Where I live, we have two recently redesigned intersections, in which left hand turns have been eliminated. Called double crossover diamond interchange, it basically eliminates the need for left hand turns in front of oncoming traffic. At the North Carolina State University they have a similar proposal to reroute traffic by eliminating left turns at intersections. The new design is not meant for freeways, but instead is meant for thoroughfares where side streets intersect.
What is impressive about the super street design is that it is estimated that the design will reduce travel time by about 20%. In addition this type of traffic design will also reduce fuel usage by making traffic move more efficiently. Below is a picture of the proposed super street design:
In a recent article it also states that:
The researchers assessed travel time at superstreet intersections as the amount of time it takes a vehicle to pass through an intersection from the moment it reaches the intersection – whether traveling left, right or straight ahead. The travel-time data were collected from three superstreets located in eastern and central North Carolina, all of which have traffic signals. The superstreet collision data were collected from 13 superstreets located across North Carolina, none of which have traffic signals.
The superstreet concept has been around for over 20 years, but little research had been done to assess its effectiveness under real-world conditions. The NC State study is the largest analysis ever performed of the impact of superstreets in real traffic conditions.
The complete paper will be presented on January 24, 2011 to the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C. , and hopefully the design will be under consideration in future designs.
In addition to smoother traffic flow, the new design will also reduce traffic collisions by an estimated 63%.
What do you think of the idea?
Source – North Carolina State University
Once we go through the hassles of the airport security checks, one would think that security issues would be put aside. But on a flight from Boston to Washington, DC other passengers alerted crew members to what they thought was a suspicious package. It turns out the suspicious package was a set of keys, a bagel with cream cheese and a hat. Yet the man was arrested and was removed from the flight after he became upset by the accusations.
When the passenger was confronted by crew members he attempted to make a cell call. He was asked to hang up the phone and when he refused he was cuffed and arrested.
In a recent article it also stated that:
Recently, passenger complaints have resulted authorities taking action against innocent passengers who went to the bathroom too often on a flight and who were just being annoying.
In the hyper-sensitive world of flying, sneezing too often could get you kicked off a flight and questioned by the FBI.
Are passengers becoming to suspicious? Or are they just being cautious?
These questions need to be answered and air crew members trained in what is and what is not suspicious behavior. I don’t believe anyone would want to let something suspicious activity go unanswered, but who decides what is or is not suspicious?
What do you think?
Source – NBC Miami
If you believe that DIRECTV has misled you in their offers or that you were charged fees illegally, you may be entitled restitution from DIRECTV. The company has settled an agreement with all 50 state Attorney Generals, including the District of Columbia, and will pay back some $13 million dollars to consumers. DIRECTV customers must file a claim within their state by June 9, 2011 in order to receive compensation.
Here is what the alleged claims against DIRECTV are:
- Failed to disclose clearly its prices and commitment terms.
- Failed to disclose clearly its promotional prices.
- Signed you up for contract terms without clearly disclosing the terms.
- Failed to disclose clearly that it would automatically renew a seasonal sports package.
- Advertised but failed to provide local channels in your programming area.
- Enrolled you without your consent in additional contracts when DIRECTV replaced defective equipment.
- Withdrew funds from your bank account without your consent.
- Failed to disclose clearly that it charged a fee if you cancelled a programming agreement before the end of the contract term.
- Extended your contracts without your consent.
- Failed to disclose that their rebates were bill credits that you had to sign up for on DIRECTV’s website.
It appears that the problem is being caused by third-party vendors that may stretch the truth in their offerings. I receive advertisements continually from third-party vendors offering DIRECTV plans that seem to good to be true. DIRECTV has stated that they are in the process of fixing the problem and want their customers to know what they are or are not getting and do not want the customer confused.
Will you be filing a claim against DIRECTV? If you are, what will you claim you were confused by? Let us know.
Source – Consumer Reports
Link to state attorney general offices