|
I was proceeding at the legal limit in the outside lane of the M3 in the usual stream leaving a safe distance awaiting my turn to overtake the middle lane traffic. Some white van man shot up on my inside....you can sense them before you see them...went past indicating right and pulled in front of me! This I am afraid instigated a very long flash of my headlights which seemed to somewhat upset the said white van man. This type of overtaking is becoming commonplace and is something to watch out for all the time.
|
|
It could be that barney100 had actually left himself a very nice safety zone - the 2 second rule is a safe MINIMUM, not the maximum or target distance. I quiet often drive with at least 6 sec. between me and the vehicle in front, now from what you others have said I should not be on the road if I leave that distance. Just before xmas I wrote a thread about the truck in front of me hitting a car on the M25, If I had been 2 sec. or closer behind him there may well have been many more vehicles involved in the accident, other then the 2 that were. It was because I had left at least 6 sec. on that occasion (in fact it was more) that I had time to pull up safely and whilst slowing I had time to put hazards on to warn others, check all around me and change lanes to avoid hitting the car and truck involved. None of this would have been possible if I had been much closer. I am so glad that there are that many people who post on here that have lightning reactions and feel comfortable driving only 2 sec. from the car infront!!!!
|
Barney: Driving without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, by lane hugging.
WVM (No relation by the way): Dangerous driving at that speed.
Almost identical to circumstances in Trentham v Rowlands [1974] by ignoring the HC rule overtake only on the right (exception does not apply in circs mentioned).
dvd
|
Thus is a prisoner's dilemma situation, isn't it?
Everbody behind wishes to overtake the slow driver in lane 2. Playing by the book, everyone follows in lane 2, pulls out to pass the slow driver, and pulls in again afterwards.
Unfortunately, if you try doing that, then it's impossible to pull out to overtake, because lane 3 is clogged by the cars doing 90 who never let anyone out. So in practice, the only way of getting past the slow driver is to get into the outside lane and stay there until you are past the obstruction.
Caught between the Allegro-driving clown at 50mph and the BMW-driving clowns as 90mph, the driver trying to travel at the speed limit is trapped. The situation could be resolved by everyone queueing in turn, but one individual overtaker can't change the overall picture.
|
Leaving a decent gap between yourself and the car in front at motorway speeds is the simplest sort of common sense, mainly because it enables you to relax and you don't get tired so quickly, but also because any 'moment' caused by something happening ahead becomes far less dramatic and much easier to deal with correctly. What can then happen is that someone in a lane to the left who wants to pull out will identify your gap as a gap, and may pull into it, causing you to drop back.
It can be quite irritating when this happens several times in succession, and this I suspect is what tempts many into closing up and tailgating. I try to resist the temptation and usually do, but we're only human.
I never undertake at high speed, only under 50 when traffic is nose to tail in all lanes. People do it here more and more (it's legal in America) but it's traditionally frowned on here, a lot of people don't expect it and it should be done with extreme caution.
|
|
|
Thus is a prisoner's dilemma situation, isn't it? Everbody behind wishes to overtake the slow driver in lane 2. Playing by the book, everyone follows in lane 2, pulls out to pass the slow driver, and pulls in again afterwards. Unfortunately, if you try doing that, then it's impossible to pull out to overtake, because lane 3 is clogged by the cars doing 90 who never let anyone out. So in practice, the only way of getting past the slow driver is to get into the outside lane and stay there until you are past the obstruction. Caught between the Allegro-driving clown at 50mph and the BMW-driving clowns as 90mph, the driver trying to travel at the speed limit is trapped. The situation could be resolved by everyone queueing in turn, but one individual overtaker can't change the overall picture.
Quite. But what you are not taking into account is that the BMW (or other make!) driving clowns are a superior breed with much greater skill (so they have their own 0.2 second rule) and more important responsibilities; it is not your place to worry that they are already above the speed limit, they have special dispensation, so stay in lane 2 where you belong! You should also bear in mind that if, at any time, they want to move over, they will tell you, assisting you by moving to within a few feet of your rear bumper so you can read their lips more easily.
