Monopolizing a public thoroughfare for the duration it takes one elongated vehicle to pass another with a 3MPH delta should be illegal enough to result in a fine when it impedes the free flow of traffic IMO. For as much as claims of safety are thrown about, people should spend more time looking at how congestion causes and compounds accidents.
Maybe if they weren't over-regulated* and actually assigned the costs associated with blocking traffic, the trucking companies could come up with something as novel as a 'governor override budget'. I.e., "If you find yourself in a situation where you need to pass and it'd be best for everyone involved if you actually get it over with, you may do so. Just don't expect to spend the whole trip at the higher speeds because you only accrue so many override minutes per hour and you need to save them for complications that may arise. There are gas prices to consider, after all."
If we're going to insist on having humans behind the wheel, I assume it's because they have the capacity to reason. Ultimately, we need to incent them properly and then trust their judgement.
* Speed limits significantly below the 85th percentile of traffic == revenue. Also, penalizing motorists (who have, by definition, opted out of public transportation) by failing to build additional, needed lanes.
>Monopolizing a public thoroughfare for the duration it takes one elongated vehicle to pass another with a 3MPH delta should be illegal enough to result in a fine when it impedes the free flow of traffic IMO.
have you ever drove a U-Haul truck? Let alone a 40 ton one? Do you understand the accident risk (and scale of a damage, just an example of pretty light one http://www.10news.com/news/24315900/detail.html) of a fully loaded semi trailer making a pass at - how fast would you like it to go instead of 68mph? - would 80mph be enough for you? Do you really think you're a better judge of how to safely drive the truck than the truck driver actually driving it and who does have economic incentive to go as fast as it is possible while still ensure the high probability of making it to the destination?
We seem to be in agreement that our wised truck driver should be the judge of whether or not it's safe to pass. My point is that, should he judge the speed of his peer (who he's stuck behind at 65MPH) to be intolerably low, he should not have the option to pass at a reasonable rate precluded by a bureaucrat who lacks his experience and detailed knowledge of the situation.
How fast? In Minnesota (where I'm from and also where the article was published) I can tell you offhand that a recent figure for the 85th percentile speed on rural freeways is 79MPH (that means three out of every 20 drivers are going even faster). Does the truck need to go that fast? Only if it's in the left lane while cars are present.
Maybe if they weren't over-regulated* and actually assigned the costs associated with blocking traffic, the trucking companies could come up with something as novel as a 'governor override budget'. I.e., "If you find yourself in a situation where you need to pass and it'd be best for everyone involved if you actually get it over with, you may do so. Just don't expect to spend the whole trip at the higher speeds because you only accrue so many override minutes per hour and you need to save them for complications that may arise. There are gas prices to consider, after all."
If we're going to insist on having humans behind the wheel, I assume it's because they have the capacity to reason. Ultimately, we need to incent them properly and then trust their judgement.
* Speed limits significantly below the 85th percentile of traffic == revenue. Also, penalizing motorists (who have, by definition, opted out of public transportation) by failing to build additional, needed lanes.