I WANT - MARS

Palomar · 2003-08-26 09:50:14

I was at this year's conference, and last. I flew last year, but drove this year. It's 2,950km from Winnipeg to Eugene, each way.

*Eeeeee! {{jaw drops, hits keyboard}}

Winnipeg is really that far from Eugene, Oregon?!! My god. Not that I'm challenging Robert to recalculate the distance ("he brainiac, me rocks in head" when it comes to math)...I'm just stunned at that number.

Good grief. "Each way"...NOT round-trip. Good grief!

--Cindy

RobertDyck · 2003-08-26 10:00:31

Winnipeg is really that far from Eugene, Oregon?!!

I have a really easy way to calculate driving distance. Go to mappoint.msn.com (Microsoft bought MapBlast), and let them calculate the distance. Just select "Directions" then enter your starting and ending address, and whether you want the quickest or shortest route, miles or kilometers. Winnipeg is actually 2,945.5km from the Eugene Conference Center. ( Complete map ) I tried to drive it in a day and a half, but it took two full days. Returning I left Sunday evening after supper, and returned home Tuesday evening at about the same time. My Aztek has the camping package; I left the back seats at home and kept the air mattress inflated. It's as large as a double bed (full bed) so I used sheets instead of a sleeping bag. The back windows have "deep tint" and my vehicle came with a cloth screen that can be put up behind the front seats. When I got tired I just found a rest stop, used the built-in air pump to firm-up the mattress, set-up the screen and went to sleep.

Palomar · 2003-08-26 10:37:28

Winnipeg is really that far from Eugene, Oregon?!!
I have a really easy way to calculate driving distance. Go to mappoint.msn.com (Microsoft bought MapBlast), and let them calculate the distance. Just select "Directions" then enter you starting and ending address, and whether you want the quickest or shortest route, miles or kilometers. Winnipeg is actually 2,945.5km from the Eugene Conference Center. ( Complete map ) I tried to drive it in a day and a half, but it took two full days. Returning I left Sunday evening after supper, and returned home Tuesday evening at about the same time. My Aztek has the camping package; I left the back seats at home and kept the air mattress inflated. It's as large as a double bed (full bed) so I used sheets instead of a sleeping bag. The back windows have "deep tint" and my vehicle camp with a cloth screen that can be put up behind the front seats. When I got tired I just found a rest stop, used the built-in air pump to firm-up the mattress, set-up the screen and went to sleep.

*Well, Robert, I must say I admire your dedication to attending the MS conference. You apparently also had to drive through some rather intense mountain country. I hope your vehicle has the cruise-control option...I'm thinking "ankle fatigue" otherwise.

--Cindy

RobertDyck · 2003-08-26 10:51:48

I hope your vehicle has the cruise-control option...I'm thinking "ankle fatigue" otherwise.

Yup; cruise control, all wheel drive, and all the power toys. Did you know the speed limit is 75mph (120km/h) through North Dakota, Montana, and Idaho? I tried to drive straight through the night, but with construction blocking lanes and reducing speed, in the middle of the night and being tired from a long drive, I had to catch a nap in the Smokey Mountains. I didn't wake until just before dawn, which caused me to miss most of the first day of the conference. Oh, well; it was safer driving through the mountains during daylight.

Palomar · 2003-08-26 11:12:47

Robert: "Yup; cruise control, all wheel drive, and all the power toys. Did you know the speed limit is 75mph (120km/h) through North Dakota, Montana, and Idaho?

*I'm pretty sure I've known that, relative to those states. The speed limit on interstate and state roads in New Mexico is also 75 mph since 1993 or thereabouts (as well it should be, considering towns average 60 miles apart here).

Robert: "I tried to drive straight through the night, but with construction blocking lanes and reducing speed, in the middle of the night and being tired from a long drive, I had to catch a nap in the Smokey Mountains. I didn't wake until just before dawn, which caused me to miss most of the first day of the conference. Oh, well; it was safer driving through the mountains during daylight."

*I would say that was a wise decision. I remember going through those mountain passages twice, as a kid, on summer vacations with my parents. Talk about hairpin curves -- yikes. Nothing to mess around with when you're tired and it's dark outside, that's for sure.

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2003-08-26 19:27:23

It's interesting to hear that so many roads in U.S. states have a 75mph limit.
Here in Australia where the towns are pretty far apart too, especially in my state of Queensland, we have a blanket limit on the open road of 100kph (62.5mph).
The exception to this rule is in the Northern Territory, where most roads (and there aren't that many in the first place! ) have no limit at all, and on a few isolated stretches of multi-lane highway elsewhere, where the limit is 110kph.