When they are not doing this they wil occasionally post on motoring forums, reminding the peasants that they are themselves to blame if they find themselves being intimidated by the super race.
|
Quite. But what you are not taking into account is that the BMW (or other make!) driving clowns are a superior breed with much greater skill (so they have their own 0.2 second rule) and more important responsibilities; it is not your place to worry that they are already above the speed limit, they have special dispensation, so stay in lane 2 where you belong! You should also bear in mind that if, at any time, they want to move over, they will tell you, assisting you by moving to within a few feet of your rear bumper so you can read their lips more easily. When they are not doing this they wil occasionally post on motoring forums, reminding the peasants that they are themselves to blame if they find themselves being intimidated by the super race.
You forgot to add they will also be on a mobile phone and not even on hands free.
--
\"a little man in a big world/\"
|
|
|
|
Caught between the Allegro-driving clown at 50mph and the BMW-driving clowns as 90mph, the driver trying to travel at the speed limit is trapped. The situation could be resolved by everyone queueing in turn, but one individual overtaker can't change the overall picture.
You're quite right, but does the fact that one person alone driving correctly won't make a difference mean that we shouldn't all try?
Should we follow the same rules when it comes to other things? Me separating my rubbish won't make any difference on a global scale, will it...
|
|
|
|
|
I was proceeding at the legal limit in the outside lane>>
Just move over and let other people get on with overtaking even if it means them breaking the legal limit.
It is really easy: Drive on the left, unless you are overtaking. If you are overtaking get on with it. Mid and right lane are for overtaking only.
Overtaking on the motorway should be just the same as overtaking on a single carriage way. Get your overtake done, then move to the left. If you're not able to overtake without breaking the speed limit, or you're unhappy breaking the speed limit, don't perform the overtake.
|
>> I was proceeding at the legal limit in the outside lane>> Just move over and let other people get on with overtaking even if it means them breaking the legal limit.
So someone overtaking at the legal limit should desist because someone else wants to do so at an illegal speed?
Is this from the BMW-drivers' manual, this priority for those who drive illegally?
|
So someone overtaking at the legal limit should desist because someone else wants to do so at an illegal speed?
Not if they're overtaking; I mostly stick to 70 and will stay as far left as I can. However if the opportunity arises to move into lane 1 or 2 whilst maintaining a safe gap and being likely to be able to get back into lane 3, then there is no safety or legal reason why someone should be in lane 3 at 70 mph.
However IMO it is far safer to open up a gap for someone doing 90 than have them sit 2 feet behind you at 70, even ignoring the fact that it should keep their blood pressure lower and their manoeuvres more controlled and less risky.
However in this case as the OP was gaining on the flow of traffic in lane 2, I don't see why he shouldn't have been in lane 3. That said, if you can be "safely" undertaken you are probably in the wrong lane in the first place.
|
So someone overtaking at the legal limit should desist because someone else wants to do so at an illegal speed? Not if they're overtaking; I mostly stick to 70 and will stay as far left as I can. However if the opportunity arises to move into lane 1 or 2 whilst maintaining a safe gap and being likely to be able to get back into lane 3, then there is no safety or legal reason why someone should be in lane 3 at 70 mph.
In the circumstances described, how likely was it that barney was likely to be able to get back into lane 3 if he pulled in? I'd not rate his chances.
|
|
|
|
So someone overtaking at the legal limit should desist because someone else wants to do so at an illegal speed?
Yes!
|
|
The fact the van was able to undertake proves the car was lane hoging. How dificult is it to move overtaking.
|
The fact the van was able to undertake proves the car was lane hoging. How dificult is it to move overtaking.
I give up. He was supposed to move out of the way the better to allow WVM to lane hog? Would he then have been allowed to undertake WVM under these rules of engagement, assuming there was actually room between WVM and the next victim?
Too many people out there are driving as if they're in a computer game. I do not consider it my duty to get out of their way unless I want to do so for my own safety.
|
|
|
|
With regard to White Van Man.
His driving will always be right, even when it's wrong.
Argue against WVM, and 9 times out of 10, you'll come off worse.
|
|
|
|
|
>> I was proceeding at the legal limit in the outside lane>>
Just move over and let other people get on with overtaking even if it means them breaking the legal limit.
