this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2024
714 points (96.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

13383 readers
333 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
714
Wank tank confirmed (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by CowsLookLikeMaps@sh.itjust.works to c/fuckcars@lemmy.world
 

BTW the tank has a better forward view than the truck

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 161 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Just gonna keep on posting this

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 84 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There really should be legal requirements for sightlines like this for most vehicles on the road.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 38 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That’s a good temporary fix but the long term solution is to get rid of stroads and get back to proper separation between streets (which are narrow, one way, and walkable) and roads (which have a high speed limit, very few intersections, and no driveways). This would dramatically cut down on the number of encounters between pedestrians and cars, while also making suburbs much more walkable and livable.

Streetcar suburbs, the most desirable neighbourhoods to live in, are illegal to build in most cities!

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 42 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

We could do both. I don't see how increasing visibility is a "temporary fix", I see that as a safety improvement regardless of how well designed a street is. Even the safest designed street is even safer by increasing the visibility a driver has. It also just makes driving easier in general.

Edit: it is also an unfortunate reality that people run over their own children or pets in their own driveway and better sightlines can reduce this risk.

[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 28 points 10 months ago (1 children)

10 meter visibility is fucking insane. How is that not illegal.

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Because when laws and policies are first made with the assumption people aren't assholes. We literally believed people will do the right thing.

All the addendums were to fix asshole behaviors.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 10 months ago

Yeah you really gotta design your laws with the assumption that someone will try to abuse it in one way or another. You need to red-team your bills.

[–] ComicalMayhem@lemmy.world 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

it bothers me a little that it's not in order

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

It's in an order: height of the front of the vehicle from the ground.

[–] Tower@lemm.ee 17 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

It's grill height until the first kid shows up, then it's the distance away from the vehicle at which the kid becomes visible.

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Ahh, nice clarification!

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (2 children)

It's only in that order for the first half of the chart then it gets a little jumbled

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Kinda, yeah. Looks like it's mostly typical household cars, and then 3 examples of taller vehicles with actually better angles of vision.

[–] laurelraven@lemmy.zip 2 points 10 months ago

Not jumbled, it's the distance to seeing the kid after that

[–] ComicalMayhem@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

oh hey it is. dunno how I didn't notice that

[–] ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

i know this is anecdotal but i've sat up front in the bajaj re tuktuk. one can almost see the single front wheel from that position -- visibility for that one vehicle is definitely closer than the 2 meters shown in this graphic.