Your Car Will Tell You How To Hit the Next Green Light

cartechboy (2660665) writes "Hitting that red light sucks. We've all been there, and you know what I'm talking about. But what if your car could tell you the ideal speed to maintain to hit the next green light? That's exactly what's going to happen in the near future thanks to car-to-car technology. Many automakers are already working on this new tech, and Honda's the latest to trial such systems. This is all part of what's known as Universal Traffic Management System which will eventually provide feedback on car-to-car and infrastructure systems before they go into practical use. The system will also be able to tell the driver if a red light is likely to show before reaching an intersection so the driver can slow down, or notify the driver when that red light will turn green. All of this may seem like something that's supposed to benefit the driver's temper, but in reality it's to help save fuel and lower emissions without any physical changes to the car. This is the future, and your vehicle will talk to other vehicles whether you like it or not."

Comments

Its called paying attention

[kid_wonder]

Isn't this why they put those countdown timers on the crosswalks?

Re:Its called paying attention

[bondsbw]

This would be great if all or most of traffic signals had countdown timers or even the Walk/Don't Walk signal. But they don't.

I like a system I saw in Mexico and I've heard exists elsewhere, where the green light flashes for a few seconds before turning yellow. Requires no extra signage, still gets the point across and makes for safer intersections.

Re:Its called paying attention

[ShanghaiBill]

Isn't this why they put those countdown timers on the crosswalks?

No, those are for pedestrians. But many countries put BIG count down timers next to the traffic lights for drivers, such as this one in China. I have never understood why these haven't caught on in America. They provide all the benefits of the fancy car-to-car technology in TFA, plus have the added benefit of working with existing cars. Traffic flows more smoothly, accidents are reduced, gas is conserved, and the cost is minimal.

Re:Its called paying attention

[Mr0bvious]

Actually I think the count down timers are somewhat superior to the car-to-car-trafficControlSystem tech with regards to:

1) Works for ALL cars that already exist.
2) Doesn't require interfacing the car to the traffic control system (which are different in many countries - we use SCATS here in most of Australia).
3) Doesn't require the traffic control system to interface with external networks (eliminating a possible attack vector).

Re:Its called paying attention

[AmiMoJo]

The idea is that when you are 1000m away from the light and can't see the countdown timer your car tells you something like "maintain 30kph to avoid having to stop". By driving slower than you normally would you reach the light just as it goes green again, rather than having to stop/start.

Re:Its called paying attention

[DickBreath]

> The idea is that when you are 1000m away from the light and can't see the countdown
> timer your car tells you something like "maintain 30kph to avoid having to stop".

It would be much more welcome news to hear my car tell me: "increase speed to 85 mph to avoid having to stop".

Re:Its called paying attention

[mcrbids]

Ha ha... paying attention goes oh so much deeper than countdown timers...

What most people don't know is that you can improve your fuel economy rather dramatically using a variety of techniques commonly referred as "Hyper-miling". I didn't think much of it myself until I got a car that has a fuel economy computer built into the dash, and then it started to click.

See, brakes are death to fuel economy. Sounds obvious, but what isn't obvious is what that translates to in real world use.

Example: negotiating a red light. Most people don't pay attention to red lights until they are half a block or so away. If it's red, they start to apply the brake, and then as the light stubbornly refuses to turn green, they apply more and more brake until they stop behind the next car. Which is exactly the *wrong* way to get best fuel economy. Instead, you should be looking ahead as far as possible, and apply the brake as early as possible to reduce speed as early as possible to increase the amount of time it takes to cover the block distance while losing as little forward momentum as possible. Instead of waiting until the last minute and losing all forward momentum, you brake early and keep perhaps 30 MPH. This means that you don't have to accelerate to 30 MPH and you save that much fuel.

