major mishap.
Kindly review our Minimal Traffic Regulation test videos:
Cairo
Delhi
Manila
Addis Ababa
As you can see, every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
edited Jan 17 at 16:31
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
answered Jan 16 at 20:06
elemtilaselemtilas
13.7k22861
13.7k22861
12
$begingroup$
"every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!" But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?
$endgroup$
– a CVn♦
Jan 16 at 20:14
3
$begingroup$
Haha! Brilliant. I've extracted a couple of clips from your videos. This youtu.be/VPbUpdmAfck?t=13 is exactly the sort of chaos I was imagining and this youtu.be/l6wb7Sb2lNQ?t=196 shows what happens when things get busy.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 20:16
6
$begingroup$
@chasly I think what this answer is saying is that "anarchy" and "get places quickly" are mutually exclusive, safety or no.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
Jan 16 at 21:23
1
$begingroup$
@aCVn "But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?" - the farther you go East in Russia, the more cars have right-side driver position, having been imported second-hand from Japan. Things have changed a bit now, but ten years ago you could hardly find a car with correct driver placement around Vladivostok, except probably for city buses, police vehicles and such.
$endgroup$
– IMil
Jan 16 at 23:34
2
$begingroup$
@Miech There's a typo in your first sentence. It should be "Abrams is doubleplusunbritopian."
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jan 17 at 14:47
|
show 8 more comments
12
$begingroup$
"every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!" But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?
$endgroup$
– a CVn♦
Jan 16 at 20:14
3
$begingroup$
Haha! Brilliant. I've extracted a couple of clips from your videos. This youtu.be/VPbUpdmAfck?t=13 is exactly the sort of chaos I was imagining and this youtu.be/l6wb7Sb2lNQ?t=196 shows what happens when things get busy.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 20:16
6
$begingroup$
@chasly I think what this answer is saying is that "anarchy" and "get places quickly" are mutually exclusive, safety or no.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
Jan 16 at 21:23
1
$begingroup$
@aCVn "But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?" - the farther you go East in Russia, the more cars have right-side driver position, having been imported second-hand from Japan. Things have changed a bit now, but ten years ago you could hardly find a car with correct driver placement around Vladivostok, except probably for city buses, police vehicles and such.
$endgroup$
– IMil
Jan 16 at 23:34
2
$begingroup$
@Miech There's a typo in your first sentence. It should be "Abrams is doubleplusunbritopian."
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jan 17 at 14:47
12
12
$begingroup$
"every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!" But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?
$endgroup$
– a CVn♦
Jan 16 at 20:14
$begingroup$
"every major jurisdiction that implements our system demonstrates how terribly effective it truly is!" But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?
$endgroup$
– a CVn♦
Jan 16 at 20:14
3
3
$begingroup$
Haha! Brilliant. I've extracted a couple of clips from your videos. This youtu.be/VPbUpdmAfck?t=13 is exactly the sort of chaos I was imagining and this youtu.be/l6wb7Sb2lNQ?t=196 shows what happens when things get busy.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 20:16
$begingroup$
Haha! Brilliant. I've extracted a couple of clips from your videos. This youtu.be/VPbUpdmAfck?t=13 is exactly the sort of chaos I was imagining and this youtu.be/l6wb7Sb2lNQ?t=196 shows what happens when things get busy.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 20:16
6
6
$begingroup$
@chasly I think what this answer is saying is that "anarchy" and "get places quickly" are mutually exclusive, safety or no.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
Jan 16 at 21:23
$begingroup$
@chasly I think what this answer is saying is that "anarchy" and "get places quickly" are mutually exclusive, safety or no.
$endgroup$
– Cadence
Jan 16 at 21:23
1
1
$begingroup$
@aCVn "But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?" - the farther you go East in Russia, the more cars have right-side driver position, having been imported second-hand from Japan. Things have changed a bit now, but ten years ago you could hardly find a car with correct driver placement around Vladivostok, except probably for city buses, police vehicles and such.
$endgroup$
– IMil
Jan 16 at 23:34
$begingroup$
@aCVn "But how many of those use vehicles where the driver sits on the wrong side?" - the farther you go East in Russia, the more cars have right-side driver position, having been imported second-hand from Japan. Things have changed a bit now, but ten years ago you could hardly find a car with correct driver placement around Vladivostok, except probably for city buses, police vehicles and such.
$endgroup$
– IMil
Jan 16 at 23:34
2
2
$begingroup$
@Miech There's a typo in your first sentence. It should be "Abrams is doubleplusunbritopian."
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jan 17 at 14:47
$begingroup$
@Miech There's a typo in your first sentence. It should be "Abrams is doubleplusunbritopian."
$endgroup$
– Martin Bonner
Jan 17 at 14:47
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
It has to be a motorbike...
Having just been to the Philippines (and I imagine many southeast Asian and over populated areas are also like this), Motor bikes are everywhere and small enough to slip between cars, yet large enough that a car won't hit you because your going to damage it.
In particular, I would recommend a Dirt Bike because it has the capabilities for you to perform more stunts which would be great in making everyone in traffic hate you as you drive over their cars.
Firstly, there is no way a Car, Tank, truck or large vehicle would be able to win. While they can force their way through traffic, in dense enough traffic conditions they have to compete with other large vehicles of equal caliber. They will also face problems when turning and have slower acceleration times and speed limits since it takes them so long to accelerate up to speed and slow down (they can't go too fast or they won't be able to stop if they get cut off or make a turn).
For cars in particular you can image that they aren't really going to come out on top. Just go stare at some peak hour traffic and you will understand why.
Animals also aren't going to work well. Animals are smart enough to know how to get out of the way and vehicles could easily force an animale (horses mostly) into a very dangerous situation by slowly pushing up towards them or into the side of them to force their way out. Your horse will also be freaked out by the constant noise and honking. Thats also combined with the fact that a horse isn't going to work over larger distances or be nearly as fast as a normal vehicle and still simply stop walking when it needs to take a piss in the middle of the road.
So it comes down to our 2 wheeled friends, Bikes, scooters and Motor bikes. What about 3 wheeled vehicles? well they are larger than 2 wheeled vehicles which means in dense traffic conditions they will need to be more carefule and can't slip between the gaps a 2 wheeled vehicle will. In addition, most 3 wheeled vehicles end up being modified versions of 2 wheeled vehicles (I swear the only ones I've seen are basically bikes with an additional cart added or the back wheeled switched for two, or the unstable one that falls over from Mr Bean).
Scooters and Motor bikes push out Bicycles simply because they are motorized. They will be able to go faster for longer and while they might not be able to squeeze through the smallest of gaps, your going to be able to comfortably move 10KM, 50KM or 100KM easily on a motorbike when compared to a manual bike (There are no road rules, so bike lanes are basically lanes for any vehicle now).
So out of a Scooter and Motorbike, I would say scooter wins simply because its cheaper. It can make riskier moves because you don't need to worry as much about replacing/repairing it.
I still recommend a Dirt Bike, simply because people use it to perform stunts. You could for example, get yourself ontop of another vehicle and ride over it, or just sit there for the ride while it takes you to the location you want.
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
This. Look at India or any Asian countries, afaik. When the light turns green who gets to go? Everyone on a 'bike' that can pull in front of all the cars.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Jan 17 at 0:35
3
$begingroup$
Britopia sounds a lot like India. Scooters/motorcycles are the best for single riders, and also for families of 6 and their two chickens. It's a bit annoying when it rains, but you can always get a rain shield.
$endgroup$
– MineR
Jan 17 at 4:05
2
$begingroup$
As much as I love my motorbike, it really only has an advantage in very ordered traffic, as soon as people are out of their lanes, or don't leave space, I'm as stuck as anyone else.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 17 at 14:43
1
$begingroup$
@Separatrix But your not as stuck as a car is... I've seen 5 cars squished into 3 lanes... and the motorbikes just slowly weave themselves through the gaps or can tail the car in front just a bit closer than a person in a car can and squeeze in that way.
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 22:03
2
$begingroup$
@Corey Well motorbikes are always going to end up riskier than cars. You don't have a massive metal frame protecting you from other vehicles. The safety is going to be dependent on too many small factors... driving aptitude, road conditions, speed, consequences of injuring/killing, repair costs, traffic density, attitude, etc
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 23:34
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
It has to be a motorbike...
Having just been to the Philippines (and I imagine many southeast Asian and over populated areas are also like this), Motor bikes are everywhere and small enough to slip between cars, yet large enough that a car won't hit you because your going to damage it.
In particular, I would recommend a Dirt Bike because it has the capabilities for you to perform more stunts which would be great in making everyone in traffic hate you as you drive over their cars.
Firstly, there is no way a Car, Tank, truck or large vehicle would be able to win. While they can force their way through traffic, in dense enough traffic conditions they have to compete with other large vehicles of equal caliber. They will also face problems when turning and have slower acceleration times and speed limits since it takes them so long to accelerate up to speed and slow down (they can't go too fast or they won't be able to stop if they get cut off or make a turn).
For cars in particular you can image that they aren't really going to come out on top. Just go stare at some peak hour traffic and you will understand why.
Animals also aren't going to work well. Animals are smart enough to know how to get out of the way and vehicles could easily force an animale (horses mostly) into a very dangerous situation by slowly pushing up towards them or into the side of them to force their way out. Your horse will also be freaked out by the constant noise and honking. Thats also combined with the fact that a horse isn't going to work over larger distances or be nearly as fast as a normal vehicle and still simply stop walking when it needs to take a piss in the middle of the road.
So it comes down to our 2 wheeled friends, Bikes, scooters and Motor bikes. What about 3 wheeled vehicles? well they are larger than 2 wheeled vehicles which means in dense traffic conditions they will need to be more carefule and can't slip between the gaps a 2 wheeled vehicle will. In addition, most 3 wheeled vehicles end up being modified versions of 2 wheeled vehicles (I swear the only ones I've seen are basically bikes with an additional cart added or the back wheeled switched for two, or the unstable one that falls over from Mr Bean).
Scooters and Motor bikes push out Bicycles simply because they are motorized. They will be able to go faster for longer and while they might not be able to squeeze through the smallest of gaps, your going to be able to comfortably move 10KM, 50KM or 100KM easily on a motorbike when compared to a manual bike (There are no road rules, so bike lanes are basically lanes for any vehicle now).
So out of a Scooter and Motorbike, I would say scooter wins simply because its cheaper. It can make riskier moves because you don't need to worry as much about replacing/repairing it.
I still recommend a Dirt Bike, simply because people use it to perform stunts. You could for example, get yourself ontop of another vehicle and ride over it, or just sit there for the ride while it takes you to the location you want.
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
$endgroup$
7
$begingroup$
This. Look at India or any Asian countries, afaik. When the light turns green who gets to go? Everyone on a 'bike' that can pull in front of all the cars.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Jan 17 at 0:35
3
$begingroup$
Britopia sounds a lot like India. Scooters/motorcycles are the best for single riders, and also for families of 6 and their two chickens. It's a bit annoying when it rains, but you can always get a rain shield.
$endgroup$
– MineR
Jan 17 at 4:05
2
$begingroup$
As much as I love my motorbike, it really only has an advantage in very ordered traffic, as soon as people are out of their lanes, or don't leave space, I'm as stuck as anyone else.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 17 at 14:43
1
$begingroup$
@Separatrix But your not as stuck as a car is... I've seen 5 cars squished into 3 lanes... and the motorbikes just slowly weave themselves through the gaps or can tail the car in front just a bit closer than a person in a car can and squeeze in that way.
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 22:03
2
$begingroup$
@Corey Well motorbikes are always going to end up riskier than cars. You don't have a massive metal frame protecting you from other vehicles. The safety is going to be dependent on too many small factors... driving aptitude, road conditions, speed, consequences of injuring/killing, repair costs, traffic density, attitude, etc
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 23:34
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
It has to be a motorbike...
Having just been to the Philippines (and I imagine many southeast Asian and over populated areas are also like this), Motor bikes are everywhere and small enough to slip between cars, yet large enough that a car won't hit you because your going to damage it.
In particular, I would recommend a Dirt Bike because it has the capabilities for you to perform more stunts which would be great in making everyone in traffic hate you as you drive over their cars.
Firstly, there is no way a Car, Tank, truck or large vehicle would be able to win. While they can force their way through traffic, in dense enough traffic conditions they have to compete with other large vehicles of equal caliber. They will also face problems when turning and have slower acceleration times and speed limits since it takes them so long to accelerate up to speed and slow down (they can't go too fast or they won't be able to stop if they get cut off or make a turn).
For cars in particular you can image that they aren't really going to come out on top. Just go stare at some peak hour traffic and you will understand why.
Animals also aren't going to work well. Animals are smart enough to know how to get out of the way and vehicles could easily force an animale (horses mostly) into a very dangerous situation by slowly pushing up towards them or into the side of them to force their way out. Your horse will also be freaked out by the constant noise and honking. Thats also combined with the fact that a horse isn't going to work over larger distances or be nearly as fast as a normal vehicle and still simply stop walking when it needs to take a piss in the middle of the road.
So it comes down to our 2 wheeled friends, Bikes, scooters and Motor bikes. What about 3 wheeled vehicles? well they are larger than 2 wheeled vehicles which means in dense traffic conditions they will need to be more carefule and can't slip between the gaps a 2 wheeled vehicle will. In addition, most 3 wheeled vehicles end up being modified versions of 2 wheeled vehicles (I swear the only ones I've seen are basically bikes with an additional cart added or the back wheeled switched for two, or the unstable one that falls over from Mr Bean).
Scooters and Motor bikes push out Bicycles simply because they are motorized. They will be able to go faster for longer and while they might not be able to squeeze through the smallest of gaps, your going to be able to comfortably move 10KM, 50KM or 100KM easily on a motorbike when compared to a manual bike (There are no road rules, so bike lanes are basically lanes for any vehicle now).
So out of a Scooter and Motorbike, I would say scooter wins simply because its cheaper. It can make riskier moves because you don't need to worry as much about replacing/repairing it.
I still recommend a Dirt Bike, simply because people use it to perform stunts. You could for example, get yourself ontop of another vehicle and ride over it, or just sit there for the ride while it takes you to the location you want.
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
$endgroup$
It has to be a motorbike...
Having just been to the Philippines (and I imagine many southeast Asian and over populated areas are also like this), Motor bikes are everywhere and small enough to slip between cars, yet large enough that a car won't hit you because your going to damage it.
