TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Radar Detectors

Re: Radar Detectors

R. T. Wurth (
Thu, 20 Jan 2005 10:57:12 GMT

Steve Sobol <> wrote in

> abbygale wrote:

>> If you research the issue, you'll find that locales fond of the
>> 'red-light cameras' have nearly all decreased the "yellow" times to
>> make the systems more *profitable*. It's about revenue, not safety
>> and it's just another tax.

> I've about had it with those stupid intersections around here. Most
> have reasonable timing, but some don't. This is the big, empty Mojave
> Desert, and we do have SURFACE streets with speed limits of 60 and
> even 65 mph here (granted, the 65 mph highway is US 395 coming out of
> this area into the middle of nowhere, but it's still a 65 mph,
> *two-lane* highway). There are certain intersections where, if I see
> the light turn yellow, I only have a few seconds to slam on my
> brakes. Disgusting.

> - Apple Valley, CA - - 888.480.4NET
> (4638) Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / / PGP:
> 0xE3AE35ED

(This is a bit far afield for Telecom Digest, but here goes anyway.)

There are national standards incorporated in the Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). I don't know about California, but
here in New Jersey, it is legally hard for a government to erect and
enforce a traffic control device that doesn't conform, although there
is a procedure for legalizing exceptions. If you read up, you may
discover standards for yellow light intervals as a function of speed
limit and other conditions. Then you would need to see if CA has
adopted the manual, added state-wide amendments and/or allowed local

-- Rich Wurth / / Rumson, NJ 07760 USA

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Tony P.: "Re: Radar Detectors"
Go to Previous message: Telecom dailyLead from USTA: "Wireless Internet Moves Into Spotlight"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page