whats the best way to make a slow driver go faster?

alastairq

To me the solution is what I posted in my previous post, two tier licences and to ensure that speed limits are set by traffic engineers based purely on safety, not by councillors based on politics and tabloid news articles.

sadly, whilst it may appear that political pressure exerts influence, it usually does so due to local pressure not getting anywhere.

In other words, it is a tool used by all today to try to achieve an end.

But changes to a speed limit are, in the end, governed by regulation...and highway engineers have the final say and input.

Of course, if their decision happens to coincide with a political influence, what can we say?

The upside of these changes being governed by regulation is, they can be challenged.

Trouble is, everyone affected wants to moan, but so very few actually do something about it.

spin_doctor_2

Before anyone makes a comment about the title - it isn't refereeing to a garment that Noel Edmonds would wear.

Is there a growing frequency in people going over junction and ignoring red lights in the process? From my experience drivers are not just missing them by split seconds, they are several seconds late, without changing their speed.

Lum

Yes it is more common. In my opinion it's yet another symptom of poorly thought out safety measures.

Some councils, Liverpool are notorious for it, decided to deal with the red light problem by adding or increasing an "all red" phase in the lights. This does admittedly reduce accidents as it mitigates the effect of jumping the red light because there wont be another vehicle coming the other way.

The problem is it also encourages and reinforces the notion that it's ok to amber-gamble, or just proceed through on red because there is a massive all red phase anyway. In some parts of Liverpool the red light may as well mean "only 4 more cars allowed", and it's perfectly safe to do this.

The problem comes when those drivers are taken out of Liverpool and drive in an area that uses a more traditional red light setup. Especially since they'll be safely back home in bed (assuming they didn't crash) long before the red light NIP arrives in the post.

Once again we need proper policing to fix this, especially as red light cameras can't determine the few emergency situations where it may be necessary to cross the stop line on red, for example to avoid being rear ended by the car that's skidding and failing to stop.

alastairq

Once again we need proper policing to fix this, especially as red light cameras can't determine the few emergency situations where it may be necessary to cross the stop line on red, for example to avoid being rear ended by the car that's skidding and failing to stop.

I agree with the notion of 'proper policing'...which falls at the first hurdle due to costs and manpower availability.......not to mention the 'why aren't you out chasing burglars instead' brigade.

Which means, using technology...which patently upsets the 'it's not fair' brigade...or the 'discretion' advocates.

The offence of failing to comply with the red light, etc etc, is basically complete, ie no half measures....just like 'exceeding the speed limit'.

The 'emergency' situations you refer to, are dealt with at the 'mitigation' stage..ie guilty of offence, but there are mitigating circumstances.

If the Magistrates accept the evidence, then the outcome is usually favourable.

The problem is, ......the evidence.

For example, actually being able to demonstrate that one would have actually been hit in the first place, and consequently pushed forwards?


Another typical example is where a driver moves across the 'stop' line on a red light, to allow an emergency vehicle to make 'progress'...

Again, the offence is complete, the mitigation being, to allow the emergency vehicle to move....however, evidence in the form of , perhaps, logbook entries, registration numbers, times, etc from the emergency service concerned...all have to be acquired by the defendant ....camera evidence may not actually be available....but can be used.

Much of the above requires the driver to have a very clear head at the time, gathering the necessary details.

Most won't think about it.

Which is why it is perfectly OK to stay where you are, despite the nee-nahs , [a bit of thought needs applying when using nee-nahs anyway....to avoid panicking nervous drivers in front.].....all of which will no doubt be contrary to what a big minority of drivers think when dealing with emergency vehicles anyway.

You end up making some hard choices...and the 'saving of vital seconds' really is a myth, traffic conditions being what they are.

bazster

alastairq wrote: »

No, overtaking is not inherently dangerous, if done correctly, bearing in mind the responsibilities placed upon the overtaking driver/rider by Law...

Are you seriously suggesting that being temporarily on the "wrong" side of the road is not more dangerous than being on the "correct" side of the road? Seriously?

alastairq wrote: »

And, no, 'getting it over with as quickly as possible' isn't necessarily the 'safest' thing to do.

partly because, by driving at the fastest speed your vehicle can manage, even if only briefly, severaly limits the ability of the overtaking driver/rider to cope with, what for them may be, an unforeseen siltation. Or a change in circumstance.

Dithering over an overtake severely increases the likelihood of an unforseen situation or a change in circumstances. As does contemplating your speedo whilst overtaking instead of concentrating on the manoeuvre.

alastairq

Are you seriously suggesting that being temporarily on the "wrong" side of the road is not more dangerous than being on the "correct" side of the road? Seriously?

Absolutely!

Unless, of course, one tries to overtake without observing correctly in the first place?

Even if one's observations are less-than-perfect, there is always the option of aborting the overtake?

But then, if you think there is something 'dangerous' about you overtaking something, then don't!