In particular, I would recommend a Dirt Bike because it has the capabilities for you to perform more stunts which would be great in making everyone in traffic hate you as you drive over their cars.
Firstly, there is no way a Car, Tank, truck or large vehicle would be able to win. While they can force their way through traffic, in dense enough traffic conditions they have to compete with other large vehicles of equal caliber. They will also face problems when turning and have slower acceleration times and speed limits since it takes them so long to accelerate up to speed and slow down (they can't go too fast or they won't be able to stop if they get cut off or make a turn).
For cars in particular you can image that they aren't really going to come out on top. Just go stare at some peak hour traffic and you will understand why.
Animals also aren't going to work well. Animals are smart enough to know how to get out of the way and vehicles could easily force an animale (horses mostly) into a very dangerous situation by slowly pushing up towards them or into the side of them to force their way out. Your horse will also be freaked out by the constant noise and honking. Thats also combined with the fact that a horse isn't going to work over larger distances or be nearly as fast as a normal vehicle and still simply stop walking when it needs to take a piss in the middle of the road.
So it comes down to our 2 wheeled friends, Bikes, scooters and Motor bikes. What about 3 wheeled vehicles? well they are larger than 2 wheeled vehicles which means in dense traffic conditions they will need to be more carefule and can't slip between the gaps a 2 wheeled vehicle will. In addition, most 3 wheeled vehicles end up being modified versions of 2 wheeled vehicles (I swear the only ones I've seen are basically bikes with an additional cart added or the back wheeled switched for two, or the unstable one that falls over from Mr Bean).
Scooters and Motor bikes push out Bicycles simply because they are motorized. They will be able to go faster for longer and while they might not be able to squeeze through the smallest of gaps, your going to be able to comfortably move 10KM, 50KM or 100KM easily on a motorbike when compared to a manual bike (There are no road rules, so bike lanes are basically lanes for any vehicle now).
So out of a Scooter and Motorbike, I would say scooter wins simply because its cheaper. It can make riskier moves because you don't need to worry as much about replacing/repairing it.
I still recommend a Dirt Bike, simply because people use it to perform stunts. You could for example, get yourself ontop of another vehicle and ride over it, or just sit there for the ride while it takes you to the location you want.
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
edited Jan 17 at 0:26
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
answered Jan 16 at 22:51
ShadowzeeShadowzee
8,8181641
8,8181641
7
$begingroup$
This. Look at India or any Asian countries, afaik. When the light turns green who gets to go? Everyone on a 'bike' that can pull in front of all the cars.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Jan 17 at 0:35
3
$begingroup$
Britopia sounds a lot like India. Scooters/motorcycles are the best for single riders, and also for families of 6 and their two chickens. It's a bit annoying when it rains, but you can always get a rain shield.
$endgroup$
– MineR
Jan 17 at 4:05
2
$begingroup$
As much as I love my motorbike, it really only has an advantage in very ordered traffic, as soon as people are out of their lanes, or don't leave space, I'm as stuck as anyone else.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 17 at 14:43
1
$begingroup$
@Separatrix But your not as stuck as a car is... I've seen 5 cars squished into 3 lanes... and the motorbikes just slowly weave themselves through the gaps or can tail the car in front just a bit closer than a person in a car can and squeeze in that way.
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 22:03
2
$begingroup$
@Corey Well motorbikes are always going to end up riskier than cars. You don't have a massive metal frame protecting you from other vehicles. The safety is going to be dependent on too many small factors... driving aptitude, road conditions, speed, consequences of injuring/killing, repair costs, traffic density, attitude, etc
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 23:34
|
show 2 more comments
7
$begingroup$
This. Look at India or any Asian countries, afaik. When the light turns green who gets to go? Everyone on a 'bike' that can pull in front of all the cars.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Jan 17 at 0:35
3
$begingroup$
Britopia sounds a lot like India. Scooters/motorcycles are the best for single riders, and also for families of 6 and their two chickens. It's a bit annoying when it rains, but you can always get a rain shield.
$endgroup$
– MineR
Jan 17 at 4:05
2
$begingroup$
As much as I love my motorbike, it really only has an advantage in very ordered traffic, as soon as people are out of their lanes, or don't leave space, I'm as stuck as anyone else.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 17 at 14:43
1
$begingroup$
@Separatrix But your not as stuck as a car is... I've seen 5 cars squished into 3 lanes... and the motorbikes just slowly weave themselves through the gaps or can tail the car in front just a bit closer than a person in a car can and squeeze in that way.
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 22:03
2
$begingroup$
@Corey Well motorbikes are always going to end up riskier than cars. You don't have a massive metal frame protecting you from other vehicles. The safety is going to be dependent on too many small factors... driving aptitude, road conditions, speed, consequences of injuring/killing, repair costs, traffic density, attitude, etc
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 23:34
7
7
$begingroup$
This. Look at India or any Asian countries, afaik. When the light turns green who gets to go? Everyone on a 'bike' that can pull in front of all the cars.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Jan 17 at 0:35
$begingroup$
This. Look at India or any Asian countries, afaik. When the light turns green who gets to go? Everyone on a 'bike' that can pull in front of all the cars.
$endgroup$
– Mazura
Jan 17 at 0:35
3
3
$begingroup$
Britopia sounds a lot like India. Scooters/motorcycles are the best for single riders, and also for families of 6 and their two chickens. It's a bit annoying when it rains, but you can always get a rain shield.
$endgroup$
– MineR
Jan 17 at 4:05
$begingroup$
Britopia sounds a lot like India. Scooters/motorcycles are the best for single riders, and also for families of 6 and their two chickens. It's a bit annoying when it rains, but you can always get a rain shield.
$endgroup$
– MineR
Jan 17 at 4:05
2
2
$begingroup$
As much as I love my motorbike, it really only has an advantage in very ordered traffic, as soon as people are out of their lanes, or don't leave space, I'm as stuck as anyone else.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 17 at 14:43
$begingroup$
As much as I love my motorbike, it really only has an advantage in very ordered traffic, as soon as people are out of their lanes, or don't leave space, I'm as stuck as anyone else.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 17 at 14:43
1
1
$begingroup$
@Separatrix But your not as stuck as a car is... I've seen 5 cars squished into 3 lanes... and the motorbikes just slowly weave themselves through the gaps or can tail the car in front just a bit closer than a person in a car can and squeeze in that way.
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 22:03
$begingroup$
@Separatrix But your not as stuck as a car is... I've seen 5 cars squished into 3 lanes... and the motorbikes just slowly weave themselves through the gaps or can tail the car in front just a bit closer than a person in a car can and squeeze in that way.
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 22:03
2
2
$begingroup$
@Corey Well motorbikes are always going to end up riskier than cars. You don't have a massive metal frame protecting you from other vehicles. The safety is going to be dependent on too many small factors... driving aptitude, road conditions, speed, consequences of injuring/killing, repair costs, traffic density, attitude, etc
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 23:34
$begingroup$
@Corey Well motorbikes are always going to end up riskier than cars. You don't have a massive metal frame protecting you from other vehicles. The safety is going to be dependent on too many small factors... driving aptitude, road conditions, speed, consequences of injuring/killing, repair costs, traffic density, attitude, etc
$endgroup$
– Shadowzee
Jan 17 at 23:34
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
It seems all the individualists have missed a trick here. You have to get from A to B as fast as possible when there are no traffic laws.
Which means if you want to get anywhere, the only valid answer is not to use the roads at all.
Admittedly it's only a rail"road" in US English, and we're in the UK
The real answer in the average city is of course to walk. Average traffic speed is only 8mph, and it doesn't take much before walking is faster. Removing traffic laws would easily bring the whole system to a standstill and make walking by far the quickest way to get around.
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems all the individualists have missed a trick here. You have to get from A to B as fast as possible when there are no traffic laws.
Which means if you want to get anywhere, the only valid answer is not to use the roads at all.
Admittedly it's only a rail"road" in US English, and we're in the UK
The real answer in the average city is of course to walk. Average traffic speed is only 8mph, and it doesn't take much before walking is faster. Removing traffic laws would easily bring the whole system to a standstill and make walking by far the quickest way to get around.
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems all the individualists have missed a trick here. You have to get from A to B as fast as possible when there are no traffic laws.
Which means if you want to get anywhere, the only valid answer is not to use the roads at all.
Admittedly it's only a rail"road" in US English, and we're in the UK
The real answer in the average city is of course to walk. Average traffic speed is only 8mph, and it doesn't take much before walking is faster. Removing traffic laws would easily bring the whole system to a standstill and make walking by far the quickest way to get around.
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
$endgroup$
It seems all the individualists have missed a trick here. You have to get from A to B as fast as possible when there are no traffic laws.
Which means if you want to get anywhere, the only valid answer is not to use the roads at all.
Admittedly it's only a rail"road" in US English, and we're in the UK
The real answer in the average city is of course to walk. Average traffic speed is only 8mph, and it doesn't take much before walking is faster. Removing traffic laws would easily bring the whole system to a standstill and make walking by far the quickest way to get around.
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
edited Jan 17 at 11:27
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 17 at 8:15
SeparatrixSeparatrix
82.3k31193322
82.3k31193322
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bikes. Although humans are not as smart as horses when it comes to not crashing against each other, bikes are cheaper to acquire and maintain, and will generally keep the streets clearer. Drivers can benefit from the exercise.
Also, this being about Britain, I had a certain song from Queen on my mind while typing this.
Bicycle races are coming your way
So forget all your duties oh yeah!
Fat bottomed girls they'll be riding today
So look out for those beauties oh yeah
Edit to address this comment from Julian Egner:
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transportation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
Bikes can navigate parks, squares, people's backyards, sidewalks, shopping malls, food courts, piers, subway platforms etc. with more ease than carscitation needed. Just stick to where it's safe.
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Bikes are a good example since many bike paths have very loose or even contradictory rules about which side bikes should be on so you can encounter an oncoming cyclist on either side.
$endgroup$
– Johnny
Jan 16 at 23:08
2
$begingroup$
Should work even in relatively heavy traffic
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transpotation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
$endgroup$
– Julian Egner
Jan 17 at 12:53
1
$begingroup$
On your marks ... get set ... go!
$endgroup$
– AndyJ
Jan 18 at 16:21
1
$begingroup$
Bikes do surprisingly well if enough drivers use big cars ... commuting in central London in the 80s, the bikes were often the only things moving ... even motorbikes had trouble getting through the gaps. I remember passing an expensive green limo with the Financial Times open across the steering wheel. I can't swear exactly what happened, but I can only guess the driver saw motion in his peripheral vision, only to find out a second later that while the traffic was moving, the cars weren't. There was a peculiarly satisfying crunch somewhere behind me.
$endgroup$
– Brian Drummond
Jan 19 at 12:02
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bikes. Although humans are not as smart as horses when it comes to not crashing against each other, bikes are cheaper to acquire and maintain, and will generally keep the streets clearer. Drivers can benefit from the exercise.
Also, this being about Britain, I had a certain song from Queen on my mind while typing this.
Bicycle races are coming your way
So forget all your duties oh yeah!
Fat bottomed girls they'll be riding today
So look out for those beauties oh yeah
Edit to address this comment from Julian Egner:
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transportation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
Bikes can navigate parks, squares, people's backyards, sidewalks, shopping malls, food courts, piers, subway platforms etc. with more ease than carscitation needed. Just stick to where it's safe.
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Bikes are a good example since many bike paths have very loose or even contradictory rules about which side bikes should be on so you can encounter an oncoming cyclist on either side.
$endgroup$
– Johnny
Jan 16 at 23:08
2
$begingroup$
Should work even in relatively heavy traffic
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transpotation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
$endgroup$
– Julian Egner
Jan 17 at 12:53
1
$begingroup$
On your marks ... get set ... go!
$endgroup$
– AndyJ
Jan 18 at 16:21
1
$begingroup$
Bikes do surprisingly well if enough drivers use big cars ... commuting in central London in the 80s, the bikes were often the only things moving ... even motorbikes had trouble getting through the gaps. I remember passing an expensive green limo with the Financial Times open across the steering wheel. I can't swear exactly what happened, but I can only guess the driver saw motion in his peripheral vision, only to find out a second later that while the traffic was moving, the cars weren't. There was a peculiarly satisfying crunch somewhere behind me.
$endgroup$
– Brian Drummond
Jan 19 at 12:02
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bikes. Although humans are not as smart as horses when it comes to not crashing against each other, bikes are cheaper to acquire and maintain, and will generally keep the streets clearer. Drivers can benefit from the exercise.
Also, this being about Britain, I had a certain song from Queen on my mind while typing this.
Bicycle races are coming your way
So forget all your duties oh yeah!
Fat bottomed girls they'll be riding today
So look out for those beauties oh yeah
Edit to address this comment from Julian Egner:
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transportation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
Bikes can navigate parks, squares, people's backyards, sidewalks, shopping malls, food courts, piers, subway platforms etc. with more ease than carscitation needed. Just stick to where it's safe.
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
$endgroup$
Bikes. Although humans are not as smart as horses when it comes to not crashing against each other, bikes are cheaper to acquire and maintain, and will generally keep the streets clearer. Drivers can benefit from the exercise.
Also, this being about Britain, I had a certain song from Queen on my mind while typing this.
Bicycle races are coming your way
So forget all your duties oh yeah!
Fat bottomed girls they'll be riding today
So look out for those beauties oh yeah
Edit to address this comment from Julian Egner:
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transportation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
Bikes can navigate parks, squares, people's backyards, sidewalks, shopping malls, food courts, piers, subway platforms etc. with more ease than carscitation needed. Just stick to where it's safe.
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
edited Jan 18 at 14:40
Separatrix
82.3k31193322
82.3k31193322
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
answered Jan 16 at 20:17
RenanRenan
48k13111245
48k13111245
4
$begingroup$
Bikes are a good example since many bike paths have very loose or even contradictory rules about which side bikes should be on so you can encounter an oncoming cyclist on either side.
$endgroup$
– Johnny
Jan 16 at 23:08
2
$begingroup$
Should work even in relatively heavy traffic
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transpotation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
$endgroup$
– Julian Egner
Jan 17 at 12:53
1
$begingroup$
On your marks ... get set ... go!
$endgroup$
– AndyJ
Jan 18 at 16:21
1
$begingroup$
Bikes do surprisingly well if enough drivers use big cars ... commuting in central London in the 80s, the bikes were often the only things moving ... even motorbikes had trouble getting through the gaps. I remember passing an expensive green limo with the Financial Times open across the steering wheel. I can't swear exactly what happened, but I can only guess the driver saw motion in his peripheral vision, only to find out a second later that while the traffic was moving, the cars weren't. There was a peculiarly satisfying crunch somewhere behind me.