Thank you, WipeOut!
You got my drift!
|
>> >> I was proceeding at the legal limit in the outside >> lane>> >> Just move over and let other people get on with overtaking >> even if it means them breaking the legal limit. Thank you, WipeOut! You got my drift!
Barney100 also said he was 'in the usual stream of traffic' so I suspect that what he means is he was driving at approx 70 limited only by the stream of other cars in front of him. In such circumstances if you pull into lane 2 (or 1) the rest of the traffic simply closes up and takes your place.
What's especially irritating about a van cutting in is that you've then got to drop much further back or your forward vision is limited to the back end of the van.
|
The van driver was not hoging the lane mearly wanting to proced on his way without obstruction.
Simply overtake then pull over.
|
The van driver was not hoging the lane mearly wanting to proced on his way without obstruction.
Don't we all ... but unfortunately other people use the roads too.
Simply overtake then pull over.
Barney was in a queue to overtake, and all this happened before he had overtaken the slower car.
I think DD has it right: WVM's driving will always be right, even when it's wrong.
|
The fact that someone undertook does not imply that Barney100 was lane hogging. It is quite easy for a moron to undertake even when someone is positioned corretly. All it takes is a lack of concern for safety.
Lets imagine that Barney was in lane 3 and that the distance between him and the lane 2 car was less than the safe distance (using the 2 second rule say). That might still leave room for undertaking.
I was told by an IAM observer that it is best not to move left, if after less than 10 seconds you have to move out again to overtake another vehicle. In these circumstances a dangerous driver could easily undertake. Of course this does not mean forming a long queue in lane 3 with an empty lane 2 (and 1).
Leif
|
I can't believe the reactions I'm seeing to this chap's post - just because it's POSSIBLE to undertake doesn't mean it's SAFE!!
If WVM is going at 90 straight towards the back of a truck doing 50 (for example), and relying on a closing gap in lane 3 in place of braking distance - he's a bleeding idiot.
If WVM is able to go along in lane 2, then pull out to overtake in exactly the same way as he would if there were nothing in lane 3, then the driver in lane 3 is lane hogging.
I suspect the 'lane-hogging' accusations have come about just because he's used the 'proceeding at the legal limit' phrase - now, he may well be a sanctimonious bloke who gets in everybody's way, but equally he could just have a very formal writing style (anyone who ever reads the CSMA's 'motoring & leisure' magazine will know what I mean - Barney100, are you a civil servant?!!??)
|
|
|
|
|
<< Some whitevan man shot up on my inside....you can sense them before you see them...went past indicating right and pulled in front of me! This I am afraid instigated a very long flash of my headlights which seemed to somewhat upset the said white van man.
If WVM had the road space to undertake you then you had the road space to move into the lane on your left. Although you have the right to not exceed the limit you don't have the right to prevent someone else from doing so.
--
L\'escargot.
|
|
|
The highway code is very clear on this. Both of the van driver and Barney100 are in the wrong.
Barney100 the highway code clearly states:
238: You should drive in the left-hand lane if the road ahead is clear..... Return to the left hand lane once you have overtake all the vehicles or IF YOU ARE DELAYING TRAFFIC BEHIND YOU.
139: MOVE QUICKLY PAST THE VEHICLE YOU ARE OVERTAKING, once you have started to overtake. Allow plenty of room. MOVE BACK TO THE LEFT AS SOON AS YOU CAN but do not cut in.
144: Being Overtaken. IF A DRIVER IS TRYING TO OVERTAKE YOU MAINTAIN A STEADY COURSE AND SPEED, SLOWING DOWN IF NECESSARY TO LET THE VEHICLE PASS. NEVER OBSTRUCT DRIVERS WHO WISH TO PASS.
|
You are all jumping in with what you imagine to have been the case, without reading carefully what was posted:
"---awaiting my turn to overtake the middle lane traffic."
That seems to me to be pretty clear that he WAS trying to move faster than the middle lane traffic, but was limited in how quickly he could get past because of the queue in the outer lane.
What's wrong with that?
