Who goes first?
Road cyclist>folding bike rider>recumbent>fixie faggot>smelly hairy mtbikers
>4 way stop
how did america fuck up intersections so badly?
>>968264
according to the signs they all have to stop until the other guys are done stopping
is this driver's ed?
>>968264
fucking america
>not using the superior roundabout
First person to get there goes, then the second.
I have literally never, in my entire life, come up to a four way stop with all signs filled.
>>968332
Considering that anyone not from NJ shits their pants and almost kills someone every time they see a circle, I don't think we can fucking handle those.
>>968362
>I have literally never, in my entire life, come up to a four way stop with all signs filled.
You must be very new to driving, then.
>two wire electrical distribution in a city
what the hell?
>>968378
>overhead wires in the city
#just3rdworldthings
>>968370
No, it's just that everyone speeds and rolls through stops, so it clears pretty quick.
>>968362
>I don't think we can fucking handle those.
I do not understand this. How is it hard? Look to your right: is there another vehicle there? No? Then you're good.
That's literally it.
>>968417
Actually listening to this fag would make roundabouts looks more like destruction derbies.
>>968370
I'm sorry you live in a crowded shithole
:^)
>>968417
Dude, I have no fucking clue.
When I'm heading into a circle and see any plate that's not yellow, I shit myself a little.
Fucking morons.
>>968332
>mfw I live in WA state, and they're putting roundabouts every fucking where
>mfw I'm totally ok with this, and all the old people won't stop bitching
Northmost, Eastmost, Southmost, Westmost.
45 degree fallback:
Northeastmost, Southeastmost, Southwestmost, Northwestmost.
Simple as that.
>>968469
Wrong
>>968273
thats the least fucked up our intersections get. we have 5 and 6 way intersections that should have been roundabouts but nooooo
and don't even get me started on how much of a mess our roundabouts are
Whoever there is first like someone already said. It's sort of hard to retrofit intersections already surrounded by buildings into a roundabout but I can say many state DOTs (Dept. of transportation) have become more willing to construct new roundabouts. We should be seeing a lot more in the next few years.
>>968264
Whoever can document in the ensuing court battle that they were in the greatest hurry.
Roundabouts a shit.
Completly unsignalled intersections and giving priority to anything coming from the right are by far the best for residential low volume roads. Which, as far as I am informed, american 4-way stops are similar to, except you have to stop every time.
t. eurofag
Im a a trucker and these fucking American roundabouts are starting to piss me of especially when they put them on fucling highways in the middle of nowhere because there to cheap to build a crossing.
>>968548
It's not a matter of cost, it's just miles more efficient in moving traffic compared to stop signs.
>>968548
Main problem with roundabouts in the US and trucks is that they're usually too small.
As to them going up everywhere, that can be just as bad. Roundabouts are ideal for medium traffic intersections with roughly equal volume in both directions or in the case of oblique angles.
If one direction is heavily biased, a roundabout can impede traffic for little benefit due to lack of cross-traffic using it; stop sign on the side roads work well here. High peak, low daily volume intersections are almost always best signalized. Low volume roads are served effectively by 4-way-stops since wait times are low.
Arterial crossings need to be grade separated. Cross traffic completely defeats the purpose of an arterial.
There is no one size fits all intersection.
>>968332
>actually building roundabouts
>one of the worst types of intersection in terms of pedestrian and cyclist safety
Fuck off cager.
>>968534
>Pretending to be a European who doesn't like roundabouts
You're not fooling anybody.
>>968634
You've just gotta design 'em right famalam
>>968667
How does right of way work for bikes?
>>968668
Just like it does with cars?
>>968668
Cars give way to bicycles & pedestrians.
Bicycles give way to pedestrians.
>>968273
>how did america fuck up intersections so badly?
There's no way in hell that's Murrica.
>>968667
so basically not gonna happen in an urban setting
>>968555
>Main problem with roundabouts in the US and trucks is that they're usually too small.
THIS
I have to look over my shoulder to see if I can merge, BUT I also have to look straight ahead to see if someone is merging in ahead of me.
>>968667
This looks a lot better than most traffic circles I've seen in the U.S.
this is the roundabout in cheyenne, wyoming USA.
people in this area tend to not acknowledge pedestrians, especially during rush hours though.
>>968725
that's san francisco you idiot
Just leaving this here.
>>968667
Why are the arrows backwards? That's just confusing.
>>968362
I have many times. It goes counterclockwise, the person to your left goes first but that's in the USA.
I have no idea what fucked up country op is from, hopefully not one with snow.
>>968754
>California
>USA
Pick one, the rest of us don't like your un-American commie ass.
>>968764
The rest of America is who California pretends to be in the movies.
>>968762
Are you retarded? It goes clockwise.
Jesus Christ, I thought you had to be 18 to post on this site.
>>968764
How come they still voted for Clinton?
>>968769
Wrong hemisphere
>>968789
Not all of us
>>968804
No you're wrong.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/NTI/Article/RightOfWay/RightOfWayRules.pdf
>>968822
I don't "feel" wrong.