$endgroup$
– Brian Drummond
Jan 19 at 12:02
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
Bikes are a good example since many bike paths have very loose or even contradictory rules about which side bikes should be on so you can encounter an oncoming cyclist on either side.
$endgroup$
– Johnny
Jan 16 at 23:08
2
$begingroup$
Should work even in relatively heavy traffic
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 2:47
1
$begingroup$
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transpotation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
$endgroup$
– Julian Egner
Jan 17 at 12:53
1
$begingroup$
On your marks ... get set ... go!
$endgroup$
– AndyJ
Jan 18 at 16:21
1
$begingroup$
Bikes do surprisingly well if enough drivers use big cars ... commuting in central London in the 80s, the bikes were often the only things moving ... even motorbikes had trouble getting through the gaps. I remember passing an expensive green limo with the Financial Times open across the steering wheel. I can't swear exactly what happened, but I can only guess the driver saw motion in his peripheral vision, only to find out a second later that while the traffic was moving, the cars weren't. There was a peculiarly satisfying crunch somewhere behind me.
$endgroup$
– Brian Drummond
Jan 19 at 12:02
4
4
$begingroup$
Bikes are a good example since many bike paths have very loose or even contradictory rules about which side bikes should be on so you can encounter an oncoming cyclist on either side.
$endgroup$
– Johnny
Jan 16 at 23:08
$begingroup$
Bikes are a good example since many bike paths have very loose or even contradictory rules about which side bikes should be on so you can encounter an oncoming cyclist on either side.
$endgroup$
– Johnny
Jan 16 at 23:08
2
2
$begingroup$
Should work even in relatively heavy traffic
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 2:47
$begingroup$
Should work even in relatively heavy traffic
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 2:47
1
1
$begingroup$
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transpotation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
$endgroup$
– Julian Egner
Jan 17 at 12:53
$begingroup$
This would a great answer if all drivers would have to use the same transpotation type - but it is no so good if all the others use big cars and you are on your bike. even with all the traffic laws it is sometimes not easy to avoid crashes, which would not end well for the biker.
$endgroup$
– Julian Egner
Jan 17 at 12:53
1
1
$begingroup$
On your marks ... get set ... go!
$endgroup$
– AndyJ
Jan 18 at 16:21
$begingroup$
On your marks ... get set ... go!
$endgroup$
– AndyJ
Jan 18 at 16:21
1
1
$begingroup$
Bikes do surprisingly well if enough drivers use big cars ... commuting in central London in the 80s, the bikes were often the only things moving ... even motorbikes had trouble getting through the gaps. I remember passing an expensive green limo with the Financial Times open across the steering wheel. I can't swear exactly what happened, but I can only guess the driver saw motion in his peripheral vision, only to find out a second later that while the traffic was moving, the cars weren't. There was a peculiarly satisfying crunch somewhere behind me.
$endgroup$
– Brian Drummond
Jan 19 at 12:02
$begingroup$
Bikes do surprisingly well if enough drivers use big cars ... commuting in central London in the 80s, the bikes were often the only things moving ... even motorbikes had trouble getting through the gaps. I remember passing an expensive green limo with the Financial Times open across the steering wheel. I can't swear exactly what happened, but I can only guess the driver saw motion in his peripheral vision, only to find out a second later that while the traffic was moving, the cars weren't. There was a peculiarly satisfying crunch somewhere behind me.
$endgroup$
– Brian Drummond
Jan 19 at 12:02
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Since this is more or less Britain, I'd vote for the Challenger 2 MBT
It will simply roll over any "normal" automobile, leaving behind a trail of flattened Jags, Bentleys, Land Rovers, Beamers and Morris Minors.
EDIT - And the very occasional Reliant Robin.
EDIT2 - And if "quickly" takes precedence over "safely", the Mythbusters episode suggests that the rocket-powered Reliant Robin should be considered.
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
I think flattening people's cars while they are still in them would violate the 'no murder' rule.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 19:51
11
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - But it's a collision. If they use the main gun, on the other hand....
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 16 at 19:53
5
$begingroup$
What happens when two people have the same idea and a two tanks end up playing chicken?
$endgroup$
– Rob
Jan 16 at 21:43
3
$begingroup$
I'm not sure how well your Challenger is going to stand up to my Bagger 293......
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:56
1
$begingroup$
@John - Frankly, I'm dubious about "didn't even notice". Everybody notices speed bumps when they go over them.
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 17 at 4:11
|
show 14 more comments
$begingroup$
Since this is more or less Britain, I'd vote for the Challenger 2 MBT
It will simply roll over any "normal" automobile, leaving behind a trail of flattened Jags, Bentleys, Land Rovers, Beamers and Morris Minors.
EDIT - And the very occasional Reliant Robin.
EDIT2 - And if "quickly" takes precedence over "safely", the Mythbusters episode suggests that the rocket-powered Reliant Robin should be considered.
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
$endgroup$
17
$begingroup$
I think flattening people's cars while they are still in them would violate the 'no murder' rule.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 19:51
11
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - But it's a collision. If they use the main gun, on the other hand....
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 16 at 19:53
5
$begingroup$
What happens when two people have the same idea and a two tanks end up playing chicken?
$endgroup$
– Rob
Jan 16 at 21:43
3
$begingroup$
I'm not sure how well your Challenger is going to stand up to my Bagger 293......
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:56
1
$begingroup$
@John - Frankly, I'm dubious about "didn't even notice". Everybody notices speed bumps when they go over them.
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 17 at 4:11
|
show 14 more comments
$begingroup$
Since this is more or less Britain, I'd vote for the Challenger 2 MBT
It will simply roll over any "normal" automobile, leaving behind a trail of flattened Jags, Bentleys, Land Rovers, Beamers and Morris Minors.
EDIT - And the very occasional Reliant Robin.
EDIT2 - And if "quickly" takes precedence over "safely", the Mythbusters episode suggests that the rocket-powered Reliant Robin should be considered.
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
$endgroup$
Since this is more or less Britain, I'd vote for the Challenger 2 MBT
It will simply roll over any "normal" automobile, leaving behind a trail of flattened Jags, Bentleys, Land Rovers, Beamers and Morris Minors.
EDIT - And the very occasional Reliant Robin.
EDIT2 - And if "quickly" takes precedence over "safely", the Mythbusters episode suggests that the rocket-powered Reliant Robin should be considered.
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
edited Jan 20 at 18:50
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
answered Jan 16 at 19:42
WhatRoughBeastWhatRoughBeast
22.9k23280
22.9k23280
17
$begingroup$
I think flattening people's cars while they are still in them would violate the 'no murder' rule.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 19:51
11
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - But it's a collision. If they use the main gun, on the other hand....
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 16 at 19:53
5
$begingroup$
What happens when two people have the same idea and a two tanks end up playing chicken?
$endgroup$
– Rob
Jan 16 at 21:43
3
$begingroup$
I'm not sure how well your Challenger is going to stand up to my Bagger 293......
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:56
1
$begingroup$
@John - Frankly, I'm dubious about "didn't even notice". Everybody notices speed bumps when they go over them.
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 17 at 4:11
|
show 14 more comments
17
$begingroup$
I think flattening people's cars while they are still in them would violate the 'no murder' rule.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 19:51
11
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - But it's a collision. If they use the main gun, on the other hand....
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 16 at 19:53
5
$begingroup$
What happens when two people have the same idea and a two tanks end up playing chicken?
$endgroup$
– Rob
Jan 16 at 21:43
3
$begingroup$
I'm not sure how well your Challenger is going to stand up to my Bagger 293......
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:56
1
$begingroup$
@John - Frankly, I'm dubious about "didn't even notice". Everybody notices speed bumps when they go over them.
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 17 at 4:11
17
17
$begingroup$
I think flattening people's cars while they are still in them would violate the 'no murder' rule.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 19:51
$begingroup$
I think flattening people's cars while they are still in them would violate the 'no murder' rule.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 16 at 19:51
11
11
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - But it's a collision. If they use the main gun, on the other hand....
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 16 at 19:53
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK - But it's a collision. If they use the main gun, on the other hand....
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 16 at 19:53
5
5
$begingroup$
What happens when two people have the same idea and a two tanks end up playing chicken?
$endgroup$
– Rob
Jan 16 at 21:43
$begingroup$
What happens when two people have the same idea and a two tanks end up playing chicken?
$endgroup$
– Rob
Jan 16 at 21:43
3
3
$begingroup$
I'm not sure how well your Challenger is going to stand up to my Bagger 293......
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:56
$begingroup$
I'm not sure how well your Challenger is going to stand up to my Bagger 293......
$endgroup$
– user3067860
Jan 16 at 21:56
1
1
$begingroup$
@John - Frankly, I'm dubious about "didn't even notice". Everybody notices speed bumps when they go over them.
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 17 at 4:11
$begingroup$
@John - Frankly, I'm dubious about "didn't even notice". Everybody notices speed bumps when they go over them.
$endgroup$
– WhatRoughBeast
Jan 17 at 4:11
|
show 14 more comments
$begingroup$
A self driving car, of course!
No need for rules, let the cars work it out between themselves automatically. Or they can automatically work out trajectories of human driven cars and route around them far faster and more efficiently than a human driver.
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
I think this would yield the best results, assuming we had the technology, but I'm not so sure that it fits 'no rules' on a technicality; the self driving code is rather likely to use a rules engine as a part of its decision making.
$endgroup$
– user5151179
Jan 17 at 6:45
3
$begingroup$
I think in this case 'no rules' means 'no enforced traffic laws'. But the cars would be free to communicate between themselves where they can.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 17 at 7:51
1
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB communication is not enough. Self-driving cars need a set of rules to work efficiently. Those rules determine what is safe to do (speed limit in circumstance, safety distance, default position in multi-lane, etc.) and who has priority over who. All those rules and protocols will need to be specified somewhere, enforced on all car manufacturer and implemented in all cars. Those will be the de-facto traffic rules.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 17 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@zakinster The OP is clearly after having no enforced traffic laws. " no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.". Nothing can prevent two people (or vehicles) from communicating with each other if they think its best.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB Yes human can but current computers need an established set of rules and protocols to communicate and make decisions. If you want self-driving cars to work without any established rules, you'll need a real AI which is far from existing with current technology so it may not fit well in a 21st-century context. It may, however, works well if OP can integrate a bit of sci-fi in his world so I did upvote.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 18 at 10:16
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
A self driving car, of course!
No need for rules, let the cars work it out between themselves automatically. Or they can automatically work out trajectories of human driven cars and route around them far faster and more efficiently than a human driver.
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
I think this would yield the best results, assuming we had the technology, but I'm not so sure that it fits 'no rules' on a technicality; the self driving code is rather likely to use a rules engine as a part of its decision making.
$endgroup$
– user5151179
Jan 17 at 6:45
3
$begingroup$
I think in this case 'no rules' means 'no enforced traffic laws'. But the cars would be free to communicate between themselves where they can.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 17 at 7:51
1
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB communication is not enough. Self-driving cars need a set of rules to work efficiently. Those rules determine what is safe to do (speed limit in circumstance, safety distance, default position in multi-lane, etc.) and who has priority over who. All those rules and protocols will need to be specified somewhere, enforced on all car manufacturer and implemented in all cars. Those will be the de-facto traffic rules.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 17 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@zakinster The OP is clearly after having no enforced traffic laws. " no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.". Nothing can prevent two people (or vehicles) from communicating with each other if they think its best.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB Yes human can but current computers need an established set of rules and protocols to communicate and make decisions. If you want self-driving cars to work without any established rules, you'll need a real AI which is far from existing with current technology so it may not fit well in a 21st-century context. It may, however, works well if OP can integrate a bit of sci-fi in his world so I did upvote.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 18 at 10:16
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
A self driving car, of course!
No need for rules, let the cars work it out between themselves automatically. Or they can automatically work out trajectories of human driven cars and route around them far faster and more efficiently than a human driver.
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
$endgroup$
A self driving car, of course!
No need for rules, let the cars work it out between themselves automatically. Or they can automatically work out trajectories of human driven cars and route around them far faster and more efficiently than a human driver.
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
answered Jan 17 at 6:07
GrandmasterBGrandmasterB
4,96711323
4,96711323
4
$begingroup$
I think this would yield the best results, assuming we had the technology, but I'm not so sure that it fits 'no rules' on a technicality; the self driving code is rather likely to use a rules engine as a part of its decision making.
$endgroup$
– user5151179
Jan 17 at 6:45
3
$begingroup$
I think in this case 'no rules' means 'no enforced traffic laws'. But the cars would be free to communicate between themselves where they can.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 17 at 7:51
1
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB communication is not enough. Self-driving cars need a set of rules to work efficiently. Those rules determine what is safe to do (speed limit in circumstance, safety distance, default position in multi-lane, etc.) and who has priority over who. All those rules and protocols will need to be specified somewhere, enforced on all car manufacturer and implemented in all cars. Those will be the de-facto traffic rules.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 17 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@zakinster The OP is clearly after having no enforced traffic laws. " no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.". Nothing can prevent two people (or vehicles) from communicating with each other if they think its best.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB Yes human can but current computers need an established set of rules and protocols to communicate and make decisions. If you want self-driving cars to work without any established rules, you'll need a real AI which is far from existing with current technology so it may not fit well in a 21st-century context. It may, however, works well if OP can integrate a bit of sci-fi in his world so I did upvote.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 18 at 10:16
|
show 1 more comment
4
$begingroup$
I think this would yield the best results, assuming we had the technology, but I'm not so sure that it fits 'no rules' on a technicality; the self driving code is rather likely to use a rules engine as a part of its decision making.
$endgroup$
– user5151179
Jan 17 at 6:45
3
$begingroup$
I think in this case 'no rules' means 'no enforced traffic laws'. But the cars would be free to communicate between themselves where they can.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 17 at 7:51
1
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB communication is not enough. Self-driving cars need a set of rules to work efficiently. Those rules determine what is safe to do (speed limit in circumstance, safety distance, default position in multi-lane, etc.) and who has priority over who. All those rules and protocols will need to be specified somewhere, enforced on all car manufacturer and implemented in all cars. Those will be the de-facto traffic rules.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 17 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@zakinster The OP is clearly after having no enforced traffic laws. " no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.". Nothing can prevent two people (or vehicles) from communicating with each other if they think its best.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB Yes human can but current computers need an established set of rules and protocols to communicate and make decisions. If you want self-driving cars to work without any established rules, you'll need a real AI which is far from existing with current technology so it may not fit well in a 21st-century context. It may, however, works well if OP can integrate a bit of sci-fi in his world so I did upvote.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 18 at 10:16
4
4
$begingroup$
I think this would yield the best results, assuming we had the technology, but I'm not so sure that it fits 'no rules' on a technicality; the self driving code is rather likely to use a rules engine as a part of its decision making.
