Milwaukee is a great place, but I had no idea that our area's lawyers were so thoughtful and concerned. I was recently in a very minor auto accident and within four days I had received five concerned letters from the local lawyer community. By the end of seven days I had recieved ten!
Without exception, the firms were worried that I might have been injured. Some of them assumed I had been injured and needed help. Gary S. Greenberg wrote, "When you get injured, I take it personally!" (Gary also sent me a refrigerator magnet so that I can remember his concern every time I drink a glass of milk). Hupy and Abraham sent me a 22 page (plus several inserts) "Handbook for personal injury victims." The most thoughtful gift was an emery board from Weigel, Carlson, Blau & Clemens; I suppose they didn't want me adding to my "injuries" by scratching myself with a ragged fingernail.
Fortunately, the accident was a slight, resulting in a few dents to the door and front fender. However, the outpouring of mail from bottom feeding lawyers has gotten on my nerves. Any lawyer can access police accident reports and then contact the drivers involved in the incident. I suppose this only a minor inconvience to be endured so that the larger values of freedom-of- information and transparency can be maintained, but it is still annoying.
While citizens definitely need the right to legally pursue compensation when wrong has been done, the "ambulance chasing" character of personal injury lawyers comes across as parasitical and nasty. I have had prior experience with one of the firms that contacted me. I was working for a non-profit organization taking kids on a bike ride. Another bike rider entered the bike path and wiped out, hurting her wrist. None of our riders hit her or otherwise caused her crash. We performed basic first aid, got a van and gave her and her bike a ride home. She sued us. Pursuit of justice has turned into pursuit of money, money, money. Unfortunately, liability law has also encouraged the practice of making other people responsible for one's mistakes.
One of the letters I received began with this sentence: There is never an "appropriate" time to contact someone who has recently suffered a loss or injury. Then why are you sending me this letter? If an injured party needs your help, they will call. There is a German proverb that states: Quality goods sell themselves, shoddy goods require a sales pitch. The same goes for attorney services.
The same week our mailbox was crammed with this garbage, I did the Word Search puzzle in the weekly paper. The hidden saying in the puzzle was, "If it were not for lawyers, we wouldn't need them."
Monday, November 23, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Thoughts on driving the Toyota Prius
For the last year and a half I have driven a 2008 Toyota Prius for my part time job. This job involves driving 150 to 200 miles a day, three to four days a week. Below are some thoughts about Prius design and performance that have accumulated over the past 18 or so months. They result from my experience as a driver not a designer, engineer, or other trained "expert."
Constructive feedback gurus say always start with positive observations before touching on "areas of improvement." Here goes. The Prius gets really good gas mileage. It runs smoothly and quietly.
Need more? It has lots of glove compartment-type spaces for storing things. (However, the sheer number of storage spaces and their clever placement kept some of them a secret for several months. I found two of them by accident. Having usable space is good, but the large number can make it hard to find specific items; a lot like having many pockets in a winter coat.)
Not enough good things yet? The seat belt buckle is easy to find and stays in place so that one can easily buckle it one-handed. Still not enough? Okay, a partial plus goes to the "Trip Information" read out screen that shows MPG at any given moment. This sheds interesting light on one's driving habits and the effect of hills on gas mileage and power use by the engine.
Okay, now for the things that could be better. A key part of driving safely is being able to see. I am disappointed by the number of blind spots and bad window design decisions in the 2008 Prius. The front windshield is broad and gives a wide angle of view toward the front. However, the windshield is held in place by very wide support bars on each side. These bars frequently block the view of cars approaching an intersection. The rear window is embedded in the back-sloping roof and back hatch door. While the size of the glass is impressive, the angle it is placed severely limits how much the driver can see using the rear-view mirror. They attempted to offset this low visibility by adding a glass panel in the vertical part of the hatch door, but this doesn't help much and is easily blocked by the back seats being up, or cargo in the back. I find both of these conditions quite annoying in such a recent vehicle; visual safety should increase over time, not decrease. The 1975 AMC Pacer solved the visibility issues 33 years ago.
This next area of complaint might throw me into the Luddite category, but so be it.