Dithering over an overtake severely increases the likelihood of an unforseen situation or a change in circumstances. As does contemplating your speedo whilst overtaking instead of concentrating on the manoeuvre.

'dithering about' seems to be your impression of what was posted, not mine.

And if you have concerns about including your speedometer in with your other observations that, as 'good' driver you should be making, then a course of additional training might be beneficial?

If you are so concerned about any dangers involved, then it would be better if you didn't overtake anything.

Until you have found out how to minimise all risks to an acceptable level [by observation, forward-planning, etc]....then you will run the risk of not complying with the Law......and not just about exceeding the speed limit, either.

Right next to the Highway Code in WH Smiths is a wee book called 'Roadcraft'.....it is a 'self-teaching-format' text book on 'advanced' driving.

Advanced driving is the level one ought to progress to after passing one's test....and it helps if some guidance is sought to that end.

'Roadcraft' is a cheap way of doing it....it is also the text book for Advanced driving courses within the various Constabularies, and the Armed Forces.

It doesn't present itself as the 'be-all-and-end-all' of 'advanced driving'.....but provides a good foundation.

If the individual cannot grasp a concept, or understand something, then enrolling in a RoSPA or IAM course might create clarity...but they cost money and time.


The only item missing from Cat B driver training, in my humble view, is the compulsion to teach [and observe] correct overtaking techniques.....then we wouldn't ave so many drivers floundering around 'in the dark', so to speak? [and therefore, few, if any problems with 'slower vehicles?']

Lum

alastairq wrote: »

The problem is, ......the evidence.

For example, actually being able to demonstrate that one would have actually been hit in the first place, and consequently pushed forwards?


Another typical example is where a driver moves across the 'stop' line on a red light, to allow an emergency vehicle to make 'progress'...

Thing is, it's technically feasible to make a red light camera that is actually fair, punishing those who deliberately go through on red and leaving alone those who have to go through for some other reason.

Keep the existing loops in the road that are used to fire the existing red light camera, but replace the camera itself with a HD video camera that is set further back from the junction than is currently the case.

This camera would be constantly recording, but any footage more than 2.5 minutes old is discarded. When the loops are triggered, that 2.5 minutes in the buffer is saved and the camera continues to record for a further 2.5 minutes, more if the loops are triggered multiple times.

The resulting video is then sent to the fixed penalty office for analysis by the same people who currently review the mobile van videos.

This would then allow for discretion in cases such as the one that happened to my partner where she had to go through the red light and the car that was screeching to a halt behind her ended up sideways across the stop line. It would also allow for the more common situation with an emergency services vehicle.

This would be a fair system, it would allow for those with mitigating circumstances not to be hassled with gathering evidence and for those who are deliberately putting others in danger to be punished as previously.

Which is why it will never happen.

Weird_Nev

GOd I hope I never get trapped in a Pub with alastairQ.....

For the OP's (trolling) question, the answer is quite simple. You don't do anything to make them go faster. They are travelling at a speed they are comfortable with for a reason. It is down ot you to deal with that. You can pass them when safe in order to continue to make progress. If you can't manage that, then you have to deal with the situation by following at a safe distance and accepting that they might cost you a minute or two of your time but nothing more. It's not hard.

However, the ensuing debate has been an interesting read.

For the record, I'm an advanced Police Driver. I've had 2 weeks response driver training and then 4 weeks advanced driver training. I have regular check tests. I'd estimate that I've spent longer under training in excess of 100Mph than "the average" driver has spent under any form of tuition at all. I've been driving 17 years, 10 of them as a police driver, and I'm yet to have any accident, incident, penalty points (on police permit or public licence) or insurance claims.

I can see what Lum means by "stealth overtakes" and I can envisage waht he means by his description of them, but I have to say I do not like that terminology at all. It is down to a driver considering an overtake to make sure that his actions are transparent and readable by all. No-one shoulfd be under any doubt that they are about to be overtaken, and it should always be born in mind that someone might not be expecting a car to appear alongside them. Once an overtake is underway, the first phase is to move over to the offside before accelerating and this serves 2 important fuctions: Firstly it allows a clear and unobstructed view of the whole road ahead, meaning you can confirm that the manouver as planned is safe. Secondly, it leaves no-one in any doubt, either ahead of you or behind, that you intend to overtake.

The single most dangerous thing about overtaking is the reaction it often provokes from other road users. You get people who accelerate, increasing the overtaking vehicles time on the offside. This can be mitigated by exploiting a performance differential, but it is still an option. You also get people swerving, or actively trying to block the manouver - incredibly dangerous. Then of course you get the good old "Full beam headlights how DARE you overtake and come onto my side of the road!" which is more often than not not really a problem, unles sit's dark of course. HOwever, you need to be aware of the negative actions your behaviour as a driver can provoke, and account and plan for them. The swervers/accelerators usually give the game away through the cars body language as you approach and plan the overtake. A huge part of advanced driver training is learning to read these signals and develop a "sixth sense". Stereotyping can often help. The chavvy Corsa, the Flat cap Nissan Almera, The Zafria full of Kids, The high performance Hatchback... All of these will more often than not confrom to typecast and can be planned for and dealt with.