Admittedly, some of the roads here may not be equal in quality to most of your roads, but in general people here think the limit is too low.
Our politicians see a car smash on a highway and immediately appear on TV to announce tighter speed controls, ostensibly to protect us from ourselves (as usual). Its good political grandstanding; showing 'genuine concern' for the electorate etc. But some of our limits on very high quality roads are now so low it takes a great deal of concentration just to stay under them! Sometimes I literally spend as much time checking my speedo as I do watching out for the inevitable klutzes we all share the roads with. I've taken to setting my cruise control wherever possible, even on relatively short suburban stretches, just so I can go back to watching the traffic instead of engaging in constant 'fine avoidance'.
All Australian state budgets are now so dependent upon speeding fines for revenue, it's unthinkable to raise speed limits anywhere because it would reduce state income. More speed cameras are being installed every month in Queensland and next year's budget has already factored in a major increase in speeding fine revenue! They simply can't afford to raise limits, ever ... even if common sense dictated it and even if they wanted to.

RobertDyck · 2003-08-26 20:27:55

In Canada the speed limit is also 100km/h in most areas, but it's 90km/h (55.9mph) for non-divided stretches such as the hairpin curves through the rocky land north of Lake Superior. The Smokey Mountains may have greater altitude, but the rock cuts reminded me of Highway 17, which is that section of the TransCanada highway. There is a short section of the TransCanada highway in Alberta west of Calgary to the Saskatchewan border that has a speed limit of 110km/h. There's as much oil in Alberta as Texas so they just had to show off. But you don't want to speed through Saskatchewan. The RCMP training academy is in the city of Regina so there are young officers patrolling the TransCanada in eastern Saskatchewan, just itching to give out their first speeding ticket. Not all provinces have provincial police; those that don't have the RCMP. Many small towns don't have municipal police either; there the provincial police serve, and if the province doesn't have any the RCMP serve as municipal police as well. You don't want to speed near the national training academy. I thought it better to drive through the States where it's legal to drive 120km/h.

Free Spirit · 2003-08-26 20:33:11

The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return.
Gore Vidal.

That seems to sum it up. I was reading a study that people tend to drive faster the wider the road gets. The so-called 'driving the geometry' theory. If that's true gov't should ensure that when building new roads the road design doesn't inherently induce people to drive faster than the limit. Of course knowing the way our illustrious public officials think they'll probably pass some law requiring roads to be superwide for 'safety' reasons and keep the speed limit ridiculously low. Can't say I'd find it shocking.

Palomar · 2003-08-27 06:05:23

I was reading a study that people tend to drive faster the wider the road gets. The so-called 'driving the geometry' theory. If that's true gov't should ensure that when building new roads the road design doesn't inherently induce people to drive faster than the limit.

*I could believe it. Our interstate highways are very nice (state roads are another story)...

Often when my husband and I drive 75 miles north to visit my mother-in-law in the nursing home, we'll be doing 70 or 75 mph, and very often a car behind us closes in fast, passes, and is soon out of sight. Some of these people are doing at least 100 mph. While the mountain ranges in this area lay miles away from the interstate highway, it is still hilly terrain with curvy roads; I honestly can't figure out how those folks zooming past can keep control of their vehicles. 75 mph is fast enough for me...thank you.

--Cindy

P.S.: A new subdivision east of town sports wide expanses of streets between blocks of home; one of these streets is so wide, I swear you could drive 3 semi-trailer trucks abreast down it, with room remaining on the sides.

Byron · 2003-08-27 06:16:01

All Australian state budgets are now so dependent upon speeding fines for revenue, it's unthinkable to raise speed limits anywhere because it would reduce state income. More speed cameras are being installed every month in Queensland and next year's budget has already factored in a major increase in speeding fine revenue! They simply can't afford to raise limits, ever ... even if common sense dictated it and even if they wanted to.

So you have the Gestapo in Australia, too ???

It seems that the "greed disease" has spread its tenacles throughout the governments of the world, who seem hell-bent on squeezing every last penny from the financially-deprived masses. At least we don't have speed cameras here in Fl...at least not yet...although speed enforcement is becoming more strict than it used to, especially in local districts. And the fines are going higher...much higher - what used to be a $50 ticket is now starts at $150 and goes up...and Florida is pretty average in this respect.

Granted, out on the open interstates (here in Fl,) the cops will generally let you run 10 mph (actually up to 13 over, according to "inside" sources) over the posted speed limit, which means I can roll at 80 and feel pretty safe (and most people do as well,) but I notice that some other states, like North Carolina, are rather strict, even on the rural stretches of interstate...75 mph is about all you can get away with there.

In my opinion, high speeds are not the primary cause of traffic accidents - bad drivers are. If this country would simply mandate German-style driver training (the best and safest drivers in the world), we would save 1000's of lives each and every year. Also, by making it difficult, expensive and time-consuming to get a driver's license, it would help take some of the cars off the road over time, as people choose not to bother, which would help open up the clogged roads for the rest of us "good" drivers...

Itll never happen, of course, but I can't help but to dream on occasion...lol..

B

Palomar · 2003-08-27 06:33:51

All Australian state budgets are now so dependent upon speeding fines for revenue, it's unthinkable to raise speed limits anywhere because it would reduce state income. More speed cameras are being installed every month in Queensland and next year's budget has already factored in a major increase in speeding fine revenue! They simply can't afford to raise limits, ever ... even if common sense dictated it and even if they wanted to.
So you have the Gestapo in Australia, too ???