I am not crazy about the touch screen. Many simple functions have been made more difficult. All the "climate controls" are accessed through the touch screen. Heat, AC, defrost, fan, etc. This makes them inconvenient. I vastly prefer three knobs and a switch on the dash, clearly labeled. I don't care what the exact temperature in Fahrenheit degrees of the air coming out of the vents may be. If its a cold day I want hot air, if its a hot day I want cool air. (And I don't think the digital temperature read out is even remotely accurate anyway).
The touch screen radio controls were impossible to figure out. I was pleased to find that the manual volume and tuning knobs popped out of the dash when pushed. To the suggestion that the owner's manual would show me how to use the radio I have two responses. If a car radio needs an instruction manual it is too complicated; and, what happens when the owner's manual gets lost?
The touch screen can be impossible to read in bright light. I don't know about other drivers, but I do most of my work in the day and the sun is pretty bright around here. Also, the touch screen just seems like one more thing that can burn out and then you are left without control over the "climate" in your car.
One other feature of the touch screen that deserves comment is the camera that points behind the car when the transmission is in reverse. This might seem like a good idea, but it is not. First, the camera doesn't give an accurate view looking behind; it is a wide angle lens that makes objects look much farther away than they actually are. Also, the lens is easily occluded by snow, ice, mist, or leaves making it useless. Second, it seems that some drivers might rely only on the cool TV screen on the dash when backing up. Even if the view was accurate (which it's not), it is not comprehensive enough to make safe reversing decisions. The driver needs to look in both side mirrors and turn their head to check for pedestrians or vehicles approaching from the sides. The camera just doesn't show enough. To the argument that the camera could keep the driver from running over a child or toy in the driveway, the driver needs to look behind the car before getting behind the steering wheel. Technology is not a replacement for basic awareness, and a safe driver is an aware driver.
The back-up camera and the touch screen seem to be unnecessary accessories added to increase the price of the car. How many other unnecessary expenses are built into the new hybrids? There is at least one more unnecessary "upgrade." The electonic key fob provides minor convenience at great expense. It is mildly handy to not have to fish the key out of my pocket to unlock the door or start the car, but it would be easy to live without. A replacement fob costs $300 (I've been told) and wouldn't work if it falls into water, is dropped from too high onto a hard surface, or if the battery wears out. A metal replacement key costs $3, can get wet, can be thrown against the wall, and requires no battery.
I get the feeling that the touch screen, key fob, etc. are designed to give a futuristic space-car feel to the Prius. I wish that designers would stop obsessing about image and "the wave of the future" and give us an efficient, safe, low-priced vehicle. (I realize that car makers are not primarily in the business of making cars, they are in the business of making money.)
Enough cosmetics, how about performance? I am generally happy with how the Prius drives; except in the snow. It has virtually no traction. The front wheels spin on the slightest powdering of snow, and on wet pavement, and on the painted stripes at stop signs and crosswalks. The spinning usually happens when starting from a dead stop, but sometimes in motion also. Acceleration can be erratic. Fast pick up is not reliable, especially on damp pavement. This is a concern when one wants to avoid a fast moving car that suddenly appears (moves out of the blind spot caused by the wide windshield support bars?) on the cross street when one is entering an intersection.
In a nutshell: I would like the Prius to have better visibility, less electronic gadgetry, and better acceleration but still get good gas mileage. These seem like reasonable requests to me.
Constructive feedback gurus say always start with positive observations before touching on "areas of improvement." Here goes. The Prius gets really good gas mileage. It runs smoothly and quietly.
Need more? It has lots of glove compartment-type spaces for storing things. (However, the sheer number of storage spaces and their clever placement kept some of them a secret for several months. I found two of them by accident. Having usable space is good, but the large number can make it hard to find specific items; a lot like having many pockets in a winter coat.)
Not enough good things yet? The seat belt buckle is easy to find and stays in place so that one can easily buckle it one-handed. Still not enough? Okay, a partial plus goes to the "Trip Information" read out screen that shows MPG at any given moment. This sheds interesting light on one's driving habits and the effect of hills on gas mileage and power use by the engine.
Okay, now for the things that could be better. A key part of driving safely is being able to see. I am disappointed by the number of blind spots and bad window design decisions in the 2008 Prius. The front windshield is broad and gives a wide angle of view toward the front. However, the windshield is held in place by very wide support bars on each side. These bars frequently block the view of cars approaching an intersection. The rear window is embedded in the back-sloping roof and back hatch door. While the size of the glass is impressive, the angle it is placed severely limits how much the driver can see using the rear-view mirror. They attempted to offset this low visibility by adding a glass panel in the vertical part of the hatch door, but this doesn't help much and is easily blocked by the back seats being up, or cargo in the back. I find both of these conditions quite annoying in such a recent vehicle; visual safety should increase over time, not decrease. The 1975 AMC Pacer solved the visibility issues 33 years ago.
