|
Years ago(1960's)I drove down a road and noticed a radar speed device and two policemen operating it but it was aimed at traffic in the opposite direction-fifteen minutes later,ireturned along the same road and I dopped my speed to 28 mph. and,very quickly, a line of traffic built up behind me.Just before we reached the device the driver of the car behind me got fed up and decided to blast past-yes,they stopped him.
|
|
We are all capable of doing things which might come under the heading 'seemed a good idea at the time'.
My last memorable one in a car was with my old Diesel Merc W124, which whilst not a flying machine, on decent tyres they handled more reassuringly than appearance might suggest.
I had a bloke in a Pug 1007 of all things tailgate me one day going home from work, getting ever closer to my rear bumper, i took no notice of the bloke (never look at them or let on that i know they are there) and just gradually increased speed to that which i would normally do on that road, cue a long bend i know well and the sudden dropping back of said Pug which then stayed back a long way.
Maybe a little naughty but i would have been doing that speed whether he was there or not, feel bad? no.
|
|
Years ago (when the A1 had many roundabouts) one November night there was a low lying fog, only about 5 feet deep.
I was in a Ford Thames van, was overtaken at high speed and witnessed the overtaker plough straight over a roundabout, which I'd seen from my higher position and slowed for. He overtaker had been following me for some time and figured he could go faster.
|
|
I've done a couple of naughty things in the past-- speeded up when someone who has been tailgating has gone to overtake me, for example--but in my defence I would plead that I always felt guilty afterwards. Nowadays I never make eye contact with any other road user, whether the encounter is good or bad. If I raise a hand in appreciation or shake my head, its always aimed at a blank windscreen and not a face.
Seems odd that just lately we've seen more than one post from folks courting appreciation for provocative driving. Must be the weather.
|
|
|
|
I dopped my speed to 28 mph
Anyone who drives @ 28mph in a 30 zone is inviting trouble, the limit is 30 and it's not for motorists to impose their interpretation of the 30 limit on other motorists ... I'm surprised the traffic behind was not tailgating, close enough to be your trailor ... it's actually scary having so many vehicles bunched up so close together, better to drive @ 31 and spread out a little.
|
|
Sorry, SM - wrong on two grounds.
One, 30 mph is the limit. People can drive at 28 mph if they want; it may not be wise and it may not be sensible, but it's perfectly legal. 28 mph is not someone's "interpretation of the 30 limit".
Two, it probably happens rarely, but you can be prosecuted for driving at 31 mph.
|
|
Agreed, FP. One can't blame JC2 for playing safe knowing that there was a speed trap ahead. And I would expect that the same line of traffic would have built up behind at 30 mph as much as at 28.
I was taught defensive driving years ago, although I don't remember being taught to 'own the road' as Rob was taught. I do remember being told that you drive defensively and aim to avoid a crash even if the other driver is in the wrong.
There's that old rhyme about this - "I'll tell you the story of Albert J, Who always fought for his right of way. He was right - dead right - as he went along.....But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong."
Edited by Avant on 11/07/2017 at 11:44
|
|
|
Sorry, SM - wrong on two grounds.
One, 30 mph is the limit. People can drive at 28 mph if they want; it may not be wise and it may not be sensible, but it's perfectly legal. 28 mph is not someone's "interpretation of the 30 limit".
Two, it probably happens rarely, but you can be prosecuted for driving at 31 mph.
Agreed. 30 is the LIMIT - the maximum. It is not a target to be achieved at all times.
There are plenty of occasions where I've dropped my speed to 25 (or lower) when I've seen a potential hazard developing - for example, kids walking on the pavement alongside parked cars, they've got a football, and the park is on the other side ofthe road ... but that's the sort of thing that IAM / defensive driving teaches you. You start to learn just how much there is to observe.
|
|
Interesting to read the comment about "owning the road".
In a previous life I drove fire engines for about 20 years. On our refresher courses we were taught to "own the road", and one technique for doing that was deliberately driving slightly over the centre line on some roads to oblige drivers coming the opposite way to move over to the left of their carriageway (not under blue lights, just normal driving). Another was the obvious one of slowly creeping forward at "give way" junctions, to encourage approaching drivers to slow down and allow you access to the main carriageway, a technique that works well with large vehicles but which can still be fraught with danger in some circumstances. And there was the "straightening" of winding roads, particularly country lanes, which you could get away with due to the high driving position, being able to see over hedges etc. .
I never felt comfortable with the first of those techniques because it must have caused some drivers to wonder whether I was having trouble keeping the vehicle on my side of the road. Plus the fact that if I'd hit something, or something had hit me, I'd have struggled for a defence if there was nothing preventing me keeping to my side of the centre line.
|
|
Some years ago I was driving up the road out of town towards home. 30 mph limit, Very wide road (used to be 3 lanes) but now regular splitter bollards to slow traffic. I indicated left to pull into our avenue and the car behind (very close behind) pulled out and hit one of the splitter islands completely removing his fornt OS suspension.
What an idiot, could not stop laughing. If he had waited 5 seconds he would have had a clear road.
|
|
I was involved in an accident a number of years ago that changed my attitude to these matters.