On the other hand, I can visualise a situation where WVM is not quite so bad as has been assumed. If you are driving along in the middle lane, and then come up to slower-moving traffic, aren't you encouraged to filter into the right hand lane, in a suitable gap? I know by the 2-second rule this gap was too small, but try counting on the fingers of one hand the number of drivers you see that do observe that rule?
|
Also just noticed that WVM was not switching lane in order to undertake - he was coming up fast, but he was in the middle lane already.
Undertaking is switching into a slower lane deliberately to pass, then moving back into the outer lane. WVM apparently did not do that.
|
|
|
|
139: MOVE QUICKLY PAST THE VEHICLE YOU ARE OVERTAKING, once you have started to overtake. Allow plenty of room. MOVE BACK TO THE LEFT AS SOON AS YOU CAN but do not cut in.
From the posting perhaps Barney100 was obeying the last four words! I have often been overtaken on the M3 etc by drivers who would like to take my right wing home with them and causing me to brake hard as they invariably overtake me when I am doing 70+ and then slow to 68 when in front of me. When overtaking on the motorway (I have excellent acceleration) I tend to move in when I can see the car I am overtaking in my rear view mirror - does this make me a lane hogger?
|
|
|
|
some shocking respsonses here. when i posted about my accident on an A road in december i was keeping a 2 second gap but the accident was my fault because I was too close, and that was at 40!
good for you for sticking to the speed limit. Regardless of whether or not the WVM undertook, he still cut in infront of you and compromised your safety. Quite how anyone can argue that it is your fault is beyond me, but then I've never driven a BMW or a 4x4.
|
I have to admit I'm with barney100 on this one. If you're in the outside lane waiting to overtake another vehicle, but simply keeping a safe distance from the car in front of you, then WVM is simply a lunatic squeezing into the 'safety' gap to shave a few milliseconds off his journey time - pretty much a typical scenario these days.
What else is he supposed to do? Wait for a few miles in the middle lane until everyone else (especially WVM!) gets past and then overtake?
|
WVM is simply a lunatic squeezing into the 'safety' gap
Lunatic or not, WVM is trained to squeeze into the tightest of gaps. It's part of their nature.
I myself drive a white van on occasion and I behave totally differently behind the wheel of that than I do in my own car.
|
I myself drive a white van on occasion and I behave totally differently behind the wheel of that than I do in my own car.
Any chance of a list of the main differences, DD?
|
Any chance of a list of the main differences, DD?
I'd better not say too much, my employer might be watching, but the main one is that if I've got the right of way I generally keep going.
|
I'd better not say too much, my employer might be watching, but the main one is that if I've got the right of way I generally keep going.
Well, that's what I do in my car, 'when it is safe to proceed' of course. Do you mean that in your car you're one of these people like the double-take brothers, who stop without warning on main roads to let cars out of side turnings or pedestrians cross where there are no special requirements and no zebra? If so I am deeply shocked, but I am clinging to the hope that I have misunderstood you.
|
|
Lud, you've misunderstood me. I mean "by keep going when I've got the right of way" as in, for example, if a car approaches from the other direction and there are parked cars on his / her side of the road, I tend to keep going. In my own car however I value my door mirrors and let them through if they've already started overtaking the parked cars.
|
Lud, you've misunderstood me. I mean "by keep going when I've got the right of way" as in, for example, if a car approaches from the other direction and there are parked cars on his / her side of the road, I tend to keep going. In my own car however I value my door mirrors and let them through if they've already started overtaking the parked cars.
I see. Yes, I usually give vans best under those circumstances, although it's a bit annoying when someone comes in the other end of a single-track stretch: Who's going to reverse, or just the Big Squeeze? Round here there's plenty of room for two cars in most of the side roads between the parked ones, but vans in particular (cars as well) tend to blind down the middle at you. Problem is, do you trust them to be tidy at the important moment? Not usually in my case.
I'm sure you don't do that though DD. It's gratuitous.
|
|
|
|
when i posted about my accident on an A road in december i was keeping a 2 second gap but the accident was my fault because I was too close, and that was at 40!
