Department of Product and Systems Design Engineering, University of the Aegean, 2 Konstantinoupoleos, GR-84100 Ermoupolis, Syros, Greece.
School of Mechanical Engineering, Sector of Industrial Management and Operations Research, Ergonomics Unit, National Technical University of Athens, 9 Iroon Politechniou, GR-15773 Zografou, Athens, Greece.
Accid Anal Prev. 2015 Jun;79:126-32. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.02.025. Epub 2015 Mar 27.
Overtaking maneuvers were studied in real traffic, by comparing cases where a change in the opposite traffic occurred during the overtaking maneuver i.e., appearance of an oncoming car, with cases where no change occurred during the maneuver i.e., either an already apparent oncoming car or no oncoming car. In total 45 naturally occurring cases of overtaking were analysed. By examining the time headways (TH) between the overtaking car and the other cars involved, at the end of the maneuver, a significant correlation was found between the TH to opposite traffic and the TH rear to the overtaken car. In cases where a change in the opposite traffic occurred and the proximity to opposite traffic was below a critical TH (<4s) the appearance of a new-oncoming car caused the overtakers to actively press, both longitudinally and laterally, close to the overtaken car. In cases of overtaking where no change in the opposite traffic occurred, the TH rear to the overtaking vehicle was unaffected by the TH to the opposite traffic. Interestingly, in comparing cases where an oncoming car appeared during overtaking with cases where an oncoming car was apparent from the start of the maneuver both the TH to the opposite traffic and the duration of the maneuver were not found to be significantly different. It is suggested that drivers were probably expecting to be confronted with an oncoming car during the overtaking. However, the decreased available time to disambiguate this situation leads the overtaking driver to limit the rear safety margin of the vehicle being overtaken. The appropriateness of this practice, in terms of safety, remains questionable.
超车操作在实际交通中进行了研究，通过比较超车操作过程中对面交通发生变化（即迎面来车出现）的情况与操作过程中没有发生变化（即迎面来车已经明显出现或没有迎面来车）的情况。总共分析了 45 个自然发生的超车案例。通过检查超车车辆与其他涉及车辆在操作结束时的车头时距（TH），发现超车车辆与对面交通的 TH 与被超车辆的后 TH 之间存在显著相关性。在对面交通发生变化且接近对面交通的 TH 低于临界值（<4s）的情况下，新出现的迎面来车会导致超车者主动靠近被超车辆，无论是在纵向还是横向。在对面交通没有变化的超车情况下，超车车辆的后 TH 不受对面交通的 TH 影响。有趣的是，在比较超车过程中出现迎面来车的情况与从操作开始就明显出现迎面来车的情况时，发现对面交通的 TH 和操作持续时间都没有显著差异。这表明驾驶员可能预计在超车过程中会遇到迎面来车。然而，可用于澄清这种情况的时间减少，导致超车驾驶员限制被超车辆的后安全裕度。这种做法在安全方面的适当性仍存在疑问。