Are you sure?
>>968534
You just said roundabouts are shit and then explained why they are by far the best? Are you retarded? Am I?
>>968667
That's still more dangerous than a four way stop dumbass (and far less space efficient). Drivers don't have to stop and look for pedestrians and cyclists before entering the intersection which increases the potential risk a of collision occuring.
>>968264
Use a roundabout ffs
>>968362
>come up to a four way stop with all signs filled.
seriously, who goes first here? i'm a euro and driving school told me that you yield to the right in cases like this, but if everyone has to yield to the right noone goes?
i had it happen to me in san francisco (the city is full of 4 way stops) and in the end i just drove first
I do because I'm late for work.
Do you not have laws against parking right next to pedestrian crossings?
Look at this shit. Its in my home town and this roundabout is heavily trafficated from a ferry nearby, meaning a lot of the people coming through here have never been here before.
Inconsistencies like this cause so many shitty, expensive minor incidents.
>>969076
What's the problem?
>>969081
In all the other entries the straight arrow is allied with the right turn, not the left. I assume that's the problem.
>>969081
I would guess anon means the circled area is left lane for straight through, whereas all the others are right lane for straight through.
>>969085
Ah
>>968977
>A well designed junction with clear separation and clear right-of-way priorities for motor vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians is less well designed than a box where the roads just come together head on and it's a free for all.
Yeah, nah.
>Drivers don't have to stop and look for pedestrians and cyclists before entering the intersection which increases the potential risk a of collision occuring.
Yeah, they don't have to stop and look. Apart from the bit where cyclists and pedestrians have priority, and the driver is liable if they don't yield and collide with a cyclist of pedestrian.
So yeah okay, apart from reality, cars don't need to slow down, look or give. Except they do obviously because we're not on opposite world.
But no you continue to believe that the entirely safe, utterly collision free not-a-free-for-all-at-all 4-way stops are safer. Even though every study ever in the entire history of people studying this stuff says otherwise. Yup.
>>969085
>>969086
The filter lanes will be designated according to the traffic flows; so the traffic study has shown people will want to turn right on that section, so there's a dedicated lane for it. On the others more traffic will enter the roundabout, so the filter lane is for that.
Also how in the fuck would anybody who had never used that junction know it was inconsistent? They just see the filter lane going right and use it. That's the entire reason for road markings; so you can see what you're supposed to do without any prior knowledge of the junction or road.
>>969089
Its inconsistent because adapting roundabouts for the flow of traffic doesn't happen here. Thats not a thing at all, this is the only case I have ever seen and I used to have a driving sales job, spending 6-7 hours a day in my car. In driving school we are taught that four-armed roundabouts are consistent.
Furthermore the arrows on the ground are covered by a queue of cars whenever ferry traffic comes through, which is 4-5 times an hour, and this is far from a high way, so there are no signs explaining the upcoming lanes.
>>969070
The first person to come to a stop goes, then it proceeds to the right from there. If everyone comes to a stop at the exact same time (which doesn't really happen, but people think it does because they're not paying attention to the other cars), then everyone stares at each other for a few seconds until someone decides to go, then it proceeds to the right from that person.
>>968757
Brit?
>>969088
>Even though every study ever in the entire history of people studying this stuff says otherwise
[citation needed]
>>968264
right-of-way for motor vehicle traffic simply goes first-stop-first-go.
i mean unless you're a wasp cunt in a luxury car, then laws don't matter and you can just go whenever or drive on the sidewalk. i mean you were probably too busy fucking around on your phone to notice the signage anyhow.
![[clapping intensifies].gif](https://i.imgur.com/2J9hvKD.gif "[clapping intensifies].gif")
>>968667
>blast through the roundabout
>use the curb in the middle as a jump
>clear that whole shrub
>hit the rear brake and slam right for a sick skid
>spray that cager with rocks
mtb dominance complete
>>970612
>Waste of space
Yet the Netherlands, one of the most densely populated nations in Europe, builds them like that all over the place.
So they can find space, but the US, once of the largest countries in the world, can't? Okay.
>not any safer
Sure. Mmmhmm.
>>970755
how do you integrate into older intersections?
not safer because you're still crossing pedestrian/cycling paths.
still have people who don't yield properly
though it saves time and fuel IF it's not busy
>>970755
>comparing the size of countries rather than the space used by the intersection
That has to be one of the dumbest fucking comparisons I've ever seen.
Just because a country happens to be densely populated doesn't mean they don't have green fields. More to the point, that thing is massive. So, good luck sticking something like that in one of those quaint little Dutch towns that Americans love to jerk off to.
>Sure. Mmmhmm.
>still hasn't provided any studies that demonstrate that roundabouts are safer for cyclists and pedestrians than four way stops
>>971013
>not safer because you're still crossing pedestrian/cycling paths.
With a well defined right-of-way between the three groups of users.
>>971096
How is it dumb? The USA is fucking HUGE. Why does it matter if you use a few extra square metres of space for every junction?