Country road bending to the left, I was following another car at around 50mph, car in front started indicating right, car coming up fast behind over took me and straight into the car in front turning right. Lots of damage but no injuries.
The overtaking cars faults are obvious but were the other two of us blameless, probably not. The lead car could have indicated earlier allowing me to drop back more, his observations could have been better and delayed or aborted his turn if he saw the car overtaking. I could have have taken positive action and pulled out to stop the overtake or even used my hazard warning lights. If I had dropped back quicker would I have left an escape route.
These type of factors are relevant in nearly every accident and how it could have been avoided. Expert drivers routinely analyse their situation all the time while driving identifying hazards and planning to minimise the risk. Its very hard work at first.
|
|
I'm amazed at the fire service teaching people to drive down the wrong side of the road in order to force others over even further, blue light reponse is one thing but general driving should be a different mindset, it only takes one lorry coming the other way to hit a nasty drain or pot hole and the vehicle sways sideways and you've got the mother of all head on crashes on your hands...the trainer didn't drive a lowered Range Rover Sport with blacked out windows sitting on 22" wheels perchance, they seem to need all the road.
|
I'm amazed at the fire service teaching people to drive down the wrong side of the road in order to force others over even further, blue light reponse is one thing but general driving should be a different mindset, it only takes one lorry coming the other way to hit a nasty drain or pot hole and the vehicle sways sideways and you've got the mother of all head on crashes on your hands...the trainer didn't drive a lowered Range Rover Sport with blacked out windows sitting on 22" wheels perchance, they seem to need all the road.
I did that training in the early 90s, and as far as I know it was officially endorsed. I retired ten years ago so have no idea whether they still do it, although given the greater emphasis on keeping the cost of public services to a minimum, including reducing complaints from other road users, I doubt it. Had we been trainees with no experience of emergency driving I might have understood the reasoning (if not agreed with the way it was implemented) but these courses were for people who had already been passed as competent blue light drivers.
The instructors would also test your emergency response driving by giving you a destination and then telling you to drive there under blue light conditions, even though there was no genuine call. Some drivers were unhappy with that requirement, not least because at that time, the question of liability in the event of an accident hadn't been satisfactorily answered. Not only that, but theoretically you were exposing other road users to unnecessary risk, although it could be argued that it was better to do that training with an instructor and get it right under training conditions, than to get it wrong when driving to a genuine call with all the potentially appalling consequences thereof.
Edited by argybargy on 11/07/2017 at 13:02
|
|
In response to GB's surprise (amazement) ... I have to say that I also drove them - for something like 27 yrs - but did my training (in London) in 1975 ... and don't have any recollection of being told to adopt the practices being spoken of. However at the time of my training I suspect things were different to current practice. The stuff 'argybargy' is talking about is unknown to me. And, equally, refresher courses weren't undertaken either throughout my time (I retired fifteen yrs ago).
Rightly or wrongly, at that time, our training was teaching you how to drive an HGV at normal road speeds and the aim was to pass a test which gave you an HGV3 and didn't involve blue light driving. You picked that up as you went along after finishing the course and having returned to your station ... whereupon you started off by driving back FROM incidents at normal road speed and built up to driving TO incidents when the officer in charge deemed you ready. I'm not saying this was right but that was how it was then.
As your confidence, experience and expertise built up it became the case that you WOULD impose yourself upon the road (although I don't ever recall people using the expression 'OWNING' anything, be it the road or a bit of space on it). And the fact of the matter is that you do push and shove in order to get where you want to be ... when you're aware that your services are required on the hurry up then you tend not to sit quietly waiting for a nice big gap to arise or pause contentedly at Give Way lines or red lights waiting for some nice polite soul to slow down, wave graciously and allow you to proceed - and if you (not you personally, GB) but if you were the one with their trousers alight, dangling from a ledge then you'd be only too pleased to know that the fire engine driver was doing his damndest to get to you ASAP.
I very much suspect it's all different now though and I know that, even in my time, there came about a thing called EFAD (Emergency Fire Appliance Driving, I believe - and you had to successfully complete that before fully passing out) and they may well do refresher courses now - I'm pretty confident they'll not let a fire engine driver loose on the streets without comprehensive blue light training beforehand.
Having said all that I have to admit that, whilst there were remarkably few actual accidents in the scheme of things, some driveres did take dreadful libertys and relied on chance/bravado to get through a situation ... frighteningly so in some caes. [at least I'm still here to tell the tale though :-) ]
|
|
KB, in my 'amazement' post i did make the distinction between blue light emergency driving and normal driving.
Many roads i drive on if a vehicle the size of a fire engine drove over the white line in order to claim the road it would leave a trail of wrecked lorries and buses in the ditch on the offside of the road where they had been forced onto the soft verge...this supposed practiceof claiming by force i have yet to see, the fire service drivers have always been highly competent without resorting to bullying tactics.