>>
irv:
are you are changing your "facts" you posted initially?
if i remember correctly,
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=37415&...e
"As a result, I was about 4 car lengths behind the car infront of me doing about 45"
as i demonstrated then, you needed to keep 10 car lengths apart.
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=37415&...e
|
and as i said at the beginning "i always try and stick to the 2 second rule" and later "i'm notoriously bad at estimating distances in car lengths" or words to that effect.
i was merely posting to emphasise the double standards
|
|
|
|
|
There seems to be a lot of conclusions made by a lot of people.
One point I find interesting is a comment about an instructer advising to staying in lane (overtaking)any slower moving traffic in the left lanes (10 second rule) - I also heard something like this on police camera show on Tv, advice given by a traffic police officer - where he was commecnting genrally on the behaviour of cars as he followed on the motorway.
Motorists were uneccassarily changing lanes (moving to the left lane) when they had to overtake again soon after.
Another point - two second rule - trying to stick by it - but the two second gap is nearly always interpreted as a gap to move into by other cars - result - having to drop back again and again.
|
One point I find interesting is a comment about an instructer advising to staying in lane (overtaking)any slower moving traffic in the left lanes (10 second rule) - I also heard something like this on police camera show on Tv, advice given by a traffic police officer - where he was commecnting genrally on the behaviour of cars as he followed on the motorway.
A "ten second rule" is probably okay when drivers can judge it correctly, but not when their judgement is flawed and they sit there for minutes, hardly gaining on the next vehicle they want to pass in the lane to the left of theirs.
From what I have seen when in the presence of a motorway police car, people tend to exaggeratedly swap lanes to try to display good lane discipline. A few miles after they have passed the police car its back to normal, lane discipline usually goes out of the window (depending on how busy it is).
On the M1 they very infrequently post the message "KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING" on the matrix signs, when there is nothing else to report, and it tends to help traffic flow when they do. Why they dont do it more often is a mystery to me, there are so many inept and ignorant drivers...
|
|
My philosophy in a situation as first described is one of 'he may be an idiot, but at least if he's in front I can keep en eye on him and keep out of his way'! Works for me and keeps me calm!
|
Reckon this is all a bit harsh on barney100, Bill Payer summed it up well:
"the typical motorway scenario is that everybody sits in a stream in lane 3 because they?d all be going faster if only it wasn?t for the car in front on them."
This was apparently the case for barney, he left a safe gap which WVM nipped into thus making it unsafe.
|
If there was space for the van to undertake barney should have been in this space alowing the van to overtake legaly in the third lane. SIMPLE.
Paul
|
|
Whether there was space to underatke rather depends on the amount of room available. My guess is that WVM couldn't care less about the appropriate space required between vehicles. Only SIMPLE to the unknowing....
|
|
|
If there was space for the van to undertake barney should have been in this space alowing the van to overtake legaly in the third lane. SIMPLE.
Paul, that is utter rubbish. I could very easily work my way through the motorway traffic , moving from lane to lane, moving into everyone's braking distance etc causing them to take action to avoid me.
But it doesn't mean everyone else is in the wrong.
|
|
Personly if it was me in my van i would not undertake unless it was safe. The majority of drivers (even vans)do not want the inconvience of a colision.
|
Not so good to see so many members here encouraging dangerous and law breaking driving, but therefore perhaps not such a surprise to see so much of it on UK roads.
Shouldn't we be able to expect more from this site?
|
Not so good to see so many members here encouraging dangerous and law breaking driving, but therefore perhaps not such a surprise to see so much of it on UK roads. Shouldn't we be able to expect more from this site?
Yes, but we are doomed to eternal disappointment I suspect.
I wonder how many of the justifiers of tailgating and push-in-undertaking have had advanced driver traing or evn opened roadcraft? Quotes -
"Impatient, aggressive and selfish attitudes can all influence the way people drive. These factors are all linked with excessive speed and a tendency to commit other driving violations that put other drivers at risk (such as...'undertaking' and driving too close").
"about a third of all accidents are rear end shunts"
"a quarter of all accidents are caused by one vehicle driving across another vehicle's priority".
|
I wonder how many of those participating in damning the actions of Barney actually practice what they preach?