>Still thinks a well built junction with well defined right-of-way for three different classes of users is less safe than a Death Race 2000 free-for-all 4-way
American imperialism is a disease that is killing the country.
>>971154
>thinks that 4 way stops don't have defined priorities
>still hasn't showed any studies
Fuck off cager.
>>971237
Please show me where the 4-way stop has a defined priority for cyclists.
>>971381
Cyclists are required in my state to have and abide by all the rights and regulations that a motorized vechiechle would have.
So, my right of way as a cyclist is no different than it would be for a car.
>>971390
>So, my right of way as a cyclist is no different than it would be for a car.
Great. So it's less safe than the roundabout >>968667 which has separation of motor vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians, each with their own clearly defined priority: cars must give way to cyclists & pedestrians, cyclists must give way to pedestrians.
Properly designed roundabout > Properly designed traffic lights > double T-junction > 4-way stop
>>971396
It's only 'unsafe' because we don't enforce the laws we already have on the books.
If we made, re: enforced laws and punished, retarded cagers, they'd shape up into respectable motorists or be removed from the road.
>>970755
Yeah, and New Jersey is the densest state in the US. That just means a high ratio of settled area to farmland and wilderness. The actual cities and towns in the Netherlands are of fairly low density, especially by European standards, and there's plenty of suburban areas.
And of course, suburban areas are where they build roundabouts that are simultaneously giant and have low capacity, not in cities.
>>971549
I didn't like the answer I got, so I'll ignore it and ask again!
person on the right
hence "Right away"
me
>>971662
Why do you refuse to link to these "studies" you speak of?
>>972207
>Spoon-feed me!
>>972218
>>968755
This is retarded. Who ever made this happen should be shot.
>>969203
I thought they were little yield signs
>>968822
Why does this pdf refuse to open in the browser and instead demands to download the file?
>>969056
there is clearly not enough space for a roundabout
>>973376
>This is retarded
Looks perfectly okay to me. You go around it. Look, there are even arrows to show you which way to go.
>>973385
Because the idiot who maintains the web server(s) that are serving that file doesn't know how to map files to appropriate MIME types, and it is being presented to your browser with an inappropriate Content-Type header.
>>973377
>I thought they were little yield signs
I'm pretty sure you're right.
>>973507
It doesn't serve the function of a roundabout. It's just a regular intersection with unnecessary obstacles in the middle. Completely useless.
Who goes first here?
>>975268
top drives on the middle of the intersection and stops
right passes behind him
bottom passes
top turns left
>>975268
bottom, right, top.
>>975268
Right, bottom, top. Right can go, as bottom can pass behind him halfway, as can top pass bottom halfway. The quickest. Also helps to show who stopped first, since that is half the factoring. Regardless of position, the first who stops, is the first to go, but intersecting traffic is always last, due to right of way. Don't even have a license, but just how I've seen it my life.
>>975628
>top
but it is making a left turn
>>975692
Doesn't make a difference.
>>976075
but it means it has to yield to straight traffic
>>976084
Where does that sign have that meaning?
>>976090
making a left turn means you have to yield to straight traffic
>>976092
Where does that sign have that meaning?
>>976093
The sign means "roads with equal priority". It makes no difference if the sign is there or not. If you are making a left turn you have to yield to straight traffic.
>>976096
The sign is only used where 'priority to the right' is in force.
>>976099
Priority to the right is in force always on all intersections unless other signs change that.
these arent bad intersections
THIS IS A BAD INTERSECTION
theres a reason Massachusetts drivers are so agressive
>>976371
>>976100
Right, so the guy at the top goes first - no one to his right.
>>976453
>Suggesting a traffic circle for any reason at any time
What the hell is wrong with you?
>>976429
But it is making a left turn so it has to yield to straight traffic
>>976371
How is it bad?
>>976503
I haven't lived in worcester for a while but iirc all the streets flowing into the square have stop signs
you pretty much just have to keep moving once your in their and try not to hit anybody, the cops won't ticket you for weaving around cause if everyone actually was kind to each other the place would be deadlock 24/7 with the interstate feeding into it just a hundred yards away
Now, neither of them has anyone to their right. And they have to give way to the right, as reminded by the traffic sign. What do they do?
>>977041
The one intending to make a left indeed has someone to his right - within the scope of the maneuver to be undertaken. Turning left will place the other driver on his right, meaning yield.
Also, as a general rule, it is the person maneuvering that gives way.
>>977145
I think the other anon was envisioning straight traffic coming from the left in the picture instead of the top, with the left turning driver still at the bottom. That would put the turning driver to the right of the straight ahead traffic at all times during the maneuver, meaning the general rule that maneuvering drivers yield is suspended and the specific yield to right rule applies.
Yield to right is also a general rule where I happen to live. If no other rules override it, it is always in force in all intersections.
I find it hard to fathom how this simple rule can be so hard to fathom, but perhaps it's because I'm born with it.
>>968264
me
>>977166
This post made no sense. None of this made sense. There is no traffic coming from left, and the driver at the bottom is not making a left turn.