It was rather surprising to me how much difference I could accomplish using these techniques! On the freeway, if I drive around 50 MPH unless going up a hill, then more like 40-45, the normal 25-28ish MPG becomes closer to 34 MPG. Around the town, normally, my car (a 4-seat Chrysler convertible) gets around 18-20 MPG, but using these techniques about braking and reduced acceleration, I can get over 30 MPG on town surface streets! (flat land) Unfortunately, I do have to get used to being flipped off in order to achieve this.

In any event, you *can* get a rather sharp increase in fuel economy by paying attention to the forces of momentum, timing and friction.

Re:Its called paying attention

[Anonymous Coward]

Err, no. Germany has red - red+yellow - green - yellow - red. No blinking involved. And yes, red-yellow means "get ready".
Austria has the same plus flashing green before yellow.

Re:Its called paying attention

[bondsbw]

I'm not completely sold on the Michigan Left. Not completely discounting it either, but it tends to cause potentially deadly confusion in areas that aren't used to it.

A nearby city recently added a few in an area with heavy traffic, and the day after (even with plenty of signage) an elderly couple got trapped taking a left at an intersection they had taken daily for years and were killed when an 18-wheeler hit their vehicle.

Re:Its called paying attention

[BasilBrush]

Does the China system only countdown to the next green? Or does it also countdown to the next red.

The former is a good thing, and is a parallel to the technology in TFA. The latter is a bad thing that would encourage speeding to beat the red. So I hope it isn't that.

As to the fancy car-to-car technology - autonomous cars are coming. Stepping stone technologies such as these will inevitably come along before full autonomy. That's the way to judge them - skate to where the puck is going rather than where it is.

Re:Its called paying attention

[Razed By TV]

I'm not sure why this is modded insightful.

First off, they put the timers on the crosswalks for the *pedestrians* who use the crosswalks. It just so happens to greatly benefit drivers who can make a better judgement on how fast to go.

Second, big surprise, not all intersections have those countdown timers. I find that most don't.

Third, if there is no countdown, and you are unfamiliar with the intersection, or the internal timer has schedules/triggers you cant depend on, no amount of paying attention is going to give you the optimal speed.

Finally, why is all of this important? For starters, it will cut down on accidents. I've been rear ended stopping quickly at a light that I wasn't sure I could make. The guy behind me still thought he could make it. Easily solved by him paying better attention? Maybe. More easily solved by both of us having information to make better decisions. Definitely. Secondly, the amount of gas that is wasted every day, by people accelerating up to lights that they don't know are going to turn red, must be astonishing. I can think of at least two stretches of road near me with limits of 45-50 where I can, from idle, hit 50 just in time for the next light to change, and do it 3 times in a row. Waste of gas, wear on my brakes, and bad for the environment.

Re:Its called paying attention

[bzipitidoo]

This kind of anti-social road operation is common. Many merchants want people sitting at the intersections where their stores are, with nothing to look at but the stores. Rich and politically well connected businesses can get traffic lights added to the entrance of their businesses. I know of at least one country club that serves the superrich, and not only did they get a stoplight, it also severly favors their entrance, truning green for them the instant anyone wants out, and screw the 6 lanes of traffic on the major street. Toll road operators want free side roads to be inadequate, badly maintained, and jammed with traffic lights. Revenue hungry cities are always running speed traps, red light camera programs, and the like, and calculatedly neglecting problems such as foliage that blocks signs.

Charles City, Iowa had a place where 3 streets cross the highway, and all 3 have traffic lights. But, not the same style of traffic light. The 2 on the end have the lights hanging from arms that reach over the highway, while the middle one has only a vertical post and buildings right at the corner, all which makes it harder to see. Of course the lights are mistimed, so that when the 2 on the end turn green, the one in the middle turns red. There's a bypass now. Olney, Texas had 3 lights, 2 in their tiny downtown area, and 1 about a mile down the highway, nearly impossible to see because it was a temporary that hung from a wire, and the trees on either side had grown out over the highway and obscured the traffic light. You could not see the light until you were less than a block away, and even then, you had to know where to look. I heard an allegation that completion of I49 through Alexandria, Louisiana was delayed for several years by a local politician who owned a restaurant on the old road.