I sense a few sanctimonious hypocrites.
|
I do not agree with tailgating and I do not undertake.
But a large proportion of drivers who drive on the motorways daily think that a 2 second gap is an unnecessarily large gap. Where visibility is good IMO there is nothing wrong with a smaller gap, as long as you are looking well ahead, not just at the car in front. Its very easy to look through and around cars and see brake lights coming on 6-8 cars infront, and to prepare accordingly and adjust your speed if necessary. If there is a van in front, then visibility can be reduced so you sometimes need to drop back.
I know the "2 second rule" is now in the highway code and is taught on the IAM advanced course. But it was not mentioned to me when I passed my test 17 years ago, its only in the last few years I have heard of it. So there must be a proportion of drivers who have never even heard of it, let alone follow it.
A 2 second or bigger gap is fine when the motorway is not busy, but when it gets moderately busy, like it or lump it, its a fact of life that drivers will drive closer than that.
If lane discipline were to improve significantly, then IMO the frustrations that result in tailgating and undertaking would be reduced. And if drivers were more courteous, other drivers would not be scared to pull over for fear of not getting let back out into lane 2 or 3...
|
|
the two second rule is certainly not new. When I was learning to drive 26 years ago I had drummed into me "only a fool breaks the two second rule"
|
|
|
|
>>Not so good to see so many members here encouraging dangerous
>>and law breaking driving,
Scarcely! Nobody is defending either party, merely analysing the actions of the two drivers in the context of the Highway Code.
WVM probably did not 'undertake'. He was merely in a queue of traffic proceeding more rapidly than the one in the outside lane. He could however probably be prosecuted for dangerous/whatever driving if he were to cause an accident as a result of passing on the inside.
Barney100 broke the HC by flashing his headlights. Why did you do that? Why not have a Lewis Gun fitted, firing through your propellor?
Barney100 should quite possibly have been one lane further in. Just because it may be 'difficult' to get back into the outside lane doesn't mean that one is entitled to break the HC & stay there when one should not.
Given no accident happened, Barney100 broke the HC at least once, possibly twice. WVM did not.
And have some sympathy for WVM. He is probably driving an underpowered vehicle. If he loses 10mph, it may take him 60 seconds to return to his old speed. That encourages a very different form of driving.
|
Have to disagree strongly with the view that:
"If you can be undertaken, you're in the wrong lane."
Undertaking is illegal and dangerous. Since it is illegal there are no rules governing how it should be done. However it is not illegal to remain in the middle lane for longer than the driver behind you happens to think you should!
|
Mr Spud, you stand corrected on both counts...
From the Highway Code:
238: You should drive in the left-hand lane if the road ahead is clear..... Return to the left-hand lane once you have overtaken all the vehicles or if you are delaying traffic behind you.
242: Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
So by overstaying your welcome in the middle lane, you are breaking 238. And then you are also causing the conditions which permit undertaking in 242.
It's quite a good read, once in a while... :-)
|
|
Au contraire, I would say the HC supports SS; the road ahead wasn't clear, and the conditions did not sound like 'congestion' to me. One impatient driver's view that someone else is inconveniencing him does not give him carte blanche to do what he likes and indulge in dangerous manouevres. We weren't there, but it sounds to me as if WVM in this case shouldn't be on the road - bad attitude, impatience and agression are ALWAYS wrong (even when I do it).
|
|
|
>>238: You should drive in the left-hand lane if the road ahead is clear..... Return to the left-hand lane once you have overtaken all the vehicles or if you are delaying traffic behind you.
The speeding driver behind might want you out of the way but you know that if you pulled over you'd be trapped behind a lorry doing 50 mph for miles. Who's right?
>>242: Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
Yes - but we're not talking about such a situation, we're talking about busy but free-moving situations.
Many of the points of the highway code are not laws in themselves but disobeying them could lead to prosecution for dangerous or careless driving or infringement of other specific traffic laws.
There have been calls for legalising 'undertaking'. If this happenned and was included in the highway code and driver training, fair enough, we'd learn to cope like Americans do as it is legal there. Until then, leave well alone!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