$endgroup$
– user5151179
Jan 17 at 6:45
$begingroup$
I think this would yield the best results, assuming we had the technology, but I'm not so sure that it fits 'no rules' on a technicality; the self driving code is rather likely to use a rules engine as a part of its decision making.
$endgroup$
– user5151179
Jan 17 at 6:45
3
3
$begingroup$
I think in this case 'no rules' means 'no enforced traffic laws'. But the cars would be free to communicate between themselves where they can.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 17 at 7:51
$begingroup$
I think in this case 'no rules' means 'no enforced traffic laws'. But the cars would be free to communicate between themselves where they can.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 17 at 7:51
1
1
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB communication is not enough. Self-driving cars need a set of rules to work efficiently. Those rules determine what is safe to do (speed limit in circumstance, safety distance, default position in multi-lane, etc.) and who has priority over who. All those rules and protocols will need to be specified somewhere, enforced on all car manufacturer and implemented in all cars. Those will be the de-facto traffic rules.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 17 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB communication is not enough. Self-driving cars need a set of rules to work efficiently. Those rules determine what is safe to do (speed limit in circumstance, safety distance, default position in multi-lane, etc.) and who has priority over who. All those rules and protocols will need to be specified somewhere, enforced on all car manufacturer and implemented in all cars. Those will be the de-facto traffic rules.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 17 at 9:56
$begingroup$
@zakinster The OP is clearly after having no enforced traffic laws. " no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.". Nothing can prevent two people (or vehicles) from communicating with each other if they think its best.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
@zakinster The OP is clearly after having no enforced traffic laws. " no right of way at junctions, no speed limits, no parking restrictions and so on.". Nothing can prevent two people (or vehicles) from communicating with each other if they think its best.
$endgroup$
– GrandmasterB
Jan 18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB Yes human can but current computers need an established set of rules and protocols to communicate and make decisions. If you want self-driving cars to work without any established rules, you'll need a real AI which is far from existing with current technology so it may not fit well in a 21st-century context. It may, however, works well if OP can integrate a bit of sci-fi in his world so I did upvote.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 18 at 10:16
$begingroup$
@GrandmasterB Yes human can but current computers need an established set of rules and protocols to communicate and make decisions. If you want self-driving cars to work without any established rules, you'll need a real AI which is far from existing with current technology so it may not fit well in a 21st-century context. It may, however, works well if OP can integrate a bit of sci-fi in his world so I did upvote.
$endgroup$
– zakinster
Jan 18 at 10:16
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Contrary to popular belief, more traffic laws makes roads less safe (1, 2). Many places are now reducing the amount of signs to make it safer, and to make sure that attention is on the road and other drivers rather than each other.
No rules is taking that to the extreme, but its not completely unimaginable. Ever been to India? I have and it's true: they do not pay attention to any markings on the road or any signs. The only rule they semi-follow is what side of the road they drive on, but whenever the traffic allows that rule is out of the window too. Strangely enough, driving there felt like one of the safest experiences I've had as people constantly communicate with horns and their movement, but I hadn't experienced a situation where there wasn't adequate time to react and safely get through.
So if a leftist leaves the house and he finds himself encountering rightists he'll join them for the time being, or vice versa. Any intersection that cannot be overseen will be slowly approached in case someone from another direction comes at you. comparable to small roads or similar people will decide on the spot who will pass first and who will move aside, or in this case chose who will temporarily change being a leftist or rightist.
In the end the best car isn't going to be the smallest or the biggest, it's going to be the most visible one with the clearest communication of direction and intent, possibly with a set of horns declaring "watchout", "you go ahead" and "I go ahead". So keep those lights on your car in good working order, strap in and drive safe.
Edit: for anyone struggling with the "less rules means more safety", I mention this is up to a point, culture on the road means more and the conclusion remains true: the best car will be the most visible one with the clearest signals of direction and intent.
(1) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/04/removal-road-markings-safer-fewer-accidents-drivers
(2) https://www.drivingtests.co.nz/resources/signage-clutter-what-is-it-and-how-is-it-reduced/
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 19 at 5:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Contrary to popular belief, more traffic laws makes roads less safe (1, 2). Many places are now reducing the amount of signs to make it safer, and to make sure that attention is on the road and other drivers rather than each other.
No rules is taking that to the extreme, but its not completely unimaginable. Ever been to India? I have and it's true: they do not pay attention to any markings on the road or any signs. The only rule they semi-follow is what side of the road they drive on, but whenever the traffic allows that rule is out of the window too. Strangely enough, driving there felt like one of the safest experiences I've had as people constantly communicate with horns and their movement, but I hadn't experienced a situation where there wasn't adequate time to react and safely get through.
So if a leftist leaves the house and he finds himself encountering rightists he'll join them for the time being, or vice versa. Any intersection that cannot be overseen will be slowly approached in case someone from another direction comes at you. comparable to small roads or similar people will decide on the spot who will pass first and who will move aside, or in this case chose who will temporarily change being a leftist or rightist.
In the end the best car isn't going to be the smallest or the biggest, it's going to be the most visible one with the clearest communication of direction and intent, possibly with a set of horns declaring "watchout", "you go ahead" and "I go ahead". So keep those lights on your car in good working order, strap in and drive safe.
Edit: for anyone struggling with the "less rules means more safety", I mention this is up to a point, culture on the road means more and the conclusion remains true: the best car will be the most visible one with the clearest signals of direction and intent.
(1) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/04/removal-road-markings-safer-fewer-accidents-drivers
(2) https://www.drivingtests.co.nz/resources/signage-clutter-what-is-it-and-how-is-it-reduced/
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 19 at 5:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Contrary to popular belief, more traffic laws makes roads less safe (1, 2). Many places are now reducing the amount of signs to make it safer, and to make sure that attention is on the road and other drivers rather than each other.
No rules is taking that to the extreme, but its not completely unimaginable. Ever been to India? I have and it's true: they do not pay attention to any markings on the road or any signs. The only rule they semi-follow is what side of the road they drive on, but whenever the traffic allows that rule is out of the window too. Strangely enough, driving there felt like one of the safest experiences I've had as people constantly communicate with horns and their movement, but I hadn't experienced a situation where there wasn't adequate time to react and safely get through.
So if a leftist leaves the house and he finds himself encountering rightists he'll join them for the time being, or vice versa. Any intersection that cannot be overseen will be slowly approached in case someone from another direction comes at you. comparable to small roads or similar people will decide on the spot who will pass first and who will move aside, or in this case chose who will temporarily change being a leftist or rightist.
In the end the best car isn't going to be the smallest or the biggest, it's going to be the most visible one with the clearest communication of direction and intent, possibly with a set of horns declaring "watchout", "you go ahead" and "I go ahead". So keep those lights on your car in good working order, strap in and drive safe.
Edit: for anyone struggling with the "less rules means more safety", I mention this is up to a point, culture on the road means more and the conclusion remains true: the best car will be the most visible one with the clearest signals of direction and intent.
(1) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/04/removal-road-markings-safer-fewer-accidents-drivers
(2) https://www.drivingtests.co.nz/resources/signage-clutter-what-is-it-and-how-is-it-reduced/
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
$endgroup$
Contrary to popular belief, more traffic laws makes roads less safe (1, 2). Many places are now reducing the amount of signs to make it safer, and to make sure that attention is on the road and other drivers rather than each other.
No rules is taking that to the extreme, but its not completely unimaginable. Ever been to India? I have and it's true: they do not pay attention to any markings on the road or any signs. The only rule they semi-follow is what side of the road they drive on, but whenever the traffic allows that rule is out of the window too. Strangely enough, driving there felt like one of the safest experiences I've had as people constantly communicate with horns and their movement, but I hadn't experienced a situation where there wasn't adequate time to react and safely get through.
So if a leftist leaves the house and he finds himself encountering rightists he'll join them for the time being, or vice versa. Any intersection that cannot be overseen will be slowly approached in case someone from another direction comes at you. comparable to small roads or similar people will decide on the spot who will pass first and who will move aside, or in this case chose who will temporarily change being a leftist or rightist.
In the end the best car isn't going to be the smallest or the biggest, it's going to be the most visible one with the clearest communication of direction and intent, possibly with a set of horns declaring "watchout", "you go ahead" and "I go ahead". So keep those lights on your car in good working order, strap in and drive safe.
Edit: for anyone struggling with the "less rules means more safety", I mention this is up to a point, culture on the road means more and the conclusion remains true: the best car will be the most visible one with the clearest signals of direction and intent.
(1) https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/04/removal-road-markings-safer-fewer-accidents-drivers
(2) https://www.drivingtests.co.nz/resources/signage-clutter-what-is-it-and-how-is-it-reduced/
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
edited Jan 18 at 13:41
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
answered Jan 16 at 20:57
DemiganDemigan
8,8041844
8,8041844
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 19 at 5:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 19 at 5:19
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 19 at 5:19
$begingroup$
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 19 at 5:19
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Planes/Helicopters/Gyrocopters.
You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
Edit - added my comment into the answer.
Yes, you have multiple other road users on the ground meeleeing with each other, a character with some level of higher reasoning could take to the sky, however along with your dystopian road rules there's no reason you couldn't also stipulate that privately operated aircraft had to remain within a certain distance from standard road systems, thus creating manageable flight patterns. Clearly not everyone would be taking to the sky, and you can still land/taxi on roads.
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
$endgroup$
– Cyn
Jan 17 at 1:38
$begingroup$
@Cyn the question asks "...what is the best vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy" An aircraft answers this. You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. It's not a critique of the OP and no clarification is necessary, this fits the requirements correctly I believe. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 1:45
1
$begingroup$
How is this safe, especially in bury corridors and around airports?
$endgroup$
– Vincent
Jan 17 at 2:00
$begingroup$
@Aaron Lavers - I did specify "road system" so, unless your planes are rolling along the road, they don't actually qualify. An airborne mode of travel would be a different question.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:23
$begingroup$
Fair enough, however everyone here's added a variation of the same answer, so maybe some out of the box thinking might improve your prose. Also added my comment into the answer.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 3:57
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Planes/Helicopters/Gyrocopters.
You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
Edit - added my comment into the answer.
Yes, you have multiple other road users on the ground meeleeing with each other, a character with some level of higher reasoning could take to the sky, however along with your dystopian road rules there's no reason you couldn't also stipulate that privately operated aircraft had to remain within a certain distance from standard road systems, thus creating manageable flight patterns. Clearly not everyone would be taking to the sky, and you can still land/taxi on roads.
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
$endgroup$
– Cyn
Jan 17 at 1:38
$begingroup$
@Cyn the question asks "...what is the best vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy" An aircraft answers this. You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. It's not a critique of the OP and no clarification is necessary, this fits the requirements correctly I believe. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 1:45
1
$begingroup$
How is this safe, especially in bury corridors and around airports?
$endgroup$
– Vincent
Jan 17 at 2:00
$begingroup$
@Aaron Lavers - I did specify "road system" so, unless your planes are rolling along the road, they don't actually qualify. An airborne mode of travel would be a different question.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:23
$begingroup$
Fair enough, however everyone here's added a variation of the same answer, so maybe some out of the box thinking might improve your prose. Also added my comment into the answer.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 3:57
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
Planes/Helicopters/Gyrocopters.
You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
Edit - added my comment into the answer.
Yes, you have multiple other road users on the ground meeleeing with each other, a character with some level of higher reasoning could take to the sky, however along with your dystopian road rules there's no reason you couldn't also stipulate that privately operated aircraft had to remain within a certain distance from standard road systems, thus creating manageable flight patterns. Clearly not everyone would be taking to the sky, and you can still land/taxi on roads.
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
$endgroup$
Planes/Helicopters/Gyrocopters.
You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
Edit - added my comment into the answer.
Yes, you have multiple other road users on the ground meeleeing with each other, a character with some level of higher reasoning could take to the sky, however along with your dystopian road rules there's no reason you couldn't also stipulate that privately operated aircraft had to remain within a certain distance from standard road systems, thus creating manageable flight patterns. Clearly not everyone would be taking to the sky, and you can still land/taxi on roads.
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
edited Jan 17 at 3:56
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
answered Jan 17 at 1:17
Aaron LaversAaron Lavers
50127
50127
1
$begingroup$
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
$endgroup$
– Cyn
Jan 17 at 1:38
$begingroup$
@Cyn the question asks "...what is the best vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy" An aircraft answers this. You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. It's not a critique of the OP and no clarification is necessary, this fits the requirements correctly I believe. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 1:45
1
$begingroup$
How is this safe, especially in bury corridors and around airports?
$endgroup$
– Vincent
Jan 17 at 2:00
$begingroup$
@Aaron Lavers - I did specify "road system" so, unless your planes are rolling along the road, they don't actually qualify. An airborne mode of travel would be a different question.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:23
$begingroup$
Fair enough, however everyone here's added a variation of the same answer, so maybe some out of the box thinking might improve your prose. Also added my comment into the answer.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 3:57
|
show 1 more comment
1
$begingroup$
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
$endgroup$
– Cyn
Jan 17 at 1:38
$begingroup$
@Cyn the question asks "...what is the best vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy" An aircraft answers this. You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. It's not a critique of the OP and no clarification is necessary, this fits the requirements correctly I believe. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 1:45
1
$begingroup$
How is this safe, especially in bury corridors and around airports?