Re:Its called paying attention

[TangoMargarine]

Yeah, my first thought when I read the summary was, "This only works if the projected speed is the same or lower"...wouldn't knowing how much to accelerate to make the light mean that other drivers would less accurately predict the speed at which you're likely to be traveling through the intersection?

But I'm generally paranoid when driving, especially at stoplights. Ever since I was driving down a straight 4-lane-wide-in-one-direction road (in the second-left lane!) and another driver turned on and randomly wandered into my obviously occupied lane, I assume all drivers are maximally incompetent.

Re:Its called paying attention

[Sarten-X]

That seems correct. As a Michigan native, I can tell you they're best described as "really not that bad".

As a pedestrian, there's no "left turn" phase at lights, so the pedestrian crossings are more frequent, but that's offset by the longer green lights. You end up waiting the same amount of time, but have a longer time with clear right-of-way (though it should be noted that many states' laws explicitly give right-of-way to pedestrians who started crossing legally).

As a driver, direct left turns are still more convenient for a very busy intersection, but for something like a boulevard with businesses on each side, occasional U-turn spaces are a nicer alternative to a center turn lane. There are no conflicts with oncoming traffic and no traffic backups in unplanned spaces. Since the "left turn" maneuver is split into three components, the maximum complexity of each maneuver is reduced - at no point do you have to be concerned with more than one direction of traffic flow.

Once I got used to those several maneuvers, I found navigating Michigan lefts to be easier than a direct left turn. Shifting to the left lane for the U-turn could be done at my leisure, and it didn't matter if I miss the first U-turn, as I could expect another soon.

Re:Its called paying attention

[dcw3]

Your anecdote aside, Michigan Lefts have proven in studies to be safer. Implementation of just a few w/o warning the general populace, is likely the only cause of the problem you cited.

Wikipedia:
Studies have shown a major reduction in left-turn collisions and a minor reduction in merging and diverging collisions, due to the shifting of left turns outside the main intersection.[1] In addition it reduces the number of different traffic light phases, significantly increasing traffic flow. Since separate phases are no longer needed for left turns, this increases green time for through traffic. The effect on turning traffic is mixed

The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is all the people behind you that will speed up and tailgate you so you can they can have the pleasure of sitting at a red light faster. Your car, in a 35 mph zone - tells you to go 20mph to avoid the red - the person behind you tailgates you and honks their horn.

Re:The problem

[Cryacin]

That's when you start driving 10 mph

Re:The problem

[Anonymous Coward]

If cars are slowing down so that they can hit the next light green instead of red, then there will be some cars further back that are slowed down instead that hit the light red instead of green. This is a zero-sum game and adding complexity just for complexities' sake is never a good solution. You should always move as quickly as possible to your next waypoint. If you get stopped there, so be it - regenerative braking is the answer to that problem.

Re:The problem

[BasilBrush]

If cars are slowing down so that they can hit the next light green instead of red, then there will be some cars further back that are slowed down instead that hit the light red instead of green.

No. The system is advising you so that you can go through the next green without having stopping first. There is nothing to be gained by those behind you to have you arrive at the red signal and stop, before starting again. That would actually mean you went through the green light later (having to start moving from a stop), and so would be more likely to delay the people behind you and make them more likely to hit a red.

Count down clocks on signals?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

Even in India there are count down clocks on many signals, telling you how many seconds of red is remaining or how many seconds of green is remaining. Just simple feedback like this would reduce accidents and save fuel for the drivers. This technology is easier to implement in a phased manner all over the country rather than fancy-nancy technology involving "the cloud" and such stuff.

Part of this is a late April fools joke.

[thegarbz]

The system will also be able to tell the driver if a red light is likely to show before reaching an intersection so the driver can slow down.

Ok all you slashdotters under the age of 75. Do any of you actually think anyone would slow down if there's a chance of hitting an upcoming red light?

Based on what I see on the roads on a daily basis some people don't even slow down when they know the red light is imminent. Instead they try to turn it green again through a lame 150hp attempt at changing its colour via doppler effect.

