driving slow : your views ?

nobbysn*ts

Classic line on Mock the Week just. Suggesting an anti speeding advert, 'Just show Richard Hammond trying to remember his own wedding day' And with that I think I'll leave you to drive at a speed you believe I'll make you safe at when you either follow, or try to pass me (or others) you believe should be responsible for you. And if the coroner's pi*sed off with me about you, well, I'll take it on the chin.

matttye

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

Obviously, we overtake differently. What sort of speeds do you overtake at, and what procedure do you use to overtake?

If it's not that busy I'll drive at 80 for almost the entire stretch of dual carriageway/motorway that I drive on, unless I have to slow down for some reason.

If I'm approaching a vehicle in front and the overtaking lane is safe to move into, I'll move into it. Once I've passed the vehicle, if I can see that it's only going to be a few seconds until I pass the next vehicle, I'll remain in the overtaking lane until I've passed that next vehicle, and so on... If, however, after overtaking, there are no more vehicles to overtake, I'll move back into the normal driving lane.

Throughout the whole scenario described above I won't change speed unless something dictates that I should (e.g. if I'm gaining on a vehicle that's also overtaking).

matttye

brat wrote: »

In those circumstances a passing speed of more than 10 mph would be unadvisable. That would allow plenty of opportunity to resolve any conflict with a motorist pulling out into a closing space.

I understand what you're saying, but I'm saying that if you try to account for others' stupidity all the time, you'll never get anywhere.

Think about it... if the person moving into the overtaking lane made appropriate checks, it wouldn't matter whether I was passing at 10 mph, 20 mph, 30 mph or even 50 mph.

You're effectively trying to anticipate for someone else's stupidity, but people could be stupid at any time. Someone could drive straight into the back of you when you slow down and let the truck out. Someone could slam into the side of you while you're overtaking sensibly. Etc...

Nearly_Old

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

....... you believe should be responsible for you. And if the coroner's pi*sed off with me about you, well, I'll take it on the chin.

No you actually posted the section from the HC that says quite clearly that you are repsonsible for checking that the lane behind is clear. The last one I was invloved with, although it was one of the other engineers that appeared as the witness with that pi*sed the coroner off also pi*sed the Police/CPS off I belive got 3 years and a 5 year ban .

nobbysn*ts

matttye wrote: »

If it's not that busy I'll drive at 80 for almost the entire stretch of dual carriageway/motorway that I drive on, unless I have to slow down for some reason.

If I'm approaching a vehicle in front and the overtaking lane is safe to move into, I'll move into it. Once I've passed the vehicle, if I can see that it's only going to be a few seconds until I pass the next vehicle, I'll remain in the overtaking lane until I've passed that next vehicle, and so on... If, however, after overtaking, there are no more vehicles to overtake, I'll move back into the normal driving lane.

Throughout the whole scenario described above I won't change speed unless something dictates that I should (e.g. if I'm gaining on a vehicle that's also overtaking).

If I pass a truck, I'll probably be doing about 70. But I will assess the space at the front of the vehicle, and I'll pass if I can clear the truck, and get my car in front of the cab. Even if I stay in the outside lane, I'll assess it for the next truck before committing again. So I'll never be next to a truck unless I'm overtaking, and I'll never overtake unless there is a clear space in front of the truck I'm overtaking. So it does mean that if the trucks are so close there is no safety gap, I'll lift off, and won't commit. That works, as if the trucks are that close, the back one will be wanting to overtake, so I'll be in a position to abort my overtake without drama. If my gap disappears as I overtake, ie, the truck I'm overtaking gains on the truck in front, I'll pass the cab, but then slow slightly, so I can still assess the next overtake, and know the truck cab next to me knows I'm still there. So each overtake is individual, I assess each one before I commit, and I'm never in harms way. I don't brake, but I do lift off if I need to. I'll also do the same if the lane I'm in is queued, I'll never hover next to a truck, I'll always drive behind the trailer, or in front of the cab. , Works so far.

nobbysn*ts

Nearly_Old wrote: »

No you actually posted the section from the HC that says quite clearly that you are repsonsible for checking that the lane behind is clear. The last one I was invloved with, although it was one of the other engineers that appeared as the witness with that pi*sed the coroner off also pi*sed the Police/CPS off I belive got 3 years and a 5 year ban .

That would be a one in a million, and nothing as simple as pulling out on a motorway to overtake the truck in front, while someone was speeding up behind. Maybe drinking, multiple pile up, but there's more to it than a simple move out from a queue.

