Tailgate and speed

alastairq

not beyond my wit or skill to deal with without drama, I might add...I half expected something like that to happen.....but, once or twice, I needed to light up my brake lights a bit.....the 'pulling out' wasn't the problem....it was the general failure to then get a move-on.

I like car crashes!

Saw three or four this week.[have done much driving about, at son's behest]....and when you see three or four traffic police cars in attendance, you just know there aren't any more out there watching out for me.
1100 miles in four days....mostly round the back roads, as I hate sitting in other peoples' traffic jams....the grotty Fester returned 45-47 mpg's....lots of high-speed gear work too..not bad, even though I hate the thing.

jase1

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

No, it's usually down to people driving far faster than the flow of traffic. Then they have to brake, and there is a knock on effect down the line of traffic that was trying to go faster than everyone else. If they had all been travelling at around the same speed, with a safe distance between them, then the traffic would flow smoothly.

So don't blame the person who doesn't like someone driving a few feet from their bumper, blame the tailgater who is trying to bully his way past.

Actually no.

More often than not, it's drivers travelling below the prevailing speed and diving in front of someone overtaking them.

The two crashes I have witnessed (not involved in, just witnessed) on motorways both happened like that.

alastairq

it's drivers travelling below the prevailing speed and diving in front of someone overtaking them.

As I've said elsewhere, people move out to overtake something, but do little or nothing to increase their speed accordingly.

However, I take issue with the idea of a 'prevailing' speed on a motorway [or any other sort of road].

In the example quoted by jase1, I conclude the logical reason for someone needing to move out is to pass another, slower vehicle?

Therefore, 'prevailing speed' is a mythical number.

Slower than me, faster than you?

The issue is one of not exercising proper care before moving to the right to pass.

Probably not signalling in the proper manner?
[otherwise, the faster-moving vehicle to the right might have increased warning of an impending event, and could take less dramatic action?}

Equally, the driver driving faster should also be exercising better care, observation, and anticipation skills.

Remember, equally, an overtaking driver has a duty to only overtake if safe to do so, and to keep clear of the vehicle being overtaken.

That also applies on a motorway.

So, 'prevailing speed' is whatever speed one wants it to be...as it will never be the same speed for any driver on the road.

So...better signalling [ie, correctly, in good time, and when necessary]....means drivers don't have to be mind readers.
Equally, if someone is signalling properly, that doesn't give us faster-moving drivers the 'right' to run them down...we, too, should allow for them to move out?

Motorways especially are not the sole preserve of high speed drivers.

They are there also for those who simply wish to get from A to B....[maybe not even over a great distance..a 'bypass', perhaps?] with the minimum of inconvenience to themselves....with whatever vehicle can use a motorway legally, and at whatever speed the driver thinks is the safest, or best, speed attainable.


Which might not be the speed you or I wish to drive at?

Then, so what?

jase1

The prevailing speed I am referring to is that which the stream of faster-moving traffic is travelling at, in the 'faster' lane. I didn't think that was an especially problematic concept.

Yes, the fault may not always be solely with the slower driver in this case -- however in the cases I witnessed, the driver pulling out pretty much went into the side of vehicle overtaking it.

One was a lorry, and the Clio ended up being forced into the grass verge -- slowing down or taking evasive action really wasn't an option.

The other was a simple case of pulling out without indicating -- perhaps blame could be placed on the driver who went into the back of them, perhaps not.

But, at the end of the day, if you pull out in front of, and in close proximity to any driver, at any speed, which causes an unexpected speed differential -- I don't care if the other guy was doing 150mph, you are guilty of careless/dangerous driving. No question.

If you are in the inside lane, and there is a train of vehicles to your right, you wait until there is a safe opportunity to pull out. There is no discussion -- you're a bad driver if you do not.

Jamie_Carter

jase1 wrote: »

The prevailing speed I am referring to is that which the stream of faster-moving traffic is travelling at, in the 'faster' lane. I didn't think that was an especially problematic concept.

Yes, the fault may not always be solely with the slower driver in this case -- however in the cases I witnessed, the driver pulling out pretty much went into the side of vehicle overtaking it.

One was a lorry, and the Clio ended up being forced into the grass verge -- slowing down or taking evasive action really wasn't an option.

The other was a simple case of pulling out without indicating -- perhaps blame could be placed on the driver who went into the back of them, perhaps not.

But, at the end of the day, if you pull out in front of, and in close proximity to any driver, at any speed, which causes an unexpected speed differential -- I don't care if the other guy was doing 150mph, you are guilty of careless/dangerous driving. No question.

If you are in the inside lane, and there is a train of vehicles to your right, you wait until there is a safe opportunity to pull out. There is no discussion -- you're a bad driver if you do not.

Unfortunately, it is all too common that people signal, and then just pull out. It's as if they think that because they have signalled then they have to automatic right to change lane, without any consideration for other road users.

The impact that excess speed has is the speed differential shortens reaction times, and also increases the severity of collisions.

alastairq

Equally, 'prevailing speed' could be that at which all the 'slower' traffic is travelling at......and the faster driver is the odd-one-out?

What needs to be taken into account is...everybody, regardless of speed is beholden to exercise due care,pay attention, anticipate the actions of others [as a 'reasonable' driver should?}.....

Not just, one party, or the other.

One was a lorry, and the Clio ended up being forced into the grass verge -- slowing down or taking evasive action really wasn't an option.

Whether or not options existed, you have only assessed the incident from your own viewpoint.

Not from the Clio driver's viewpoint.

Neither can you comment on what the Clio driver saw, or did, because you cannot say for certain what the Clio driver was even thinking, prior to the incident.

Nobody can [or could]....except, perhaps,the Clio driver...and if their own conclusion was that their own driver skills were found wanting, they surely weren't going to admit it.

Perhaps you were thinking, ''if I were driving that Clio, I would not have had any options left?''

In any event, passing comment on options , or what could, or could not have happened is extremely difficult and subjective.