Re:Part of this is a late April fools joke.

[photonic]

True story: The lecturer that taught us general relativity at university was a fantastic guy that was also pretty good at drawing cartoons. For one of the questions on the final exam, he drew a scene of a guy being stopped by a policeman: "I am stopping you for crossing the red light." "I saw it as green, I swear officer." "Fine, then I will write you a ticket for speeding." The question was to calculate the speed of the car, given the wavelengths of green and red light and the velocity of light.

Re:Part of this is a late April fools joke.

[HnT]

Real world examples: in certain towns in Austria the red-green phases are synced up to the speed limits in such a way that you will continue having "green" when you stay within the limit.

In the Netherlands, speed limits on the freeways are set to prevent traffic jams from building up and people are quite likely to follow the limits because they know they won't get stuck in jams that way.

Green wave system

[Knightman]

In some parts of the world they have dynamic speed signs that tells what speed you need to drive to hit each traffic light when they are green, aka. a green wave. Works like a charm no matter what kind of vehicle you are driving.

Stop signs and lights everywhere.

[Konowl]

Stop putting stop signs/lights every 50 feet. Build more roundabouts.

Why the hell do I have to stop at a stop sign at 3 in the morning with no one in site and waste gas. Make it a mini-roundabout. Teach people how to drive.

Re:Stop signs and lights everywhere.

[steelfood]

Teach people how to drive.

We're having trouble teaching people even the most basic things like arithmetic. What makes you think there's any hope for a complex skill like driving?

Wrong assumption

[smooth wombat]

This article presumes people give a rat's ass about saving fuel or driving safely. As those of us who drive on a regular basis can attest, more and more people seem to be of the mindset that no matter what, they will accelerate as hard as possible just so they can slam on the brakes as hard as possible at every opportunity.

This morning I had a guy literally on my rear bumper (less than 1 meter) and when it looked like there might be an opportunity for him to jump into the lane next to get around around me, he tried to take it. Unfortunately for him he misjudged the line of cars in that lane and had to swerve back behind me.

He wasn't going to get anywhere faster as there was a red light for us (a left turn), and he would have only gotten one car ahead, but by golly he was going to use every drop of fuel he possibly could just to try and do it.

I, and others, can relate story after story about people like this, and the only thing this proposal will do is add costs to vehicles (and those driving them when the system breaks down), cause more people to try and beat the red light which means more accidents, as well as people slamming on their brakes when they misjudge the timing, also causing more accidents.

Once again, we are trying to find a technical solution to a human problem rather than fixing the human problem.

Re:Wrong assumption

[wonkey_monkey]

If anyone gets to within 1m of me at any kind of speed I'll slow down, to a crawl if necessary, until they get the hint*. Partly for both our safety, but also because it's fun to be a jerk to jerks.

*this rarely happens.

Don't listen to that blue sedan in the right lane

[youn]

it lies a lot and has no clue on traffic :p

Anger Management Classes to Follow

[lazarus]

Except that the massive pickup behind me who is driving 3 inches from my bumper revving his engine and cussing has no idea why I'm driving as slow as I am. I drive a VW clean diesel and my fuel economy (on average over three years) is already over 50mpg from driving like this as often as possible. Trust me, this initiative will go absolutely nowhere until the cars are driving themselves. You can't change human behaviour like you are hoping to. Even when they can see the red light in front of them people MUST get there as quickly as possible so they can stop and wait.

Hint: Drivers are morons.

[Lumpy]

We need this "tech" only because the average driver is a complete and utter moron. we need lane assist because looking out the front window is hard, we need Light timing assist, because paying attention and thinking is hard, we need backup cameras because actually looking behind us is hard.

As a motorcyclist of 30 years, I have watched how the average car driver has turned into complete drooling morons every year. And the auto companies are catering to them.

Lights always green for me!

[ai4px]

Gosh, I just put an IR emitter on my dash flashing at 14.025hz and the lights are always green for me.... what's so new in TFA?