Nearly_Old

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

That would be a one in a million, and nothing as simple as pulling out on a motorway to overtake the truck in front, while someone was speeding up behind. Maybe drinking, multiple pile up, but there's more to it than a simple move out from a queue.

Someone changed lanes without looking, or if they did look they didn't see, multi-vehicle collision, single female fatality. The driver's attitude upset a lot of people among them the jury - jurys can be very unpredictable.

TBH there is an immense amount of variability in accidents. I've seen CCTV footage from a scheme on the M1 with a 3 on 2 contra-flow (5 lanes on one carriageway) where a petrol tanker has a blow out and swerves all the other 4 lanes and somehow misses all the other vehicles. Another time what seems to be a "routine" 4 vehicle nose-to-tail accident has 2 fatalities as one vehicle was carrying steel plates that have broken free and gone through the windscreen of another vehicle. So just changing lanes without making sure that its safe to do so, safe being the operative word, could just result in flashing lights and fist on the horn, or it might be far more serious and that to a great extent is pure chance.

brat

Nearly_Old wrote: »

Gatsos were only ever a temporary measure as their effect is very limited. In an attempt to reduce the severity of accidents the area I managed used blue Police "Speed Check Area" signs and at first these were actually very effective. Unfortunately the HA (Highways Agency) said that these could only be used if the Police actually did some speed enforcement. We then lobbied the HA to be allowed to use Gatsos when we had contra-flow working until the first SPECS systems got type approval. The aim was to try and reduce speeds when in contra-flow and later to provide some protection to the workforce.

Our area, and most I'm familiar with, used Gatsos in roadworks from about 1995/6, well before the use, or even the consideration of the use of specs, so I'm not sure that I buy the theory that Gatsos were only designed as a temporary measure due to their ineffectiveness. The argument doesn't hold up anyway, because the same ineffectiveness would translate directly to Gatso use on non-motorway roads, and these have never been talked about as a temporary measure.

The point is, however, that TRL595 recognised no safety improvement in specs over active speed enforcement, and the gatso, the weapon of choice of most speed camera partnerships, was less safe than no speed enforcement.

One unexpected by-product was that when questions were raised by people having received a NIP, I was not there, its actually my wife's car, etc the number of straying wives was twice that of straying husbands!

Hmmm... I'll let you get away with that as a humorous anecdote, no more.

brat

matttye wrote: »

I understand what you're saying, but I'm saying that if you try to account for others' stupidity all the time, you'll never get anywhere.

Think about it... if the person moving into the overtaking lane made appropriate checks, it wouldn't matter whether I was passing at 10 mph, 20 mph, 30 mph or even 50 mph.

You're effectively trying to anticipate for someone else's stupidity, but people could be stupid at any time. Someone could drive straight into the back of you when you slow down and let the truck out. Someone could slam into the side of you while you're overtaking sensibly. Etc...

That's the value of awareness and anticipation at all times. It's not about right or wrong, it's about self preservation. I would not be prosecuted for a collision caused when legally overtaking someone on a motorway who pulled out into my path making the collision unavoidable. But I like to think I drive in such a way that such an event would never happen - and it doesn't significantly impede progress.
Road safety is best served when we each maximise our own personal safety buffer. That way, we don't put ourselves in situations where we are likely to create risk for ourselves and others, and if we or someone else inadvertently or inconsiderately makes a manoeuvre that creates a risk, the other party's personal safety buffer should prevent us all from becoming a victim.

brat

Nearly_Old wrote: »

If only - but its not a nice perfect world. If there are two single vehicles with a gap between them then yes it is easy to judge if the gap is constant or closing and take appropriate action. However there is a local service area that has a large truck park so at certain times there are long convoys (i.e. >10 trucks) travelling nose to tail. Now on the 3-lane sections it isn't too bad as to be safe you can, if you want to, move over to Lane 3 until you've got past them all but on the 2-lane sections it isn't that clear cut. Another post suggests keeping the speed differential down to <=10mph - at certain times this would result in a very siginificant queue and that inceases the accident risk.

This is a very precise specific situation that you've highlighted, but if you have a queue of HGVs in lane one of a two lane dual, most of whom are slowing down to come off at a junction, I wouldn't dream of flashing past in lane two at such a speed that wouldn't allow me to avoid a collision with an HGV that I could easily anticipate might pop out of the pack into lane two.