speed limits

Bongles

Lum wrote: »

Out of interest, all the reasons given for not passing on the left, other than "because the highway code says so". Reasons like blindspots and the like.

Actually, I'm not certain what the objection is. There seem to be a few different ones getting mixed up.

Is it an objection on principle to contravening the advice in the HC? To me, that would seem to ignore the difference between the HC and the law - to miss the implications of the fact that this is HC advice, not law. If it were absolutely unacceptable to ever consider doing this, it would be explicitly illegal. As I've said before, absolute, unwavering adherence to the HC for the sake of it would seem to me to be driving by rote rather than by reason, and is not the way I've been encouraged to think about driving in any of the further training I've had.

Or is the objection a belief that if the worst happened, you would be fully responsible for the consequences? I think such a belief would simply be wrong. If someone is themselves violating the Highway Code with their choice of lane, and they then change lanes for no apparent reason and without looking, I can't see them getting away without some difficult questions to answer.

Or is it an objection because passing on the left is thought dangerous? I think that one's been done to death. But for the avoidance of doubt, if you face this situation and you feel that passing on the left would be dangerous then for God's sake don't do it! Don't ever do anything you feel would be dangerous. However, if you believe it is inconceivable that passing on the left could ever be safe, then a) I clearly disagree (really rather strongly) and b) I have to wonder how you ever manage to pluck up the courage to pass on the right.

DirectDebacle wrote: »

No matter how well planned and perfectly executed a bad driving manoeuvre is done, it is still bad driving.

Could you give another example of something that could be well planned but bad driving. It's probably another case of the same words meaning different things to different people, but to me, well planned is kind of the definition of good driving.

DirectDebacle wrote: »

Is it now taught to advanced drivers by the IAM?

I've certainly heard plenty of people from that world advocate this sort of thing. I'd be very surprised if the simple fact that it contravenes the HC would be sufficient to put the IAM off. From what I know they're big fans of using the full width of the road on single carriageways where safe for example, and that's a HC violation.

DirectDebacle wrote: »

In what way is it safer than following the existing Highway Code rules.

You brought this up before, but you never answered my question: Where does the Highway Code talk about dealing with lone drivers in the wrong lane (as distinct from queues and heavy traffic)? Now you're starting to give the impression that you're not familiar with it .

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I'll tell you what Bongles, and I've said it earlier in this post, you do it your way and I/we'll do it ours.
Lets re-convien in 5 years and see who's still alive and/or got the least points on their licence??, deal??:A

If you like . But can we add counting the number of times we get an adverse reaction from another driver? Avoiding that is one of the reasons I favour minimal interaction.

jase1

mikey72 wrote: »

Driving too slowly in the fog, when you can't see the road in front of you.

Well, it's certainly an original theory. Getting in the way of someone driving faster, when he couldn't see you, then he couldn't stop in time. Fault of the car at the front? How many people have you rear ended?

Too slowly in the fog is a bogus argument, but if he had no lights on and the fog was bad enough, I would have some sympathy with a driver who failed to avoid the thump in that instance. His fault of course, but the tendency by some to absolve bad drivers like this hypothetical no-lights chap of any blame at all is something that frequently irritates me.

Lum

Here's the objections I commonly see to passing on the left:

It's against the highway code - therefore it's illegal

This one has been done to death on this thread. It's not illegal and the highway code is not a book of law.


It's against the highway code - therefore you will be liable in the event of an accident if the other person changes lane

It's also against the highway code to change lane without looking, a more serious transgression than overtaking on the left.


It's less safe because people tend not to look left before changing lanes

While it is generally true that fewer people look left before changing lanes, I would argue that an MLM is unlikely to change lanes in either direction and even less likely to look when they do so.

You can mitigate this by performing the overtake quickly so as to reduce the time spent exposed to danger.


It's less safe because there are bigger blind spots on the left of the car than on the right

Possibly true, though it's counteracted by the face that to check the left mirror they have to actually look left.

Again, this can be mitigated by performing the overtake quickly. In all cases you should be looking to reduce or eliminate the time you spend in another vehicle's blind spot.


Overtaking is inherently unsafe

While it is true that overtaking carries a certain risk, so choosing to get into your car and start driving in the first place. Driving is ultimately an exercise in risk management and the risk of overtaking can be brought to an acceptable level by taking various measures to reduce the risk such as minimising the time spent alongside another vehicle, ensuring that the road ahead is clear enough to complete your overtake safely and so on.