You can type/talk about overtaking all day long, but it's a practical skill and it has to be practiced and learnt by DOING, not reading. I read roadcraft before having advanced tuition, and I have to say it totally broke my driving. You simply can't digest and appreciate what it is trying to show you without skilled and dilligent tuition. Having deconstructed my driving, however, it gave a great basis to rebuilt is in a far more methodical, structured approach. I'm glad to say I feel I can drive quickly, safely with the best of them.

I would like to raise this though: I drive quickly every time I get into a car, my own car or for work purposes. Sometimes I have legal exemption for this, sometimes I do not and I knowingly and willfully breaking speed limits (but never knowingly in a stated speed limit). Quite often you will find me driving significantly SLOWER than posted limits, even with blues and twos on, because to drive faster would be dangerous in my assessment. I am well overdue points. If and when I get unlucky (and I like to think astute observation has saved me thus far) I will stand up and take my point like a man. Small price to pay for the time I've saved and the fun I've had over the years.

However, in my life and in my own cars, i have had just 3 occasions when I have genuinely driven as fast as my vehicle and my skill set would allow:

1) My grandmother had a heart attack, I was 40 miles away but the closes family memeber to her. I had to drive my Nissan 200SX to get to her, along motorways and A-Roads. I was fully prepared to drive as fast as necessary. By and large, my progress was unimpeded apart from 2 cars, both Audis, who saw fit to willfully block my progress on the Motorway simply because I wanted to "go faster than them". I dealt with the situation, but I was painfully aware that to them they were just being road captains, but in my minds eye they were potentially denying me and my grandmother from seeing a loved one for the very last time.

2) My Father had a very serious stroke and was in a coma in hospital. This time, I was actually 90 miles away. I had a 1.6 1988 Toyota MR2 at my disposal. Again, I was prepared to drive as fast as possible, whilst remaining safe and in control and using the training I had had, to get to his bedside. This time, and I put it largely down to the cheeky and cute image of the MR2, I had literally NO problems at all despite being comfortably over three figures most of the way there. People were courteous and got out of my way as I approached, and It actually felt like I had Blue lights on the car.

3) When my wife was in labour, (a very quick labour as it turned out! Her waters broke as I walked her through the maternity ward doors) I had to driver her about 20 miles to our nearest unit. Baby arrived weeks eearly, so I hadn't had time to do a dry run, so I was driving unsighted, in our 1.3 Mazda. Again, I was happy to drive as fast as I could safely and smoothly for my wifes comfort, to get us there as it was evident things were progressing pretty fast! I have to say, I was absolutely on it. It was the middle of the night, so there were only a few overtakes required, but I was very, very glad of the training I had received. Even my wife said after baby was born that she was really glad I could drive, because she felt safe in the knowledge that not only would we get there quickly as she was in the throws of labour, but that we would get there safely too despite the fact we were going really pretty quickly at times.

My point is this: Sometimes, people have a real reason for wanting to be somewhere else, fast. How do you feel about blocking someones progress in one of the situations above? Sure, you've prevented them from breaking the LAW by blocking their overtake, or boxing them in on the motorway..... Not really your place though is it? The police can catch them and deal with them as they see fit, but as a motorist it's your job to drive with courtesy and respect for everyone, even those who want to go a bit faster than you do.

alastairq wrote: »

No, driving is not 'dangerous'.

alastairq wrote: »

No, overtaking is not inherently dangerous, if done correctly, bearing in mind the responsibilities placed upon the overtaking driver/rider by Law...

To be honest, Alastair, you sound like a really dangerous character from your descriptions throughout this thread. You appear to feel you are a far better driver than everyone else, and you appear to have a very naive and black and white view of the world (or driving). The moment you start to think that you're better than the rest, or the moment you stop regarding driving as a dangerous activity is the moment you come unstuck! Driving is pretty much THE MOST dangerous activity most of us participate in on a regular basis. Skydiving and Motorcycling are about the only things that beat it, even in the relatively safe environment of UK roads.
And overtaking is a complex manouver. It brings you into potential conflict with a number of other road users, it provokes negative reactions from those who don't know any better, and particularly if you're untrained in the art it can put you into incredibly dangerous situations far, far faster than almost any other common driving manouver.
To dismiss these things as "not dangerous" is to show complacency bordering on negligence, IMO.

David_Aston

Just read your post tod. Looked at your initial responses and then jumped to the end. If someone has already commented, sorry. Thanks for a gentle, and humourous bit of trolling!

andy8442

Wow this one got out of control, well done Tod.

Back to the OP, shoot out the tyres, and frag the driver!