Making waves in traffic

[Afty0r]

So correct me if I'm wrong, but if all drivers adopted this, wouldn't it result in traffic in a lane approaching a light from converging together into "clumps" or "waves"?

Cars near the front of any given clump would be slowing down in order to arrive at the light after it has stopped being red and become green. (Close) Behind those cars would cars which would have passed through during the green interval regardless of this system. At the back of a clump would be cars who are speeding up to attempt to "get in" on that same green signal.

Ultimately it would result in cars travelling very close together, with huge spaces between "convoys". It might even be more efficient, so sure - but while there are still humans behind the wheel, this seems dangerous as everyone will always be "tailgating". Once CPUs are behind all the wheels, it will be trivial to implement using the "Internet of Things".

Re:Making waves in traffic

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

We already have those kinds of convoys, as anyone crossing at unlighted intersections can tell you.

Are we slaves to the future?

[PseudoCoder]

"This is the future, and your vehicle will talk to other vehicles whether you like it or not."

*This is the future, and your car will have a backup camera whether you like it or not.

*This is the future, and we've "proven" eating beef is evil and you will have to eat plants, whether you like it or not.

*This is the future, and your privacy is a luxury which you will be forced to give up for the "greater good", whether you like it or not.

*This is the future, and "evil" money doesn't exist so you will live by an advanced, centrally controlled credit system which is "fair and equitable" whether you like it or not.

*This is the future, and the government will have its hands in all aspects of your life whether you like it or not.

Nazi eugenics were the future too, until people realized that its practical implementation boiled down to genocide. Now they're an ugly part of the past that should remind us we can't fix human. But doesn't stop "the enlightened ones" from trying because it makes us feel good. Now I'm not against the future. I have more LED bulbs in my house than most people, and I'm going to get a Tesla as soon as I can afford one. I hate red lights as much as anyone, but how much of our humanity will we give up for the sake of "the future". Let's just be careful with this line of thought where we must sacrifice everything for a Utopian future that will never exist.

Re:In a society that has destroyed all adventure

[CanHasDIY]

the only adventure left is to destroy society.

For some reason, when I read your title+post, I heard it in Don LaFontaine's voice, may he rest in peace.

LOL I do that now with my brain

[stevegee58]

Instead of going the speed limit until the last second and braking at a red light, I take my foot off the gas and coast up to it. Frequently I never have to use the brake at all.
Unfortunately it drives the type-A drivers behind me crazy. :p

Re:Backdoor to Woe-land

[Mr0bvious]

It doesn't spontaneously change the light - it puts a priority request to the traffic management system (which may or may not be granted depending on the system rules) and the signal change times are adjusted accordingly - any interfacing with the system would be able to be aware of this change to.

This is actually no different than a pedestrian pressing the walk button to possibly change the sequence sooner.

Disclaimer: I've worked on interfacing to some traffic control systems for providing priority through intersections to specific vehicles (GPS+GPRS+known route).

Fewer tickets?

[sjbe]

I like a system I saw in Mexico and I've heard exists elsewhere, where the green light flashes for a few seconds before turning yellow.

But then the police department can't raise money by issuing tickets for running red lights. Oh Noes! We might not even be able to justify those fancy red-light cameras. Isn't it the 'Murican Way (tm) to profit from punishment?

[/sarcasm]

Re:Fewer tickets?

[bondsbw]

I totally hate red light cameras. I used to work at a public safety/traffic research center and knew people who did studies on RLCs that basically said they do nothing good and tend to cause quite a bit of economic damage.

That said... the police departments are almost never the direct beneficiaries of RLCs. And once the vendor gets their cut, and after court costs in cases that didn't hold up, etc., the city usually winds up in the red. Which in turn leads to taking down RLCs after the contract expires.

Fun fact: most vendors require, in their contracts, that the city cannot reengineer those yellow lights to be longer, even when justified by safety.

