🚀 go-pugleaf

In <35a833e9.2382230@news.v-wave.com> grimrod@mindless.moc (Brandon
Sommerville) writes:

>>Two seconds is barely safe.  I much prefer three.  I do close to a
>>three-second distance, but I don't feel obliged to do that by revving up
>>the engine and screeching my tires.  

>Two seconds is a lot of space around here.  I find that with watching
>the vehicles in front of the guy in front of me, one and a half is
>plenty.  More than that and the space gets quickly filled up.  If you
>can screech your tires at highway speeds by accelerating, that must be
>one hell of a car you're driving.

Confusion between space and time.

I maintain my following distance to have sufficient time, not sufficient
space.  Two seconds can be a LOT of space depending on the speed, but
it's not a lot of time.  It's always two seconds of time.  I much prefer
three seconds.

As an example suppose you were flying an airplane at supersonic speed.
If you were following another airplane at two seconds, that would be a
lot of space indeed -- but it would still be only two seconds of time.
Do you have any idea why the FAA keeps aircraft at such distances away
from one another?  It's not because they need the space, it's because
they need the TIME.

*Sigh* Tailgaters simply cannot follow the logic of basic physics.
-- 
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@spams.r.us.com>