$endgroup$
– Vincent
Jan 17 at 2:00
$begingroup$
@Aaron Lavers - I did specify "road system" so, unless your planes are rolling along the road, they don't actually qualify. An airborne mode of travel would be a different question.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:23
$begingroup$
Fair enough, however everyone here's added a variation of the same answer, so maybe some out of the box thinking might improve your prose. Also added my comment into the answer.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 3:57
1
1
$begingroup$
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
$endgroup$
– Cyn
Jan 17 at 1:38
$begingroup$
This does not provide an answer to the question. To critique or request clarification from an author, leave a comment below their post. - From Review
$endgroup$
– Cyn
Jan 17 at 1:38
$begingroup$
@Cyn the question asks "...what is the best vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy" An aircraft answers this. You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. It's not a critique of the OP and no clarification is necessary, this fits the requirements correctly I believe. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 1:45
$begingroup$
@Cyn the question asks "...what is the best vehicle to have. "Best" means the most likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy" An aircraft answers this. You are not engaging with motorists then, creating your best chances for survival. It's not a critique of the OP and no clarification is necessary, this fits the requirements correctly I believe. An example in a similar vein is the 'Gyrocopter Captain' from Mad Max who avoids the drama on the ground in exactly this fashion.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 1:45
1
1
$begingroup$
How is this safe, especially in bury corridors and around airports?
$endgroup$
– Vincent
Jan 17 at 2:00
$begingroup$
How is this safe, especially in bury corridors and around airports?
$endgroup$
– Vincent
Jan 17 at 2:00
$begingroup$
@Aaron Lavers - I did specify "road system" so, unless your planes are rolling along the road, they don't actually qualify. An airborne mode of travel would be a different question.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:23
$begingroup$
@Aaron Lavers - I did specify "road system" so, unless your planes are rolling along the road, they don't actually qualify. An airborne mode of travel would be a different question.
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:23
$begingroup$
Fair enough, however everyone here's added a variation of the same answer, so maybe some out of the box thinking might improve your prose. Also added my comment into the answer.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 3:57
$begingroup$
Fair enough, however everyone here's added a variation of the same answer, so maybe some out of the box thinking might improve your prose. Also added my comment into the answer.
$endgroup$
– Aaron Lavers
Jan 17 at 3:57
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
In addition to other good answers like bikes, I'd say the Knight Bus would make a good choice. I read somewhere that J.K. Rowling has spotted it in Britain already ;-).
The Knight Bus is a triple-decker, purple AEC Regent III RT that assists stranded individuals of the wizarding community through public transportation. It operates at a very fast speed and obstacles will jump out of its way. To hail the bus, a witch or wizard must stick their wand hand in the air in the same manner that a Muggle might do while hailing a Muggle Bus in the UK, though it is possible to book tickets for travel on the bus in advance.
Also, many country roads in modern Britain are pretty much one-lane, two-way roads that people drive down the middle of, and only slow down/go off to the side when traffic is approaching in the opposite direction. If there was uncertainty about which side somebody would go toward, a convention of using turn signals to indicate this could alleviate the problem.
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In addition to other good answers like bikes, I'd say the Knight Bus would make a good choice. I read somewhere that J.K. Rowling has spotted it in Britain already ;-).
The Knight Bus is a triple-decker, purple AEC Regent III RT that assists stranded individuals of the wizarding community through public transportation. It operates at a very fast speed and obstacles will jump out of its way. To hail the bus, a witch or wizard must stick their wand hand in the air in the same manner that a Muggle might do while hailing a Muggle Bus in the UK, though it is possible to book tickets for travel on the bus in advance.
Also, many country roads in modern Britain are pretty much one-lane, two-way roads that people drive down the middle of, and only slow down/go off to the side when traffic is approaching in the opposite direction. If there was uncertainty about which side somebody would go toward, a convention of using turn signals to indicate this could alleviate the problem.
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In addition to other good answers like bikes, I'd say the Knight Bus would make a good choice. I read somewhere that J.K. Rowling has spotted it in Britain already ;-).
The Knight Bus is a triple-decker, purple AEC Regent III RT that assists stranded individuals of the wizarding community through public transportation. It operates at a very fast speed and obstacles will jump out of its way. To hail the bus, a witch or wizard must stick their wand hand in the air in the same manner that a Muggle might do while hailing a Muggle Bus in the UK, though it is possible to book tickets for travel on the bus in advance.
Also, many country roads in modern Britain are pretty much one-lane, two-way roads that people drive down the middle of, and only slow down/go off to the side when traffic is approaching in the opposite direction. If there was uncertainty about which side somebody would go toward, a convention of using turn signals to indicate this could alleviate the problem.
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
$endgroup$
In addition to other good answers like bikes, I'd say the Knight Bus would make a good choice. I read somewhere that J.K. Rowling has spotted it in Britain already ;-).
The Knight Bus is a triple-decker, purple AEC Regent III RT that assists stranded individuals of the wizarding community through public transportation. It operates at a very fast speed and obstacles will jump out of its way. To hail the bus, a witch or wizard must stick their wand hand in the air in the same manner that a Muggle might do while hailing a Muggle Bus in the UK, though it is possible to book tickets for travel on the bus in advance.
Also, many country roads in modern Britain are pretty much one-lane, two-way roads that people drive down the middle of, and only slow down/go off to the side when traffic is approaching in the opposite direction. If there was uncertainty about which side somebody would go toward, a convention of using turn signals to indicate this could alleviate the problem.
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
edited Jan 20 at 15:42
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
answered Jan 17 at 15:31
WBTWBT
9251714
9251714
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The mythbusters have your answer, two of them actually.
The biggest problem you have is there's only so much space on the road and you are creating a perfect storm for traffic jams. The only way to guarantee getting from A to B is to be able to clear the road as you go.
the cow catcher serves the same purpose it did on trains, to push anything in front of them out of the way with the minimum energy.
You can't get from A to B in a timely fashion without moving other cars out of the way. If someone gets hurt. Oh well, that's what they get fro driving something as unsafe as a car on the road. This society clearly doesn't care much about personal safety.
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
"Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." Hitting people & vehicles so hard that they literally fly out of your way, like the mythbusters vehicles were designed to do, sounds tantamount to murder
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
no one says you have to hit them that fast.
$endgroup$
– John
Jan 17 at 20:36
$begingroup$
GTA logic says this is legit.
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Lam
Jan 20 at 16:27
$begingroup$
If there are many people with these trucks, it wouldn't be possible to shove other cars out of the way, though.
$endgroup$
– 2015oceanview
Jan 21 at 6:41
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 I don't think this is murder as you are not deliberately hitting anyone. You are just on your way from A to B and they are in the way. that may sound strange, but every accident happens because someone is on his way from A to B and suddenly someone else or something is in his way. That doesn't make it murder, unless you deliberately aim for a car that you want to hit.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 21 at 9:50
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The mythbusters have your answer, two of them actually.
The biggest problem you have is there's only so much space on the road and you are creating a perfect storm for traffic jams. The only way to guarantee getting from A to B is to be able to clear the road as you go.
the cow catcher serves the same purpose it did on trains, to push anything in front of them out of the way with the minimum energy.
You can't get from A to B in a timely fashion without moving other cars out of the way. If someone gets hurt. Oh well, that's what they get fro driving something as unsafe as a car on the road. This society clearly doesn't care much about personal safety.
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
$endgroup$
2
$begingroup$
"Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." Hitting people & vehicles so hard that they literally fly out of your way, like the mythbusters vehicles were designed to do, sounds tantamount to murder
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
no one says you have to hit them that fast.
$endgroup$
– John
Jan 17 at 20:36
$begingroup$
GTA logic says this is legit.
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Lam
Jan 20 at 16:27
$begingroup$
If there are many people with these trucks, it wouldn't be possible to shove other cars out of the way, though.
$endgroup$
– 2015oceanview
Jan 21 at 6:41
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 I don't think this is murder as you are not deliberately hitting anyone. You are just on your way from A to B and they are in the way. that may sound strange, but every accident happens because someone is on his way from A to B and suddenly someone else or something is in his way. That doesn't make it murder, unless you deliberately aim for a car that you want to hit.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 21 at 9:50
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The mythbusters have your answer, two of them actually.
The biggest problem you have is there's only so much space on the road and you are creating a perfect storm for traffic jams. The only way to guarantee getting from A to B is to be able to clear the road as you go.
the cow catcher serves the same purpose it did on trains, to push anything in front of them out of the way with the minimum energy.
You can't get from A to B in a timely fashion without moving other cars out of the way. If someone gets hurt. Oh well, that's what they get fro driving something as unsafe as a car on the road. This society clearly doesn't care much about personal safety.
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
$endgroup$
The mythbusters have your answer, two of them actually.
The biggest problem you have is there's only so much space on the road and you are creating a perfect storm for traffic jams. The only way to guarantee getting from A to B is to be able to clear the road as you go.
the cow catcher serves the same purpose it did on trains, to push anything in front of them out of the way with the minimum energy.
You can't get from A to B in a timely fashion without moving other cars out of the way. If someone gets hurt. Oh well, that's what they get fro driving something as unsafe as a car on the road. This society clearly doesn't care much about personal safety.
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
edited Jan 17 at 20:41
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
answered Jan 17 at 2:51
JohnJohn
32.8k944117
32.8k944117
2
$begingroup$
"Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." Hitting people & vehicles so hard that they literally fly out of your way, like the mythbusters vehicles were designed to do, sounds tantamount to murder
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
no one says you have to hit them that fast.
$endgroup$
– John
Jan 17 at 20:36
$begingroup$
GTA logic says this is legit.
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Lam
Jan 20 at 16:27
$begingroup$
If there are many people with these trucks, it wouldn't be possible to shove other cars out of the way, though.
$endgroup$
– 2015oceanview
Jan 21 at 6:41
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 I don't think this is murder as you are not deliberately hitting anyone. You are just on your way from A to B and they are in the way. that may sound strange, but every accident happens because someone is on his way from A to B and suddenly someone else or something is in his way. That doesn't make it murder, unless you deliberately aim for a car that you want to hit.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 21 at 9:50
|
show 2 more comments
2
$begingroup$
"Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." Hitting people & vehicles so hard that they literally fly out of your way, like the mythbusters vehicles were designed to do, sounds tantamount to murder
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 18:58
1
$begingroup$
no one says you have to hit them that fast.
$endgroup$
– John
Jan 17 at 20:36
$begingroup$
GTA logic says this is legit.
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Lam
Jan 20 at 16:27
$begingroup$
If there are many people with these trucks, it wouldn't be possible to shove other cars out of the way, though.
$endgroup$
– 2015oceanview
Jan 21 at 6:41
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 I don't think this is murder as you are not deliberately hitting anyone. You are just on your way from A to B and they are in the way. that may sound strange, but every accident happens because someone is on his way from A to B and suddenly someone else or something is in his way. That doesn't make it murder, unless you deliberately aim for a car that you want to hit.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 21 at 9:50
2
2
$begingroup$
"Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." Hitting people & vehicles so hard that they literally fly out of your way, like the mythbusters vehicles were designed to do, sounds tantamount to murder
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 18:58
$begingroup$
"Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." Hitting people & vehicles so hard that they literally fly out of your way, like the mythbusters vehicles were designed to do, sounds tantamount to murder
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 18:58
1
1
$begingroup$
no one says you have to hit them that fast.
$endgroup$
– John
Jan 17 at 20:36
$begingroup$
no one says you have to hit them that fast.
$endgroup$
– John
Jan 17 at 20:36
$begingroup$
GTA logic says this is legit.
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Lam
Jan 20 at 16:27
$begingroup$
GTA logic says this is legit.
$endgroup$
– Jonathan Lam
Jan 20 at 16:27
$begingroup$
If there are many people with these trucks, it wouldn't be possible to shove other cars out of the way, though.
$endgroup$
– 2015oceanview
Jan 21 at 6:41
$begingroup$
If there are many people with these trucks, it wouldn't be possible to shove other cars out of the way, though.
$endgroup$
– 2015oceanview
Jan 21 at 6:41
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 I don't think this is murder as you are not deliberately hitting anyone. You are just on your way from A to B and they are in the way. that may sound strange, but every accident happens because someone is on his way from A to B and suddenly someone else or something is in his way. That doesn't make it murder, unless you deliberately aim for a car that you want to hit.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 21 at 9:50
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 I don't think this is murder as you are not deliberately hitting anyone. You are just on your way from A to B and they are in the way. that may sound strange, but every accident happens because someone is on his way from A to B and suddenly someone else or something is in his way. That doesn't make it murder, unless you deliberately aim for a car that you want to hit.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 21 at 9:50
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
The question is describing a common situation in town fairs: bumper cars, or dodgems. A chaotic traffic situation, without traffic rules, sudden changes in general flow, etc...
It works, and to memory, it is less lethal than standard regulated traffic.
Apparently, in England, someone has already started thinking about taking the dodgem on the road. Also, for the skeptics, just remember that most of the UK can be considered flat compared to other European countries, hence no real terrain issues for these lovely little contraptions.
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I’ve forgotten precisely where, but there’s a place (really!) where someone persuaded the town to remove ALL stop signs and semaphores. Accident rate decreased
$endgroup$
– WGroleau
Jan 17 at 3:48
1
$begingroup$
@WGroleau I can believe that. However, many areas of the UK are filled with roundabouts, for that matters. That means that you will find on average significantly less stop signs and semaphores compared to some other countries in mainland Europe. Still, traffic laws, precedence rules, right of way, and parking fines apply.
$endgroup$
– NofP
Jan 17 at 10:22
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The question is describing a common situation in town fairs: bumper cars, or dodgems. A chaotic traffic situation, without traffic rules, sudden changes in general flow, etc...
It works, and to memory, it is less lethal than standard regulated traffic.
Apparently, in England, someone has already started thinking about taking the dodgem on the road. Also, for the skeptics, just remember that most of the UK can be considered flat compared to other European countries, hence no real terrain issues for these lovely little contraptions.
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
I’ve forgotten precisely where, but there’s a place (really!) where someone persuaded the town to remove ALL stop signs and semaphores. Accident rate decreased
$endgroup$
– WGroleau
Jan 17 at 3:48
1
$begingroup$
@WGroleau I can believe that. However, many areas of the UK are filled with roundabouts, for that matters. That means that you will find on average significantly less stop signs and semaphores compared to some other countries in mainland Europe. Still, traffic laws, precedence rules, right of way, and parking fines apply.
$endgroup$
– NofP
Jan 17 at 10:22
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The question is describing a common situation in town fairs: bumper cars, or dodgems. A chaotic traffic situation, without traffic rules, sudden changes in general flow, etc...
It works, and to memory, it is less lethal than standard regulated traffic.
Apparently, in England, someone has already started thinking about taking the dodgem on the road. Also, for the skeptics, just remember that most of the UK can be considered flat compared to other European countries, hence no real terrain issues for these lovely little contraptions.
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
$endgroup$
The question is describing a common situation in town fairs: bumper cars, or dodgems. A chaotic traffic situation, without traffic rules, sudden changes in general flow, etc...