A much better method exist already and is even in

[kandresen]

Why have the car tell, when it is better to have the lightcross itself tell? The low tech solution is to simply show the countdown for when the light will change on the lightcross itself. You see a large counter sign the size of the traffic light triplet stating it will change in 37 seconds. You know it inmediately if you will reach it in time so no need to stress - you know it if you need to slightly increase the speed too, as well as you would know if you cannot make it.

I have already seen this system used extensively and it seem like a great success! The only reason you might not have heard is that the place it has been used for several years already is Havana, Cuba... I do not think they have the method patented, so go see and learn ;)

Re:Green wave

[NikeHerc]

... red lights are staggered so that you will have to stop at every single one of them...

Around here, the traffic control idiots time lights so that you stop at every other traffic light. I've experimentally determined if you drive about 48mph in a 40mph zone, you'll rarely stop.

OTOH, cops love speeders, so this is not an optimal solution. The optimal solution is to time lights so as to present as few red lights as possible, but people in government around here are generally complete losers.

Hypermiling

[sjbe]

What most people don't know is that you can improve your fuel economy rather dramatically using a variety of techniques commonly referred as "Hyper-miling".

People are well aware that hypermiling improves fuel economy. What they care a LOT more about is actually getting where they are going in a timely manner. Driving behind someone who is hypermiling is enough to drive even Mother Teresa to want to bust a cap in the asshat in front of them. If you really want to improve fuel economy, drive a motorcycle. You'll get FAR better gas mileage than any car you can buy and you won't have to drive slower than my grandmother while doing it.

In any event, you *can* get a rather sharp increase in fuel economy by paying attention to the forces of momentum, timing and friction.

At the cost of driving very slowly, getting in the way of others and annoying everyone around you who have zero interest in driving like that because they have things they care a lot more about than maximizing fuel economy. Even at 50mpg your car still is incredibly wasteful. It's like trying to put out a forest fire by urinating on it.

Re:Hypermiling

[BasilBrush]

Why is your desire to put your foot down, and your misapprehension that you'll save much journey time by doing so a hyper-miler's problem?

Re:Hypermiling

[arth1]

When there is a decent amount of traffic, hypermilers are a PITA. They fail to realize while they are timing the light ahead to keep going straight without stopping, 10 people behind them are making a left or right turn at that light which has a different timing cycle and they all get held back. Think about it, there is an intersection and a light at that intersection for a reason, because there is a lot of cars turning on and off. Trying to spread out traffic and cruise through slow does not work for anyone but the hypermiler. The way I view it? They don'f give a fk about anyone else but themselves.

No, you think about it.

Alternative 1: Car 1 continues at high speed to the intersection, where he stops at red. All cars behind him have to stop too. They can't turn right or left until the light has turned green and car 1 has proceeded.

Alternative 2: Car 1 reduces speed and coasts to the intersection, hitting it as the light turns green. The cars behind him can turn right or left immediately, saving several seconds by following a car that slowed down compared to having to wait for car 1 to accelerate from 0 when the light turns green, and then do the same themselves.

They get irritated because they don't fathom the reason why the person slows down, they only notice the slowdown.

Re:Hypermiling

[kwbauer]

Alternative 2 (amended): Car 2 doesn't get into the left turn lane in time for the automated system to sense a car in the left turn and has to wait an extra cycle.

Alternative 2 (amended again): Car 2 was planning to turn right and the intersection has a sweeping right turn lane with a yield sign that does require stopping just because the straight through traffic has a red.

Both of the amended Alternative 2s mean that the hypermiler was impeding someone else uneccesarily and that someone else did not even have to be driving aggressively nor breaking speed limits.

Yes YES... feel the RAGE!

[Immerial]

Or as it has happened IRL... they mash the gas peddle, swerve around you to get in front, flip you the bird, scream at you with the window rolled down, only to have to stop four seconds later, as you slowly drive up right behind them at the light :P

Re:Driving in India

[Jmc23]

I learned to drive in Mexico. I find it one of the safest places to drive because you're basically always under the assumption that everybody will do whatever is in their best interests.