*Cameras might not always be such a bad thing, especially at busy intersections. In my city, people are notorious for running red lights...I mean, I've seen people run red lights even after it's been green for the opposite lanes for up to 3, even 4 seconds! This is a very real, very consistent problem in Las Cruces. I -always- look both ways before driving past side roads, through intersections, etc. After 11 years of living here!

If one of those as*holes ever broadsides/plows into me and I'm injured, etc., I'd definitely like a little video tape to help me in court -- if for any reason to secure insurance payments for hospitalization, car repair, etc.!

I try to see issues like this from *all* angles. Although I admit I prefer a minimum of cameras in public life.

--Cindy

clark · 2003-08-27 06:35:46

Just a quick question, and in my own experience, I have deserved every single speeding ticket I have ever gotten.

Has anyone ever received a speeding ticket they didn't deserve?

:laugh:

Don't say, "everyone else was speeding faster..."

It's like saying, "everyone else was looting..."

getting a ticket is a frustrating experience. Paying them is like root canal. Still, I like the reassurance everytime I use a crosswalk. :;):

sethmckiness · 2003-08-27 07:02:12

I know the stop-light cameras in Sacramento were repealed, between the problems, and questionable nature of the constituitionality of them. About keeping control of a vehicle at 100+ mph, that is a formula of tires, breaks, suspension, and aerodynamics. The biggest factors are Tires and Shock absorbers. The tires need to be able to grip, and not melt at high speeds, and the shocks need to dampen enough to keep the car stable. The rest is driver capability. Driving within your limits, and your vehicles limits. On Interstates in California I averaged 90. But I knew the limitations of my vehicle, and kept it maintained. While I was speeding, I don't feel I was being unsafe.

Byron · 2003-08-27 09:40:24

I try to see issues like this from *all* angles. Although I admit I prefer a minimum of cameras in public life.

Nothing wrong with that....in fact, I wouldn't be opposed to *limited* use of intersection cameras in locations with a history of accidents. In my opinion, these cameras should be clearly marked (like in L.A.), and they should only be used to *enhance safety* as opposed to fattening some city's coffers. It would be a good idea to take things like traffic fines and shunt them directly into things such as purchasing health insurance for children, scholarships, etc...this way, there's no preverse incentive to set up "trick" cameras just for collecting fines in order to supplement municipal budgets, such as the city (I forget where) that put up a traffic light camera along a street with numerous stoplights, except that this particular traffic light only had a "yellow time" of 2.5 seconds, as opposed to 4 seconds for all the other lights along that particular street. Talk about entrapment! (Some guy sued over this and won...lol)

I'm all for safety and all of that, but ways need to be found to keep our dollars out of the greedy hands of our elected officials.

B

clark · 2003-08-27 09:47:21

I'm all for safety and all of that, but ways need to be found to keep our dollars out of the greedy hands of our elected officials.

I think they call it 'voting' in the States. It may differ in other parts of the globe though.

Bill White · 2003-08-27 15:36:30

Has anyone ever received a speeding ticket they didn't deserve?

Yeah! Me!

I am perfect.

The police are always wrong when they give ME a ticket.

Josh Cryer · 2003-08-27 16:09:14

I think about all the speeding tickets I deserved but didn't get. I've only had two in my life, that I recall. The rest were freebies.

Now, I've gotten ticketed several times for jaywalking, though. I see absolutely no good reason to go to the crosswalk midday when traffic is slow as hell, or late at night when it's even slower. And I see no good reason to ticket someone who is ?jaywalking? when they're not bothering anyone or endangering themselves (had I walked in the middle of a busy street, then certainly, it would be deserved).

alokmohan · 2003-09-20 04:43:19

Cindy you go.Why not go alone?I encourage.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2003-08-26 09:50:14

Re: I WANT - MARS

#27 2003-08-26 10:00:31

Re: I WANT - MARS

#28 2003-08-26 10:37:28

Re: I WANT - MARS

#29 2003-08-26 10:51:48

Re: I WANT - MARS

#30 2003-08-26 11:12:47

Re: I WANT - MARS

#31 2003-08-26 19:27:23

Re: I WANT - MARS

#32 2003-08-26 20:27:55

Re: I WANT - MARS

#33 2003-08-26 20:33:11

Re: I WANT - MARS

#34 2003-08-27 06:05:23

Re: I WANT - MARS

#35 2003-08-27 06:16:01

Re: I WANT - MARS

#36 2003-08-27 06:33:51

Re: I WANT - MARS

#37 2003-08-27 06:35:46

Re: I WANT - MARS

#38 2003-08-27 07:02:12

Re: I WANT - MARS

#39 2003-08-27 09:40:24

Re: I WANT - MARS

#40 2003-08-27 09:47:21

Re: I WANT - MARS

#41 2003-08-27 15:36:30

Re: I WANT - MARS

#42 2003-08-27 16:09:14

Re: I WANT - MARS

#43 2003-09-20 04:43:19

Re: I WANT - MARS

Board footer