It works, and to memory, it is less lethal than standard regulated traffic.
Apparently, in England, someone has already started thinking about taking the dodgem on the road. Also, for the skeptics, just remember that most of the UK can be considered flat compared to other European countries, hence no real terrain issues for these lovely little contraptions.
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
answered Jan 17 at 0:19
NofPNofP
3,170424
3,170424
1
$begingroup$
I’ve forgotten precisely where, but there’s a place (really!) where someone persuaded the town to remove ALL stop signs and semaphores. Accident rate decreased
$endgroup$
– WGroleau
Jan 17 at 3:48
1
$begingroup$
@WGroleau I can believe that. However, many areas of the UK are filled with roundabouts, for that matters. That means that you will find on average significantly less stop signs and semaphores compared to some other countries in mainland Europe. Still, traffic laws, precedence rules, right of way, and parking fines apply.
$endgroup$
– NofP
Jan 17 at 10:22
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
I’ve forgotten precisely where, but there’s a place (really!) where someone persuaded the town to remove ALL stop signs and semaphores. Accident rate decreased
$endgroup$
– WGroleau
Jan 17 at 3:48
1
$begingroup$
@WGroleau I can believe that. However, many areas of the UK are filled with roundabouts, for that matters. That means that you will find on average significantly less stop signs and semaphores compared to some other countries in mainland Europe. Still, traffic laws, precedence rules, right of way, and parking fines apply.
$endgroup$
– NofP
Jan 17 at 10:22
1
1
$begingroup$
I’ve forgotten precisely where, but there’s a place (really!) where someone persuaded the town to remove ALL stop signs and semaphores. Accident rate decreased
$endgroup$
– WGroleau
Jan 17 at 3:48
$begingroup$
I’ve forgotten precisely where, but there’s a place (really!) where someone persuaded the town to remove ALL stop signs and semaphores. Accident rate decreased
$endgroup$
– WGroleau
Jan 17 at 3:48
1
1
$begingroup$
@WGroleau I can believe that. However, many areas of the UK are filled with roundabouts, for that matters. That means that you will find on average significantly less stop signs and semaphores compared to some other countries in mainland Europe. Still, traffic laws, precedence rules, right of way, and parking fines apply.
$endgroup$
– NofP
Jan 17 at 10:22
$begingroup$
@WGroleau I can believe that. However, many areas of the UK are filled with roundabouts, for that matters. That means that you will find on average significantly less stop signs and semaphores compared to some other countries in mainland Europe. Still, traffic laws, precedence rules, right of way, and parking fines apply.
$endgroup$
– NofP
Jan 17 at 10:22
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While someone has already mentioned a tank, its price tag puts it out of reach for the vast majority of the motoring public. The legions of unwashed plebs are Sempletons(pun fully intended) who require a far more economical option, so I present to you the Bob Semple "tank"
An "armoured" superstructure to protect from the chaos a total lack of traffic regulation would produce. Its cheap and shoddyhomemade nature allows for easy DIY fixing on the fly, rather than having to be sent to some workshop or depot. No murder? Remove all the guns or install dummies in their place then, to hang your laundry fromput the fear of God into all those other wankers. Last but not least, low speed and reliability for maximum obnoxiousness towards everyone behind you on the road.
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm not sure if this is the best solution but I definitely want one!
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While someone has already mentioned a tank, its price tag puts it out of reach for the vast majority of the motoring public. The legions of unwashed plebs are Sempletons(pun fully intended) who require a far more economical option, so I present to you the Bob Semple "tank"
An "armoured" superstructure to protect from the chaos a total lack of traffic regulation would produce. Its cheap and shoddyhomemade nature allows for easy DIY fixing on the fly, rather than having to be sent to some workshop or depot. No murder? Remove all the guns or install dummies in their place then, to hang your laundry fromput the fear of God into all those other wankers. Last but not least, low speed and reliability for maximum obnoxiousness towards everyone behind you on the road.
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I'm not sure if this is the best solution but I definitely want one!
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
While someone has already mentioned a tank, its price tag puts it out of reach for the vast majority of the motoring public. The legions of unwashed plebs are Sempletons(pun fully intended) who require a far more economical option, so I present to you the Bob Semple "tank"
An "armoured" superstructure to protect from the chaos a total lack of traffic regulation would produce. Its cheap and shoddyhomemade nature allows for easy DIY fixing on the fly, rather than having to be sent to some workshop or depot. No murder? Remove all the guns or install dummies in their place then, to hang your laundry fromput the fear of God into all those other wankers. Last but not least, low speed and reliability for maximum obnoxiousness towards everyone behind you on the road.
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
$endgroup$
While someone has already mentioned a tank, its price tag puts it out of reach for the vast majority of the motoring public. The legions of unwashed plebs are Sempletons(pun fully intended) who require a far more economical option, so I present to you the Bob Semple "tank"
An "armoured" superstructure to protect from the chaos a total lack of traffic regulation would produce. Its cheap and shoddyhomemade nature allows for easy DIY fixing on the fly, rather than having to be sent to some workshop or depot. No murder? Remove all the guns or install dummies in their place then, to hang your laundry fromput the fear of God into all those other wankers. Last but not least, low speed and reliability for maximum obnoxiousness towards everyone behind you on the road.
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
edited Jan 17 at 2:22
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
answered Jan 17 at 2:07
nullpointernullpointer
5,38721133
5,38721133
$begingroup$
I'm not sure if this is the best solution but I definitely want one!
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm not sure if this is the best solution but I definitely want one!
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:21
$begingroup$
I'm not sure if this is the best solution but I definitely want one!
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:21
$begingroup$
I'm not sure if this is the best solution but I definitely want one!
$endgroup$
– chasly from UK
Jan 17 at 2:21
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Okay so this is based on real experience with a real place that was, in a way, very much like Mad Max - had no rules and plenty of danger...its still basically like that - and the vehicles we used. I choose these vehicles as: Though I was a USMC, I know all of these vehicles are available to UK groups (except possibly the MRAP); All drive like regular vehicles so not much special training involved in their operation; They are vehicles primarily not weapons (like a tank) so if some of the liability standards we currently use continue over (even though no "road rules") these could still be classified in the same manner as driving a truck (or car with HMMV):
Option 1: HMMV (up-armored if possible)
"Speed is life, stopping is death" <- first words about driving in a combat zone I ever heard and they are true. As the rules state "you can't just shot or kill people" and cities (like London) would have very heavy foot, vehicle, and other traffic it seems to me that this would be a great option. One, it allows for "bumping" cars and other objects out of the way. Two, you don't have to kill people when hit with it (like a tank would likely do) Three, you can actually buy at least the un-armored version of this (and armor yourself if needed).
Note - that thread is from 2006, the video is real, and there are some opinionated anti-military answers within.
Option 2: Country roads? Use a 7-ton
The 7-ton is my favorite option (when I was deployed) - fast, was nearly impossible to get stuck, could drive over ridiculous terrain, ford full rivers, and it goes on. Beside that this would allow you to safely drive a much larger crew (10-15 people vs. HMMV's 4-6) or a lot of equipment around. In this case it has an added bonus, though armored versions are restricted the actual military vehicles can be purchased and many parts if repairs are needed. Only downsides to HMMV - not as small and "bumping" something with these will cause more damage.
Option 3: MRAP
Okay, this is the last vehicle I have personal experience driving and it has one massive advantage - and that is, well...the picture explains it better than words can. This thing will not stop (without resorting to full on tank killer weapons). It is also now being offered to government (i.e. law enforcement) groups in the US so it is technically possible to get it but not really for civilians. However, it has two huge disadvantages - its heavy and doesn't do well off-road. Why is heavy in bold? Cause these things had so much weight they would (and did a few times on me) collapse the road you were driving on. The V-shape made them get stuck on dunes and bad terrain a lot more than the earlier vehicles too. Still if the goal is an urban road and point A to B quickly and safely - they'd be an awesome option.
Option 4: Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
This one is "if I could pick any vehicle, money is not an option but it should still be car-ish". This thing was just a dream when I was in and only came out last year - so it is certainly not possible to get as a civilian (most military units are chomping at the bit to get a few). However, a few of the guys I know who still work in Green have gotten a chance to at least look at it and say it is like they took all the best parts of the 3 other options and built the car of the future. So if its dream money and wish scenario...
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're still driving on roads, and "Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." It seems like these big wide vehicles would be even harder to maneuver through traffic that can't decide what side of the road to drive on.
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 19:02
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 yes, those were similar laws that we had when in country (no road rules but we had many, many restrictions on when force was authorized) and these can be driven in that regard (particularly 1 & 4) but also give added protection when other people start driving tanks (as is suggested in many other answers) and/or shooting at you. Also, IMHO, one point is if there are no road rules, I would want something that gave me fording/off-road heavy capabilities - beyond the just bad country roads one occasionally finds - to avoid any such problems in the first place (or at least bypass it).
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:40
$begingroup$
Besides if I just wanted to crush stuff - I'd you the only vehicle I know in the USMC which is called Ultra-heavy ;)
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Okay so this is based on real experience with a real place that was, in a way, very much like Mad Max - had no rules and plenty of danger...its still basically like that - and the vehicles we used. I choose these vehicles as: Though I was a USMC, I know all of these vehicles are available to UK groups (except possibly the MRAP); All drive like regular vehicles so not much special training involved in their operation; They are vehicles primarily not weapons (like a tank) so if some of the liability standards we currently use continue over (even though no "road rules") these could still be classified in the same manner as driving a truck (or car with HMMV):
Option 1: HMMV (up-armored if possible)
"Speed is life, stopping is death" <- first words about driving in a combat zone I ever heard and they are true. As the rules state "you can't just shot or kill people" and cities (like London) would have very heavy foot, vehicle, and other traffic it seems to me that this would be a great option. One, it allows for "bumping" cars and other objects out of the way. Two, you don't have to kill people when hit with it (like a tank would likely do) Three, you can actually buy at least the un-armored version of this (and armor yourself if needed).
Note - that thread is from 2006, the video is real, and there are some opinionated anti-military answers within.
Option 2: Country roads? Use a 7-ton
The 7-ton is my favorite option (when I was deployed) - fast, was nearly impossible to get stuck, could drive over ridiculous terrain, ford full rivers, and it goes on. Beside that this would allow you to safely drive a much larger crew (10-15 people vs. HMMV's 4-6) or a lot of equipment around. In this case it has an added bonus, though armored versions are restricted the actual military vehicles can be purchased and many parts if repairs are needed. Only downsides to HMMV - not as small and "bumping" something with these will cause more damage.
Option 3: MRAP
Okay, this is the last vehicle I have personal experience driving and it has one massive advantage - and that is, well...the picture explains it better than words can. This thing will not stop (without resorting to full on tank killer weapons). It is also now being offered to government (i.e. law enforcement) groups in the US so it is technically possible to get it but not really for civilians. However, it has two huge disadvantages - its heavy and doesn't do well off-road. Why is heavy in bold? Cause these things had so much weight they would (and did a few times on me) collapse the road you were driving on. The V-shape made them get stuck on dunes and bad terrain a lot more than the earlier vehicles too. Still if the goal is an urban road and point A to B quickly and safely - they'd be an awesome option.
Option 4: Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
This one is "if I could pick any vehicle, money is not an option but it should still be car-ish". This thing was just a dream when I was in and only came out last year - so it is certainly not possible to get as a civilian (most military units are chomping at the bit to get a few). However, a few of the guys I know who still work in Green have gotten a chance to at least look at it and say it is like they took all the best parts of the 3 other options and built the car of the future. So if its dream money and wish scenario...
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
You're still driving on roads, and "Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." It seems like these big wide vehicles would be even harder to maneuver through traffic that can't decide what side of the road to drive on.
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 19:02
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 yes, those were similar laws that we had when in country (no road rules but we had many, many restrictions on when force was authorized) and these can be driven in that regard (particularly 1 & 4) but also give added protection when other people start driving tanks (as is suggested in many other answers) and/or shooting at you. Also, IMHO, one point is if there are no road rules, I would want something that gave me fording/off-road heavy capabilities - beyond the just bad country roads one occasionally finds - to avoid any such problems in the first place (or at least bypass it).
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:40
$begingroup$
Besides if I just wanted to crush stuff - I'd you the only vehicle I know in the USMC which is called Ultra-heavy ;)
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Okay so this is based on real experience with a real place that was, in a way, very much like Mad Max - had no rules and plenty of danger...its still basically like that - and the vehicles we used. I choose these vehicles as: Though I was a USMC, I know all of these vehicles are available to UK groups (except possibly the MRAP); All drive like regular vehicles so not much special training involved in their operation; They are vehicles primarily not weapons (like a tank) so if some of the liability standards we currently use continue over (even though no "road rules") these could still be classified in the same manner as driving a truck (or car with HMMV):
Option 1: HMMV (up-armored if possible)
"Speed is life, stopping is death" <- first words about driving in a combat zone I ever heard and they are true. As the rules state "you can't just shot or kill people" and cities (like London) would have very heavy foot, vehicle, and other traffic it seems to me that this would be a great option. One, it allows for "bumping" cars and other objects out of the way. Two, you don't have to kill people when hit with it (like a tank would likely do) Three, you can actually buy at least the un-armored version of this (and armor yourself if needed).
Note - that thread is from 2006, the video is real, and there are some opinionated anti-military answers within.
Option 2: Country roads? Use a 7-ton
The 7-ton is my favorite option (when I was deployed) - fast, was nearly impossible to get stuck, could drive over ridiculous terrain, ford full rivers, and it goes on. Beside that this would allow you to safely drive a much larger crew (10-15 people vs. HMMV's 4-6) or a lot of equipment around. In this case it has an added bonus, though armored versions are restricted the actual military vehicles can be purchased and many parts if repairs are needed. Only downsides to HMMV - not as small and "bumping" something with these will cause more damage.
Option 3: MRAP
Okay, this is the last vehicle I have personal experience driving and it has one massive advantage - and that is, well...the picture explains it better than words can. This thing will not stop (without resorting to full on tank killer weapons). It is also now being offered to government (i.e. law enforcement) groups in the US so it is technically possible to get it but not really for civilians. However, it has two huge disadvantages - its heavy and doesn't do well off-road. Why is heavy in bold? Cause these things had so much weight they would (and did a few times on me) collapse the road you were driving on. The V-shape made them get stuck on dunes and bad terrain a lot more than the earlier vehicles too. Still if the goal is an urban road and point A to B quickly and safely - they'd be an awesome option.