The US was confusing because in some states it seems everybody follows the rules. It get's a little harder when you have the rule breakers mixed in with the rule followers.

I found canada to be the worst place to drive. You have the rule-breakers, the almost rule-breakers who try to only drive 19km/h above the speed limit, the rule followers, the polite rule followers (where they follow the rules unless it would be rude to do so), and those who drive 20km/h or more below the limit.

Re:In a society that has destroyed all adventure

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

"the only adventure left is to destroy society..."

Remember kids! Lights that are timed for 35 MPH are also timed for 70!

Re:Driving in India

[Jmc23]

Most places they are fine but I've probably been flipped the bird more times in Canada (for no good reason mostly) than everywhere else I've driven combined.

Canadians really aren't polite. We just trust the metal armour of our cars to protect us better than our army, our policemen, or ourselves can, rightfully so, and then all that repressed shit comes out.

Re:In a society that has destroyed all adventure

[Chris Shannon]

So you're that guy who races up to red lights and then has to slam on the brakes.

Here's what happens. You and I are stopped at a light with you in front of me. There's another light 20 seconds away at 35 mph or 10 seconds way at 70mph. The first light turns green and the second is due to turn green in 20 seconds. You arrive at the second light in 10 seconds and have to come to a complete stop. I arrive in 20 seconds the moment the second light turns green but I have to stop because of you. Everyone behind me also has to stop because of you. Your actions caused us all to decelerate and accelerate unnecessarily.

Actually, I wouldn't stop. I'd slow down giving you enough room to accelerate so to minimize my change in speed, but most people wouldn't apply that forethought.

The concept of aliasing is not applicable to the timing of traffic lights for a number of reasons. First, you're going the wrong way, a more reasonable answer would be 17.5 mph also works for lights timed for 35mph, but that's not true either. The timing is a phase variance, not a change in frequency. There's pretty much nothing you can do to beat the system of lights timed for a given speed other than drive that speed. That's a pretty optimal solution anyway.

Re:Time is the most valuable thing I have

[AthanasiusKircher]

Even if it is 1 second I save, it is one second of MY LIFE. I don't have any interest in trading my time for someone else's pointless pursuit of a few extra MPG. My time is the most valuable thing I have and I resent anyone who interferes needlessly with my ability to spend it on the things that matter to me.

In most situations, you actually DON'T save one second of your life. How do you save any time by reaching a red light sooner than you might otherwise? You still have to wait for green. If the car in front of your is OVER-compensating and slowing down too much (so that the light turns green before he gets to the intersection), you have a point, but that would also be wasteful and therefore defeat the purpose. If the guy is doing it correctly, the only thing you'd get by zooming fast to the red light is worn-out brakes and more time to sit at a stop.

Granted, there are scenarios where this behavior is problematic, such as on a single-lane road with a lot of added turn lanes at intersections with differently timed lights for turns. Unless you have a situation like that, you're not actually saving any time, not even one second.

You sound like the guy who gets annoyed at drivers in heavy traffic on highways who try to drive at a constant speed instead of speeding up to 40 mph, then braking and stopping for 20 seconds, and then repeating -- why not just drive at a constant 20 mph? (Doing so, by the way, can actually increase throughput on a highway and work to free up traffic jams.)

Instead, you sound like the guy who is constantly switching lanes and cutting people off because you think you can "save a few seconds" by getting around the guy who is driving at constant speed. But you're not going to get where you're going any faster in such traffic... and, moreover, the continued traffic waves and jams are actually caused by sudden acceleration and decelerations like you are probably doing.

Waste of technology

[Dcnjoe60]

What a waste of technology. Back in the 70s, in many locales, signs were posted that told you for what speed the lights were timed for. If you drove those speeds, you made the lights, plain and simple. To use inter-vehicle communication just so one can make the lights is lame. There are a number of valid reasons for this technology that should be what is promoted, but if the main focus is on making the lights, well, what a waste. They were doing it decades ago before there was even the IBM PC.