This next area of complaint might throw me into the Luddite category, but so be it.
I am not crazy about the touch screen. Many simple functions have been made more difficult. All the "climate controls" are accessed through the touch screen. Heat, AC, defrost, fan, etc. This makes them inconvenient. I vastly prefer three knobs and a switch on the dash, clearly labeled. I don't care what the exact temperature in Fahrenheit degrees of the air coming out of the vents may be. If its a cold day I want hot air, if its a hot day I want cool air. (And I don't think the digital temperature read out is even remotely accurate anyway).
The touch screen radio controls were impossible to figure out. I was pleased to find that the manual volume and tuning knobs popped out of the dash when pushed. To the suggestion that the owner's manual would show me how to use the radio I have two responses. If a car radio needs an instruction manual it is too complicated; and, what happens when the owner's manual gets lost?
The touch screen can be impossible to read in bright light. I don't know about other drivers, but I do most of my work in the day and the sun is pretty bright around here. Also, the touch screen just seems like one more thing that can burn out and then you are left without control over the "climate" in your car.
One other feature of the touch screen that deserves comment is the camera that points behind the car when the transmission is in reverse. This might seem like a good idea, but it is not. First, the camera doesn't give an accurate view looking behind; it is a wide angle lens that makes objects look much farther away than they actually are. Also, the lens is easily occluded by snow, ice, mist, or leaves making it useless. Second, it seems that some drivers might rely only on the cool TV screen on the dash when backing up. Even if the view was accurate (which it's not), it is not comprehensive enough to make safe reversing decisions. The driver needs to look in both side mirrors and turn their head to check for pedestrians or vehicles approaching from the sides. The camera just doesn't show enough. To the argument that the camera could keep the driver from running over a child or toy in the driveway, the driver needs to look behind the car before getting behind the steering wheel. Technology is not a replacement for basic awareness, and a safe driver is an aware driver.
The back-up camera and the touch screen seem to be unnecessary accessories added to increase the price of the car. How many other unnecessary expenses are built into the new hybrids? There is at least one more unnecessary "upgrade." The electonic key fob provides minor convenience at great expense. It is mildly handy to not have to fish the key out of my pocket to unlock the door or start the car, but it would be easy to live without. A replacement fob costs $300 (I've been told) and wouldn't work if it falls into water, is dropped from too high onto a hard surface, or if the battery wears out. A metal replacement key costs $3, can get wet, can be thrown against the wall, and requires no battery.
I get the feeling that the touch screen, key fob, etc. are designed to give a futuristic space-car feel to the Prius. I wish that designers would stop obsessing about image and "the wave of the future" and give us an efficient, safe, low-priced vehicle. (I realize that car makers are not primarily in the business of making cars, they are in the business of making money.)
Enough cosmetics, how about performance? I am generally happy with how the Prius drives; except in the snow. It has virtually no traction. The front wheels spin on the slightest powdering of snow, and on wet pavement, and on the painted stripes at stop signs and crosswalks. The spinning usually happens when starting from a dead stop, but sometimes in motion also. Acceleration can be erratic. Fast pick up is not reliable, especially on damp pavement. This is a concern when one wants to avoid a fast moving car that suddenly appears (moves out of the blind spot caused by the wide windshield support bars?) on the cross street when one is entering an intersection.
In a nutshell: I would like the Prius to have better visibility, less electronic gadgetry, and better acceleration but still get good gas mileage. These seem like reasonable requests to me.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Diagrams Done Badly
These drawings are based on the grocery store parking lot at Humboldt and North Avenue in Milwuakee, though the concept could be easily adapted to most parking lots. These diagrams are my attempt to visually depict the content of my first blog - Parking Lots Badly Done.
Red lines indicate where car and pedestrian traffic overlap.The lower diagram represents the parking lot as it is now. The top diagram shows how the parking lot could be modified to make it more pedestrian-friendly. The top diagram shows walkways between rows of parked cars leading to the store entrances. Cars could be kept out of the fire lane with signs, painted stripes, and easily moved plastic chains.