Option 4: Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
This one is "if I could pick any vehicle, money is not an option but it should still be car-ish". This thing was just a dream when I was in and only came out last year - so it is certainly not possible to get as a civilian (most military units are chomping at the bit to get a few). However, a few of the guys I know who still work in Green have gotten a chance to at least look at it and say it is like they took all the best parts of the 3 other options and built the car of the future. So if its dream money and wish scenario...
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
$endgroup$
Okay so this is based on real experience with a real place that was, in a way, very much like Mad Max - had no rules and plenty of danger...its still basically like that - and the vehicles we used. I choose these vehicles as: Though I was a USMC, I know all of these vehicles are available to UK groups (except possibly the MRAP); All drive like regular vehicles so not much special training involved in their operation; They are vehicles primarily not weapons (like a tank) so if some of the liability standards we currently use continue over (even though no "road rules") these could still be classified in the same manner as driving a truck (or car with HMMV):
Option 1: HMMV (up-armored if possible)
"Speed is life, stopping is death" <- first words about driving in a combat zone I ever heard and they are true. As the rules state "you can't just shot or kill people" and cities (like London) would have very heavy foot, vehicle, and other traffic it seems to me that this would be a great option. One, it allows for "bumping" cars and other objects out of the way. Two, you don't have to kill people when hit with it (like a tank would likely do) Three, you can actually buy at least the un-armored version of this (and armor yourself if needed).
Note - that thread is from 2006, the video is real, and there are some opinionated anti-military answers within.
Option 2: Country roads? Use a 7-ton
The 7-ton is my favorite option (when I was deployed) - fast, was nearly impossible to get stuck, could drive over ridiculous terrain, ford full rivers, and it goes on. Beside that this would allow you to safely drive a much larger crew (10-15 people vs. HMMV's 4-6) or a lot of equipment around. In this case it has an added bonus, though armored versions are restricted the actual military vehicles can be purchased and many parts if repairs are needed. Only downsides to HMMV - not as small and "bumping" something with these will cause more damage.
Option 3: MRAP
Okay, this is the last vehicle I have personal experience driving and it has one massive advantage - and that is, well...the picture explains it better than words can. This thing will not stop (without resorting to full on tank killer weapons). It is also now being offered to government (i.e. law enforcement) groups in the US so it is technically possible to get it but not really for civilians. However, it has two huge disadvantages - its heavy and doesn't do well off-road. Why is heavy in bold? Cause these things had so much weight they would (and did a few times on me) collapse the road you were driving on. The V-shape made them get stuck on dunes and bad terrain a lot more than the earlier vehicles too. Still if the goal is an urban road and point A to B quickly and safely - they'd be an awesome option.
Option 4: Joint Light Tactical Vehicle
This one is "if I could pick any vehicle, money is not an option but it should still be car-ish". This thing was just a dream when I was in and only came out last year - so it is certainly not possible to get as a civilian (most military units are chomping at the bit to get a few). However, a few of the guys I know who still work in Green have gotten a chance to at least look at it and say it is like they took all the best parts of the 3 other options and built the car of the future. So if its dream money and wish scenario...
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
edited Jan 18 at 13:06
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
answered Jan 17 at 3:28
JGreenwellJGreenwell
1,469215
1,469215
$begingroup$
You're still driving on roads, and "Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." It seems like these big wide vehicles would be even harder to maneuver through traffic that can't decide what side of the road to drive on.
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 19:02
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 yes, those were similar laws that we had when in country (no road rules but we had many, many restrictions on when force was authorized) and these can be driven in that regard (particularly 1 & 4) but also give added protection when other people start driving tanks (as is suggested in many other answers) and/or shooting at you. Also, IMHO, one point is if there are no road rules, I would want something that gave me fording/off-road heavy capabilities - beyond the just bad country roads one occasionally finds - to avoid any such problems in the first place (or at least bypass it).
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:40
$begingroup$
Besides if I just wanted to crush stuff - I'd you the only vehicle I know in the USMC which is called Ultra-heavy ;)
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You're still driving on roads, and "Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." It seems like these big wide vehicles would be even harder to maneuver through traffic that can't decide what side of the road to drive on.
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 19:02
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 yes, those were similar laws that we had when in country (no road rules but we had many, many restrictions on when force was authorized) and these can be driven in that regard (particularly 1 & 4) but also give added protection when other people start driving tanks (as is suggested in many other answers) and/or shooting at you. Also, IMHO, one point is if there are no road rules, I would want something that gave me fording/off-road heavy capabilities - beyond the just bad country roads one occasionally finds - to avoid any such problems in the first place (or at least bypass it).
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:40
$begingroup$
Besides if I just wanted to crush stuff - I'd you the only vehicle I know in the USMC which is called Ultra-heavy ;)
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:50
$begingroup$
You're still driving on roads, and "Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." It seems like these big wide vehicles would be even harder to maneuver through traffic that can't decide what side of the road to drive on.
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 19:02
$begingroup$
You're still driving on roads, and "Bear in mind that other laws exist so you can't deliberately murder other motorists, by shooting them for example." It seems like these big wide vehicles would be even harder to maneuver through traffic that can't decide what side of the road to drive on.
$endgroup$
– Xen2050
Jan 17 at 19:02
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 yes, those were similar laws that we had when in country (no road rules but we had many, many restrictions on when force was authorized) and these can be driven in that regard (particularly 1 & 4) but also give added protection when other people start driving tanks (as is suggested in many other answers) and/or shooting at you. Also, IMHO, one point is if there are no road rules, I would want something that gave me fording/off-road heavy capabilities - beyond the just bad country roads one occasionally finds - to avoid any such problems in the first place (or at least bypass it).
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:40
$begingroup$
@Xen2050 yes, those were similar laws that we had when in country (no road rules but we had many, many restrictions on when force was authorized) and these can be driven in that regard (particularly 1 & 4) but also give added protection when other people start driving tanks (as is suggested in many other answers) and/or shooting at you. Also, IMHO, one point is if there are no road rules, I would want something that gave me fording/off-road heavy capabilities - beyond the just bad country roads one occasionally finds - to avoid any such problems in the first place (or at least bypass it).
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:40
$begingroup$
Besides if I just wanted to crush stuff - I'd you the only vehicle I know in the USMC which is called Ultra-heavy ;)
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:50
$begingroup$
Besides if I just wanted to crush stuff - I'd you the only vehicle I know in the USMC which is called Ultra-heavy ;)
$endgroup$
– JGreenwell
Jan 17 at 20:50
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A big "Spot" robot or something alike, big enough for you to be able to climb on its back. It's a boston dynamic robot that can walk through roads, clim sloped terrain, and that will lead you through forests.
Avoid the roads when you can, if you must travel through a city, you can dodge other motorized vehicles by passing through pedestrian places.
https://youtu.be/M8YjvHYbZ9w
On top of that, it's super cool.
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What happens if it goes flat? Can you push them ?
$endgroup$
– Criggie
Jan 21 at 3:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A big "Spot" robot or something alike, big enough for you to be able to climb on its back. It's a boston dynamic robot that can walk through roads, clim sloped terrain, and that will lead you through forests.
Avoid the roads when you can, if you must travel through a city, you can dodge other motorized vehicles by passing through pedestrian places.
https://youtu.be/M8YjvHYbZ9w
On top of that, it's super cool.
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What happens if it goes flat? Can you push them ?
$endgroup$
– Criggie
Jan 21 at 3:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A big "Spot" robot or something alike, big enough for you to be able to climb on its back. It's a boston dynamic robot that can walk through roads, clim sloped terrain, and that will lead you through forests.
Avoid the roads when you can, if you must travel through a city, you can dodge other motorized vehicles by passing through pedestrian places.
https://youtu.be/M8YjvHYbZ9w
On top of that, it's super cool.
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
$endgroup$
A big "Spot" robot or something alike, big enough for you to be able to climb on its back. It's a boston dynamic robot that can walk through roads, clim sloped terrain, and that will lead you through forests.
Avoid the roads when you can, if you must travel through a city, you can dodge other motorized vehicles by passing through pedestrian places.
https://youtu.be/M8YjvHYbZ9w
On top of that, it's super cool.
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
edited Jan 17 at 17:34
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
answered Jan 17 at 17:18
holeo hlwholeo hlw
1344
1344
$begingroup$
What happens if it goes flat? Can you push them ?
$endgroup$
– Criggie
Jan 21 at 3:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What happens if it goes flat? Can you push them ?
$endgroup$
– Criggie
Jan 21 at 3:15
$begingroup$
What happens if it goes flat? Can you push them ?
$endgroup$
– Criggie
Jan 21 at 3:15
$begingroup$
What happens if it goes flat? Can you push them ?
$endgroup$
– Criggie
Jan 21 at 3:15
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Either a police car or a tank
The "no killing" rule leaves room for interpretation, which needs to be exploited for the best answer. Also the question only asks to get from A to B not what happens afterwards.
First let's look at the tank/bulldozer/anything armored option. Yes it kills people, but since there are no traffic rules, no sidewalk or park is safe for pedestrians and whether you are in a tank or a motorcycle or even horse, if you hit a pedestrian, good chance he will die (horses are dangerous, I have been riding). But in the tank at least you reach B. Who is gonna arrest you anyway? The police is stuck in traffic like the rest. Or are they?
Situation two, the police can move fast through the traffic to stop any offenders. Well in this case the police car is the best means of transportation for you to get from A to B.
Bear in mind the question is about a single person getting from A to B. Most of the other people are going nowhere.
And I agreed that the question is too broad. What means no killing, is it OK to be arrested afterwards, can the police catch you some other way?
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Correct reaction to an emergency vehicle is covered by the traffic laws of a country. Hence it would bring no advantage in this situation.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 9:16
$begingroup$
Most people get out of the way of emergency vehicles based on consideration for the people they're rushing to help, or because they expect the emergency vehicle to run into them rather than stop, not because of the Highway Code - so I think findusl's answer is valid.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 11:49
$begingroup$
@separatix please read the full answer. It also describes and reasons the correct answer if a police car is not the solution.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 18 at 11:54
$begingroup$
@GuyF-W, but how you respond is regional. In some countries you do anything to get out of the way, in some the correct response is to stop where you are and let them go round you. The UK has strict regulations on when you do what, you're not allowed to break any other regulation to make way for example, you will still be fined for bus lane or traffic light offences.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 12:03
$begingroup$
Given the number of people I've seen break traffic laws to let police cars through, that seems to be honoured more in the breach than the observance.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 12:17
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Either a police car or a tank
The "no killing" rule leaves room for interpretation, which needs to be exploited for the best answer. Also the question only asks to get from A to B not what happens afterwards.
First let's look at the tank/bulldozer/anything armored option. Yes it kills people, but since there are no traffic rules, no sidewalk or park is safe for pedestrians and whether you are in a tank or a motorcycle or even horse, if you hit a pedestrian, good chance he will die (horses are dangerous, I have been riding). But in the tank at least you reach B. Who is gonna arrest you anyway? The police is stuck in traffic like the rest. Or are they?
Situation two, the police can move fast through the traffic to stop any offenders. Well in this case the police car is the best means of transportation for you to get from A to B.
Bear in mind the question is about a single person getting from A to B. Most of the other people are going nowhere.
And I agreed that the question is too broad. What means no killing, is it OK to be arrested afterwards, can the police catch you some other way?
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Correct reaction to an emergency vehicle is covered by the traffic laws of a country. Hence it would bring no advantage in this situation.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 9:16
$begingroup$
Most people get out of the way of emergency vehicles based on consideration for the people they're rushing to help, or because they expect the emergency vehicle to run into them rather than stop, not because of the Highway Code - so I think findusl's answer is valid.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 11:49
$begingroup$
@separatix please read the full answer. It also describes and reasons the correct answer if a police car is not the solution.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 18 at 11:54
$begingroup$
@GuyF-W, but how you respond is regional. In some countries you do anything to get out of the way, in some the correct response is to stop where you are and let them go round you. The UK has strict regulations on when you do what, you're not allowed to break any other regulation to make way for example, you will still be fined for bus lane or traffic light offences.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 12:03
$begingroup$
Given the number of people I've seen break traffic laws to let police cars through, that seems to be honoured more in the breach than the observance.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 12:17
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Either a police car or a tank
The "no killing" rule leaves room for interpretation, which needs to be exploited for the best answer. Also the question only asks to get from A to B not what happens afterwards.
First let's look at the tank/bulldozer/anything armored option. Yes it kills people, but since there are no traffic rules, no sidewalk or park is safe for pedestrians and whether you are in a tank or a motorcycle or even horse, if you hit a pedestrian, good chance he will die (horses are dangerous, I have been riding). But in the tank at least you reach B. Who is gonna arrest you anyway? The police is stuck in traffic like the rest. Or are they?
Situation two, the police can move fast through the traffic to stop any offenders. Well in this case the police car is the best means of transportation for you to get from A to B.
Bear in mind the question is about a single person getting from A to B. Most of the other people are going nowhere.
And I agreed that the question is too broad. What means no killing, is it OK to be arrested afterwards, can the police catch you some other way?
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
$endgroup$
Either a police car or a tank
The "no killing" rule leaves room for interpretation, which needs to be exploited for the best answer. Also the question only asks to get from A to B not what happens afterwards.
First let's look at the tank/bulldozer/anything armored option. Yes it kills people, but since there are no traffic rules, no sidewalk or park is safe for pedestrians and whether you are in a tank or a motorcycle or even horse, if you hit a pedestrian, good chance he will die (horses are dangerous, I have been riding). But in the tank at least you reach B. Who is gonna arrest you anyway? The police is stuck in traffic like the rest. Or are they?
Situation two, the police can move fast through the traffic to stop any offenders. Well in this case the police car is the best means of transportation for you to get from A to B.
Bear in mind the question is about a single person getting from A to B. Most of the other people are going nowhere.
And I agreed that the question is too broad. What means no killing, is it OK to be arrested afterwards, can the police catch you some other way?