When the blue lights are spotted you'll find most switched on drivers are the very first to spot the approaching bluey whether from behind or approaching, and some will already would have already pre planned the ideal spot to slow down or stop in (with oncomers often holding back a line of traffic to provide the bluey with a fast slalom)...all this taking into account the road itself, traffic volumes and traffic type, some emergency lads might not notice these things developing but that smooth uninterrupted slice at hight speed emergency vehicles make through sections of busy roads often isn't just down to luck nor forcing of will on other lesser motorists, its often because they've received, and continue to do so, a hell of a lot of cooperation.
The emergency drivers might have had all the training, but they arn't the only ones switched on highly competent and capable of using their loafs.
As for early spotting of blueys, it was a hell of a lot easier when they had two tones, these toy sirens are hopeless for working out direction of travel and speed, the two tones were miles better.
Edited by gordonbennet on 11/07/2017 at 17:37
|
In response to GB's surprise (amazement) ... I have to say that I also drove them - for something like 27 yrs - but did my training (in London) in 1975 ... and don't have any recollection of being told to adopt the practices being spoken of. However at the time of my training I suspect things were different to current practice. The stuff 'argybargy' is talking about is unknown to me. And, equally, refresher courses weren't undertaken either throughout my time (I retired fifteen yrs ago).
Rightly or wrongly, at that time, our training was teaching you how to drive an HGV at normal road speeds and the aim was to pass a test which gave you an HGV3 and didn't involve blue light driving. You picked that up as you went along after finishing the course and having returned to your station ... whereupon you started off by driving back FROM incidents at normal road speed and built up to driving TO incidents when the officer in charge deemed you ready. I'm not saying this was right but that was how it was then.
Apologies for the partial quoting of your post, KB.
Like you, I took the route of first obtaining a normal HGV 3 licence by completing a three week course and then taking the test, all paid for by the fire service. My route to blue light training was also the same as yours, consisting of going back on station, taking the machine out fully crewed for a week or so (or longer if your nerves were particularly affected by constant ribbing from the three wise monkeys on the back seat ), then when your OIC considered you were ready, going for the full blue light run. I remember my very first shout as a driver because I drove to the address like a bat out of Hell, someone shouted "you've gone past it!" and I slammed on the brakes, almost hurling the three back seat passengers through the bulkhead.
The centre line straddling technique that I spoke about may have been particular to that instructor, or it might have been local fire service policy, but having already driven to incidents for a good while previously, it didn't teach me anything I didn't know. I also found it rather embarrassing to be asked by the instructor on one occasion to take the outside lane on a dual carriageway and drive at such a speed that I held up all the other traffic. Never did see the point of that.
Edited by argybargy on 11/07/2017 at 20:41
|
|
|
Interesting to read the comment about "owning the road".
I never felt comfortable with the first of those techniques because it must have caused some drivers to wonder whether I was having trouble keeping the vehicle on my side of the road..
We've heard a lot about this approach, and I understand what it means. Although it's a snappy phrase which sticks in the mind, I think it is an unfortunate choice of words, which may create subconscious overconfidence in some. Clearly every driver competing for space on a road can't 'own it', especially slower vehicles like a steam tractor, horse-drawn vehicle or even a pushbike.
|
|
I think owning the road is a poor term, 'owning your roadspace' is better, when I used to cycle to work every day I used to use a number of roads which weren't wide enough to let a car pass safely. On these roads I would ride in the middle so a following car couldn't try and squeeze past. Some drivers took exception to this but that's just hard luck to them. When it was safe for them to pass I would pull in and let them go.
I don't see a problem with it as long as you don't wilfully obstruct the traffic when there is no need.
|
I think owning the road is a poor term, 'owning your roadspace' is better, when I used to cycle to work every day I used to use a number of roads which weren't wide enough to let a car pass safely. On these roads I would ride in the middle so a following car couldn't try and squeeze past.
Easy to spot someone on a bike who is not a cyclist; they are the ones riding in the gutter, inviting following traffic to whizz past at close range in unsuitable places without slowing down.
|
|
|
|
"I think owning the road is a poor term, 'owning your roadspace' is better, when I used to cycle to work every day I used to use a number of roads which weren't wide enough to let a car pass safely. On these roads I would ride in the middle so a following car couldn't try and squeeze past."
As someone who also used to ride a bike to work, I agree with that. Moving in and out of the spaces between parked cars on a bicycle in heavy traffic is more dangerous than simply riding a line outside vehicles at the kerb. You might get in the way a bit more, but you're always visible.
Edited by argybargy on 11/07/2017 at 13:08
|
The overtaking cars faults are obvious but were the other two of us blameless, probably not.
In the instance I described above there was only one person to blame and that was the stupid and impatient driver doing the overtaking. There is not room between the kerb and the splitter island/refuge for 2 cars and I was indicating left to turn left just after the splitter, just like I did at least once a day for the 35+ years I lived in the avenue. In all that time I (or the wife) never had a single other issue.
If someone had been stood on the splitter/refuge waiting to cross it could have resulted in more than a badly broken car.
|
The overtaking cars faults are obvious but were the other two of us blameless, probably not.
In the instance I described above there was only one person to blame and that was the stupid and impatient driver doing the overtaking.
Tottaly accepted skidpan, my comments were "in general" and not directed at your incident.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