Any one who is less graphics-challenged than I am is encouraged to create better diagrams than these.
Parking Lots Badly Done
My genetic predisposition is in line with Joni Mitchell's lament that "they paved paradise and put up a parking lot." However, since parking lots are part of our current existence I would like to suggest that they should and could be better designed.
A goal of most parking lots is to encourage vehicle/pedestrian collisions! Virtually every customer entering or leaving a store has to cross the traffic of cars entering or leaving the parking lot. Most every car entering the parking lot passes in front of the store to get to a parking spot. Then the driver (now shopper) has to cross the same lanes on foot to get to the entrance of the store.
Just stand and watch traffic for two minutes the next time you visit the supermarket. The frustration of both drivers and pedestrians is visible on their faces. If the weather is warm enough for windows to be down, frustration and anger can be heard as well.
The driver has pulled in off a busy street and isn't really prepared to deal with pedestrians sharing the lane in unpredictable ways. The driver is in a fast mindset and sees snail-like pedestrians blocking up where cars should go. However, shoppers have already parked and are walking. They are preparing to enter the store to shop for their family. They are in a slow mindset and perceive drivers as impatient speed demons who need to chill out.
Parking lots can be constructed to minimize vehicle/walker interactions. All new lots should be built to be safer and more pleasant places, and most existing parking lots can re-designed with minimal cost.
Here is how: Create vehicle free pedestrian lanes passing from the central part of the parking lot to the front of the store. Cars can enter the lot near the store but must turn immediately into the parking area. Drivers who have parked walk to the central walk area to approach and return from the store. Cars can also enter and leave the lot from openings on the side of the lot furthest from the store. [See diagrams in next post].
As far as I can figure, without having consulted any parking lot designers or civil engineers, the reason for the current configuration is to maintain an open and accessible fire lane for emergency vehicles immediately in front of the store. The fire lane can be maintained while prohibiting other vehicle traffic. Vividly painted stripes and signs can alert drivers of the fire lane, and entrances just big enough for emergency vehicles could discourage cars from driving there. Perhaps speed bumps, easily moved barriers, or light weight plastic chain spanning the entrance could be used to deter drivers but still allow emergency vehicles.
Walker friendly parking lots would reduce vehicle-pedestrian collisions and lower the number of times emergency vehicles need to go to the supermarket!
A goal of most parking lots is to encourage vehicle/pedestrian collisions! Virtually every customer entering or leaving a store has to cross the traffic of cars entering or leaving the parking lot. Most every car entering the parking lot passes in front of the store to get to a parking spot. Then the driver (now shopper) has to cross the same lanes on foot to get to the entrance of the store.
Just stand and watch traffic for two minutes the next time you visit the supermarket. The frustration of both drivers and pedestrians is visible on their faces. If the weather is warm enough for windows to be down, frustration and anger can be heard as well.
The driver has pulled in off a busy street and isn't really prepared to deal with pedestrians sharing the lane in unpredictable ways. The driver is in a fast mindset and sees snail-like pedestrians blocking up where cars should go. However, shoppers have already parked and are walking. They are preparing to enter the store to shop for their family. They are in a slow mindset and perceive drivers as impatient speed demons who need to chill out.
Parking lots can be constructed to minimize vehicle/walker interactions. All new lots should be built to be safer and more pleasant places, and most existing parking lots can re-designed with minimal cost.
Here is how: Create vehicle free pedestrian lanes passing from the central part of the parking lot to the front of the store. Cars can enter the lot near the store but must turn immediately into the parking area. Drivers who have parked walk to the central walk area to approach and return from the store. Cars can also enter and leave the lot from openings on the side of the lot furthest from the store. [See diagrams in next post].
As far as I can figure, without having consulted any parking lot designers or civil engineers, the reason for the current configuration is to maintain an open and accessible fire lane for emergency vehicles immediately in front of the store. The fire lane can be maintained while prohibiting other vehicle traffic. Vividly painted stripes and signs can alert drivers of the fire lane, and entrances just big enough for emergency vehicles could discourage cars from driving there. Perhaps speed bumps, easily moved barriers, or light weight plastic chain spanning the entrance could be used to deter drivers but still allow emergency vehicles.
Walker friendly parking lots would reduce vehicle-pedestrian collisions and lower the number of times emergency vehicles need to go to the supermarket!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)