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
edited Jan 18 at 11:55
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
answered Jan 17 at 19:22
finduslfindusl
1114
1114
$begingroup$
Correct reaction to an emergency vehicle is covered by the traffic laws of a country. Hence it would bring no advantage in this situation.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 9:16
$begingroup$
Most people get out of the way of emergency vehicles based on consideration for the people they're rushing to help, or because they expect the emergency vehicle to run into them rather than stop, not because of the Highway Code - so I think findusl's answer is valid.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 11:49
$begingroup$
@separatix please read the full answer. It also describes and reasons the correct answer if a police car is not the solution.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 18 at 11:54
$begingroup$
@GuyF-W, but how you respond is regional. In some countries you do anything to get out of the way, in some the correct response is to stop where you are and let them go round you. The UK has strict regulations on when you do what, you're not allowed to break any other regulation to make way for example, you will still be fined for bus lane or traffic light offences.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 12:03
$begingroup$
Given the number of people I've seen break traffic laws to let police cars through, that seems to be honoured more in the breach than the observance.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 12:17
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Correct reaction to an emergency vehicle is covered by the traffic laws of a country. Hence it would bring no advantage in this situation.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 9:16
$begingroup$
Most people get out of the way of emergency vehicles based on consideration for the people they're rushing to help, or because they expect the emergency vehicle to run into them rather than stop, not because of the Highway Code - so I think findusl's answer is valid.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 11:49
$begingroup$
@separatix please read the full answer. It also describes and reasons the correct answer if a police car is not the solution.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 18 at 11:54
$begingroup$
@GuyF-W, but how you respond is regional. In some countries you do anything to get out of the way, in some the correct response is to stop where you are and let them go round you. The UK has strict regulations on when you do what, you're not allowed to break any other regulation to make way for example, you will still be fined for bus lane or traffic light offences.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 12:03
$begingroup$
Given the number of people I've seen break traffic laws to let police cars through, that seems to be honoured more in the breach than the observance.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 12:17
$begingroup$
Correct reaction to an emergency vehicle is covered by the traffic laws of a country. Hence it would bring no advantage in this situation.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 9:16
$begingroup$
Correct reaction to an emergency vehicle is covered by the traffic laws of a country. Hence it would bring no advantage in this situation.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 9:16
$begingroup$
Most people get out of the way of emergency vehicles based on consideration for the people they're rushing to help, or because they expect the emergency vehicle to run into them rather than stop, not because of the Highway Code - so I think findusl's answer is valid.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 11:49
$begingroup$
Most people get out of the way of emergency vehicles based on consideration for the people they're rushing to help, or because they expect the emergency vehicle to run into them rather than stop, not because of the Highway Code - so I think findusl's answer is valid.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 11:49
$begingroup$
@separatix please read the full answer. It also describes and reasons the correct answer if a police car is not the solution.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 18 at 11:54
$begingroup$
@separatix please read the full answer. It also describes and reasons the correct answer if a police car is not the solution.
$endgroup$
– findusl
Jan 18 at 11:54
$begingroup$
@GuyF-W, but how you respond is regional. In some countries you do anything to get out of the way, in some the correct response is to stop where you are and let them go round you. The UK has strict regulations on when you do what, you're not allowed to break any other regulation to make way for example, you will still be fined for bus lane or traffic light offences.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 12:03
$begingroup$
@GuyF-W, but how you respond is regional. In some countries you do anything to get out of the way, in some the correct response is to stop where you are and let them go round you. The UK has strict regulations on when you do what, you're not allowed to break any other regulation to make way for example, you will still be fined for bus lane or traffic light offences.
$endgroup$
– Separatrix
Jan 18 at 12:03
$begingroup$
Given the number of people I've seen break traffic laws to let police cars through, that seems to be honoured more in the breach than the observance.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 12:17
$begingroup$
Given the number of people I've seen break traffic laws to let police cars through, that seems to be honoured more in the breach than the observance.
$endgroup$
– Guy F-W
Jan 18 at 12:17
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Solution 1 : Though all answers are considering the gravity factor and since its Britopia, there is no need to consider gravity. The best option I think is to just fly. Lets consider it as a space and in Space there is no concept of direction. Something like human carrying drones will be good to go anywhere. and Just like how the current air traffic is managed.
Solution 2 : I recently come across the concept of elevated car here.
So basically we have always either two states, elevated or none.
None Elevated :
And Elevated :
We need to make sure that the when two vehicles are approaching one become elevated and one is non elevated. Also need to manage angel of approach to make sure one can pass another without damaging legs of elevated one.
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Air traffic is definitely not managed like "fly wherever you like, nobody care". That apart, OP is clearly asking about road traffic.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 18 at 8:16
1
$begingroup$
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
$endgroup$
– Spudley
Jan 18 at 11:57
$begingroup$
@L.dutch : I know Air traffic is not managed like "Fly wherever you like, nobody care" But I referenced it here as policy to avoid collision and likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
$endgroup$
– Jaydeep
Jan 18 at 12:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Solution 1 : Though all answers are considering the gravity factor and since its Britopia, there is no need to consider gravity. The best option I think is to just fly. Lets consider it as a space and in Space there is no concept of direction. Something like human carrying drones will be good to go anywhere. and Just like how the current air traffic is managed.
Solution 2 : I recently come across the concept of elevated car here.
So basically we have always either two states, elevated or none.
None Elevated :
And Elevated :
We need to make sure that the when two vehicles are approaching one become elevated and one is non elevated. Also need to manage angel of approach to make sure one can pass another without damaging legs of elevated one.
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Air traffic is definitely not managed like "fly wherever you like, nobody care". That apart, OP is clearly asking about road traffic.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 18 at 8:16
1
$begingroup$
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
$endgroup$
– Spudley
Jan 18 at 11:57
$begingroup$
@L.dutch : I know Air traffic is not managed like "Fly wherever you like, nobody care" But I referenced it here as policy to avoid collision and likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
$endgroup$
– Jaydeep
Jan 18 at 12:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Solution 1 : Though all answers are considering the gravity factor and since its Britopia, there is no need to consider gravity. The best option I think is to just fly. Lets consider it as a space and in Space there is no concept of direction. Something like human carrying drones will be good to go anywhere. and Just like how the current air traffic is managed.
Solution 2 : I recently come across the concept of elevated car here.
So basically we have always either two states, elevated or none.
None Elevated :
And Elevated :
We need to make sure that the when two vehicles are approaching one become elevated and one is non elevated. Also need to manage angel of approach to make sure one can pass another without damaging legs of elevated one.
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
$endgroup$
Solution 1 : Though all answers are considering the gravity factor and since its Britopia, there is no need to consider gravity. The best option I think is to just fly. Lets consider it as a space and in Space there is no concept of direction. Something like human carrying drones will be good to go anywhere. and Just like how the current air traffic is managed.
Solution 2 : I recently come across the concept of elevated car here.
So basically we have always either two states, elevated or none.
None Elevated :
And Elevated :
We need to make sure that the when two vehicles are approaching one become elevated and one is non elevated. Also need to manage angel of approach to make sure one can pass another without damaging legs of elevated one.
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
edited Jan 18 at 12:15
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
answered Jan 18 at 7:42
JaydeepJaydeep
114
114
$begingroup$
Air traffic is definitely not managed like "fly wherever you like, nobody care". That apart, OP is clearly asking about road traffic.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 18 at 8:16
1
$begingroup$
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
$endgroup$
– Spudley
Jan 18 at 11:57
$begingroup$
@L.dutch : I know Air traffic is not managed like "Fly wherever you like, nobody care" But I referenced it here as policy to avoid collision and likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
$endgroup$
– Jaydeep
Jan 18 at 12:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Air traffic is definitely not managed like "fly wherever you like, nobody care". That apart, OP is clearly asking about road traffic.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 18 at 8:16
1
$begingroup$
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
$endgroup$
– Spudley
Jan 18 at 11:57
$begingroup$
@L.dutch : I know Air traffic is not managed like "Fly wherever you like, nobody care" But I referenced it here as policy to avoid collision and likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
$endgroup$
– Jaydeep
Jan 18 at 12:07
$begingroup$
Air traffic is definitely not managed like "fly wherever you like, nobody care". That apart, OP is clearly asking about road traffic.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 18 at 8:16
$begingroup$
Air traffic is definitely not managed like "fly wherever you like, nobody care". That apart, OP is clearly asking about road traffic.
$endgroup$
– L.Dutch♦
Jan 18 at 8:16
1
1
$begingroup$
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
$endgroup$
– Spudley
Jan 18 at 11:57
$begingroup$
"Roads? Where we're going, we don't need roads..."
$endgroup$
– Spudley
Jan 18 at 11:57
$begingroup$
@L.dutch : I know Air traffic is not managed like "Fly wherever you like, nobody care" But I referenced it here as policy to avoid collision and likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
$endgroup$
– Jaydeep
Jan 18 at 12:07
$begingroup$
@L.dutch : I know Air traffic is not managed like "Fly wherever you like, nobody care" But I referenced it here as policy to avoid collision and likely to get you from A to B in the shortest time whilst remaining alive and healthy.
$endgroup$
– Jaydeep
Jan 18 at 12:07
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It doesn't answer all the questions but if there's no left / right then having the steering wheel in the middle would be needed. McLaren F1 drivers would all be very happy.
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It doesn't answer all the questions but if there's no left / right then having the steering wheel in the middle would be needed. McLaren F1 drivers would all be very happy.
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It doesn't answer all the questions but if there's no left / right then having the steering wheel in the middle would be needed. McLaren F1 drivers would all be very happy.
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
$endgroup$
It doesn't answer all the questions but if there's no left / right then having the steering wheel in the middle would be needed. McLaren F1 drivers would all be very happy.
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
answered Jan 21 at 13:25
icc97icc97
1835
1835
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interestingly the regime of Colonel Gaddafi considered exactly this problem (it is reported that their motivation was that a large number of road users believed in predestination via god's will, so there was no point looking at junctions: if god had determined you would die, you were going to die). They ended up designing a car with a large foam "nose cone". Normally this would be an issue for visibility at junctions, but if one's not going to look anyway, I guess it's fine.
https://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/02/libyan-rocket-colonel-muammar-gaddafi-designs-a-safe-car/#slide-333692
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interestingly the regime of Colonel Gaddafi considered exactly this problem (it is reported that their motivation was that a large number of road users believed in predestination via god's will, so there was no point looking at junctions: if god had determined you would die, you were going to die). They ended up designing a car with a large foam "nose cone". Normally this would be an issue for visibility at junctions, but if one's not going to look anyway, I guess it's fine.
https://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/02/libyan-rocket-colonel-muammar-gaddafi-designs-a-safe-car/#slide-333692
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interestingly the regime of Colonel Gaddafi considered exactly this problem (it is reported that their motivation was that a large number of road users believed in predestination via god's will, so there was no point looking at junctions: if god had determined you would die, you were going to die). They ended up designing a car with a large foam "nose cone". Normally this would be an issue for visibility at junctions, but if one's not going to look anyway, I guess it's fine.
https://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/02/libyan-rocket-colonel-muammar-gaddafi-designs-a-safe-car/#slide-333692
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
$endgroup$
Interestingly the regime of Colonel Gaddafi considered exactly this problem (it is reported that their motivation was that a large number of road users believed in predestination via god's will, so there was no point looking at junctions: if god had determined you would die, you were going to die). They ended up designing a car with a large foam "nose cone". Normally this would be an issue for visibility at junctions, but if one's not going to look anyway, I guess it's fine.
https://www.autoblog.com/2009/09/02/libyan-rocket-colonel-muammar-gaddafi-designs-a-safe-car/#slide-333692
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
answered Jan 19 at 18:18
jamesjames
1011
1011
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Based on what the other people have said, I think a motorbike or a horse would work best in a highly populated urban city. You could also use three-wheelers. Because this is a 21st century society, self-driving cars would still not be affordable by everyone. But if the technology were more advanced, it would be a more feasible solution. In less populated areas, I would say agile sports cars like BMW street drifting cars might be best.
However, more than likely a voter would change his or her vote such that there isn't a tie. Because, having traffic laws are better than having none, right? ;)
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Based on what the other people have said, I think a motorbike or a horse would work best in a highly populated urban city. You could also use three-wheelers. Because this is a 21st century society, self-driving cars would still not be affordable by everyone. But if the technology were more advanced, it would be a more feasible solution. In less populated areas, I would say agile sports cars like BMW street drifting cars might be best.
However, more than likely a voter would change his or her vote such that there isn't a tie. Because, having traffic laws are better than having none, right? ;)
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Based on what the other people have said, I think a motorbike or a horse would work best in a highly populated urban city. You could also use three-wheelers. Because this is a 21st century society, self-driving cars would still not be affordable by everyone. But if the technology were more advanced, it would be a more feasible solution. In less populated areas, I would say agile sports cars like BMW street drifting cars might be best.
However, more than likely a voter would change his or her vote such that there isn't a tie. Because, having traffic laws are better than having none, right? ;)
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
$endgroup$
Based on what the other people have said, I think a motorbike or a horse would work best in a highly populated urban city. You could also use three-wheelers. Because this is a 21st century society, self-driving cars would still not be affordable by everyone. But if the technology were more advanced, it would be a more feasible solution. In less populated areas, I would say agile sports cars like BMW street drifting cars might be best.
However, more than likely a voter would change his or her vote such that there isn't a tie. Because, having traffic laws are better than having none, right? ;)
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
answered Jan 21 at 6:47
2015oceanview2015oceanview
916
916
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136769%2fa-road-system-with-no-traffic-rules-what-sort-of-vehicle-is-best%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
9
$begingroup$
Can you specify: Does everybody have to drive the same kind/class of vehicle or is this a kind of personal "arms race" you are asking about? Are there limitations, such as only existing and/or only road legal vehicles?
$endgroup$
– Daniel
Jan 17 at 12:04
4
$begingroup$
This honestly sounds a lot like how people drive in Cairo - there are road signs, traffic lights, lanes etc. And no one pays attention to any of them.
$endgroup$
– SpoonMeiser
Jan 17 at 16:25
20
$begingroup$
Go to India, take notes, and do the same thing :P
$endgroup$
– only_pro
Jan 17 at 19:33
5
$begingroup$
@chaslyfromUK Indeed, that's just the point. If someone drives too fast to stop their car before hitting someone and killing them, is it murder? With traffic rules everybody is supposed to follow, you can have justification for driving at a certain speed for example. Without rules, you don't have the rules to determine what is ok and what is not. Like killing someone with a knife, it takes extraordinary circumstances to not make that a manslaughter at the very least. With car, if you drive according to the rules, you are reasonably safe from being convicted as a killer.
$endgroup$
– hyde
Jan 17 at 20:01
2
$begingroup$
Would privately operated roads be a possibility? I would thing that after enough Chaos the Leftists, and/or Rightists would just spend the money and build their own privately administered transport systems with strict rules and fees.
$endgroup$
– Zoredache
Jan 18 at 0:23