I would also argue that sitting behind an unobservant numpty MLM is also a risky thing to do. They may decide that your 2secs following distance is tailgating, brake test you, and then you discover that you have a brake fault, or they may change lanes into the side of someone else who over/under takes causing a pileup right in front of you. It could be argued that it is safer to put that muppet safely in your rear view mirror where and potential bad driving on their part cannot possibly affect you.

mikey72

Lum wrote: »

Here's the objections I commonly see to passing on the left:

It's against the highway code - therefore it's illegal

This one has been done to death on this thread. It's not illegal and the highway code is not a book of law............

It might as well be, if you break the highway code, and have an accident, or get seen by the police, there's a high chance you'll be found guilty when you go to court.
Due car and attention, dangerous driving, and your insurance will still be paying.
If you're following it, it's good practice, and normally an adequate defence.
But you're right, breaking the highway code is never going to be an offence like exceeding the speed limit, or drunk driving.
But it'll never need to be.

Bongles

mikey72 wrote: »

It might as well be, if you break the highway code, and have an accident, or get seen by the police, there's a high chance you'll be found guilty when you go to court.

If you genuinely believe that if someone changed lanes for no apparent reason and without looking, the driver they hit could be found guilty of careless or dangerous driving, despite having an explanation for what they were doing and explaining the precautions they'd taken before doing it, then all I can say is feel free in this situation to wait behind in lane 2 indefinitely until they move into lane 1.

But I cannot conceive of how anyone could believe that.

mikey72

If you want to try to pass me on the nearside, when I move back in, yes, I'll wipe you out, if you're expecting me to check, and then you may be in my blindspot anyway.
Golden rule, don't expect me to check for undertakers, ever.

bleepandbooster

So lets have a look at the M42 by Brum ............. 3 lanes by the NEC/Solihul, the hard shoulder sometimes becomes a 4th lane to ease congestion. Most of the traffic stays as they are, but some drivers then dive up the hard shoulder like ferrets down a drain pipe ! Surely opening the inside lane/hard shoulder encourages drivers to under take ???

Driving in the US drivers undertake/overtake all the time you have to have eyes up your backside and nerves of steel !!!!!!!!! It's about time we should be allowed to turn left on a red light aswell if it is safe to do so ............ what's the point of sitting there when the road is clear !!!!!!!!!!

Hope I haven't opened another bag of worms !

Cofion
David

Lum

re: The M42 hardshoulder running thing most of the time it says "Hardsholulder - exit at junction X only", but I think you'll find a lot of people think it's a bad idea, or at least a problematic idea.

Most of my motorway driving these days is on the M4 in South Wales, and one that's recently become common is people will sit in the middle lane because they have just passed a junction where the left hand lane becomes an exit and 5 miles further down there is another junction that does the same thing.

What I find interesting is that this behaviour has become much more common since HADECS went in and people are getting paranoid about the cameras. It was very rarely an issue before.

mikey72 wrote: »

If you want to try to pass me on the nearside, when I move back in, yes, I'll wipe you out, if you're expecting me to check, and then you may be in my blindspot anyway.
Golden rule, don't expect me to check for undertakers, ever.

I think we can safely discount any opinions offered by this guy who openly admits to not doing a blindspot check before changing lanes and thinks it's ok to cause a collision. What if the person you hit has just joined the motorway and happens to be alongside you eh?

mikey72

Lum wrote: »

.........I think we can safely discount any opinions offered by this guy who openly admits to not doing a blindspot check before changing lanes and thinks it's ok to cause a collision. What if the person you hit has just joined the motorway and happens to be alongside you eh?

I find that quite ironic.

You all profess to be skilled drivers, capable of ignoring the highway code, and being able to drive safely at all times, speed, undertake, criticise middle lane hoggers, have outstanding observational skills, but ultimately confess that your skills actually come down to relying on all the "poor" drivers ensuring they see you, and they have to keep you safe?
Doesn’t that suggest your skills may really be lower than theirs?

If someone has just joined the motorway next to me, and ultimately relies on me seeing him, I would suggest that their skills are quite low as well, if they can't work out where the blind spot is on other cars, and perhaps they shouldn't be driving on motorways.

Do you also believe you should pull out in front of other cars, as they should see you and stop?

jase1

mikey72 wrote: »

If you want to try to pass me on the nearside, when I move back in, yes, I'll wipe you out, if you're expecting me to check, and then you may be in my blindspot anyway.
Golden rule, don't expect me to check for undertakers, ever.

Sorry, but anyone who does not check a lane before moving into it, is a terrible driver in my book.

Unless what you actually mean is you'd do it deliberately. In which case you're just filth.