Which is more illegal? Lane Hogging? Or undertaking somebody lane hogging?

matttye

GabbaGabbaHey wrote: »

Not necessarily true. Apart from the increasing number of "smart" motorway sections with no hard shoulders, you are more likely to encounter a stopped vehicle on the hard shoulder than in any of the driving lanes.

Statistically, the hard shoulder is the most dangerous place to be on a motorway. There have been numerous occasions where emergency or breakdown vehicles - with full lights - have been hit when stopped on the hard shoulder. (Hence the advice that, if you ever have to stop on the hard shoulder, you should ensure that all passengers exit the car - by the nearside doors - and remain behind the armco barriers).

I imagine that the hard shoulder is the most dangerous place to be on the motorway because vehicles are stationary on it/ or possibly because it's the "emergency" lane so most drivers using it have some sort of problem with themselves or their vehicle. So people moving onto the hard shoulder at speed could be liable to hit the other stationary vehicles.

I guarantee however that it would be more dangerous to stop in any of the other lanes!

JustAnotherSaver

I'm surprised none of the do-gooders came in talking about the flashing incident (headlights before anyone gets funny ), i mean since everyone on MSE drives like they're on their test (or so they'd seem to have you believe) do they teach you to go driving behind people flashing them??

I'm not saying it's right or wrong or that i wouldn't do it but the way some of the posters (yeah i know, posters on walls, har-har & all that) act i'm surprised at them suggesting such a thing

I wonder what they'd do if this person 'hogging' the outside lane was doing let's say 40 or 50 with nothing in front of them as far as the eye can see (yes i know, we all have different ranges of sight. You'll have to excuse me since i see how quick some of you are to pick apart posts I'm sure i'll have left something for you to grab on to).

Would these people just sit back waiting for it to open up to a 3 lane while that person was doing 40-50? What if they were doing it in the outside lane of a 3 lane road?


If someone is in the middle lane & i'm on the inside & doing 70 & i'm catching them & there's nothing in front of them then i'm not about to move to their lane, to the outside lane, overtake them, back to the middle lane, back to the inside lane just because they want to sit at 60 in the middle for no good reason.

Yes i may be on camera, yes it's wrong, yes you can call it awkward, but none of you are perfect either. You'll all do your own thing that we can all point fingers at.

Joe_Horner

JustAnotherSaver wrote: »

If someone is in the middle lane & i'm on the inside & doing 70 & i'm catching them & there's nothing in front of them then i'm not about to move to their lane, to the outside lane, overtake them, back to the middle lane, back to the inside lane just because they want to sit at 60 in the middle for no good reason.

Why not? It's not like those lane changes are going to cost you anything and you're presumably a capable enough driver to carry out the manouevre safely?

So why not go round on the expected side and avoid the risk of the obvious cretin failing to see you coming past on the unexpected (to many drivers, especially the cretins) side and choosing that moment to pull left?

GabbaGabbaHey

GTE_Boy wrote: »

I bet he was well impressed at you sat in lane 2 at 70. :rotfl:

As I have (repeatedly) said, there are only (infrequent) circumstances when driving in the middle lane is appropriate. There were no such circumstances during my test - but if there had been, then I would absolutely have driven in the middle lane, and explained my rationale to the examiner as part of my commentary.

GTE_Boy wrote: »

Being in lane one you have the hardshoulder to the left and two lanes to the right.
In lane two you have one lane to the right and a lane and harshoulder to the left.

How is your way any safer than the correct way?

All things being equal, in the circumstances you describe, there isn't a difference. However, not all roads are 3 lanes, and even on 3-lane roads there will be circumstances where the hard shoulder will be compromised (broken down vehicle, snow, whatever).

It's about THINKING about what you're doing when you're driving, and not just robotically following a set of "rules".

GTE_Boy

GabbaGabbaHey wrote: »

As I have (repeatedly) said, there are only (infrequent) circumstances when driving in the middle lane is appropriate. There were no such circumstances during my test - but if there had been, then I would absolutely have driven in the middle lane, and explained my rationale to the examiner as part of my commentary.

All things being equal, in the circumstances you describe, there isn't a difference. However, not all roads are 3 lanes, and even on 3-lane roads there will be circumstances where the hard shoulder will be compromised (broken down vehicle, snow, whatever).

It's about THINKING about what you're doing when you're driving, and not just robotically following a set of "rules".

So now you've invented snow, but surely your advanced observations would see the broken down vehicle well in advance?

This institute of advanced motorist seems a right laugh. And a complete waste of money.

JustAnotherSaver

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Why not? It's not like those lane changes are going to cost you anything and you're presumably a capable enough driver to carry out the manouevre safely?

So why not go round on the expected side and avoid the risk of the obvious cretin failing to see you coming past on the unexpected (to many drivers, especially the cretins) side and choosing that moment to pull left?

Why not? Because i decide not to.

Why don't they pull in? Why do they decide to stay there in the middle forever? Because they decide to.

So they're going to sit in the middle for mile after mile but the moment i pass on the left is the moment they may decide to pull in? Maybe but unlikely.

Call me whatever you like, as is usually the case here (unless you're different to all the others?) but i'm sure you'll do things that are illegal / wrong yourself, despite the fact that no MSE member ever does anything illegal (or so it seems).

GabbaGabbaHey

GTE_Boy wrote: »

So now you've invented snow, but surely your advanced observations would see the broken down vehicle well in advance?

I was just using snow (as, for example, deposited by a snow plough) as yet another example, to help you to understand.

You might see a broken down vehicle in advance - but then again, you might not. It could be just around a bend, or it might have no lights on and be on an unlit section of road.

Once again, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the IAM and has everything to do with driving defensively - making intelligent decision about a whole host of things (not just road positioning, but also speed, gear, car balance, acceleration/deceleration, indicating, use of lights, use of horn, etc) based on a whole host of constantly changing factors (other traffic, weather, temperature, road condition, light levels, information from road signs, etc) in order to make progress in a safe and courteous way.

It is NOT about blindly obeying rules ("must always drive in left lane", "must always indicate", etc) without actually thinking about what you are doing and why you are doing it.

I strongly suggest that you arrange an observed run with a local motoring organisation (IAM, RoSPA, a local independent driving instructor who specialises in post-driving-test instruction, or anyone else) - you might be sobered by how many factors there are in safe driving that you might never have considered.

GTE_Boy

GabbaGabbaHey wrote: »

I was just using snow (as, for example, deposited by a snow plough) as yet another example, to help you to understand.

You might see a broken down vehicle in advance - but then again, you might not. It could be just around a bend, or it might have no lights on and be on an unlit section of road.

Once again, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the IAM and has everything to do with driving defensively - making intelligent decision about a whole host of things (not just road positioning, but also speed, gear, car balance, acceleration/deceleration, indicating, use of lights, use of horn, etc) based on a whole host of constantly changing factors (other traffic, weather, temperature, road condition, light levels, information from road signs, etc) in order to make progress in a safe and courteous way.

It is NOT about blindly obeying rules ("must always drive in left lane", "must always indicate", etc) without actually thinking about what you are doing and why you are doing it.

I strongly suggest that you arrange an observed run with a local motoring organisation (IAM, RoSPA, a local independent driving instructor who specialises in post-driving-test instruction, or anyone else) - you might be sobered by how many factors there are in safe driving that you might never have considered.

A few years ago it snowed in December. Trucks were running all night in lanes 1 and 2 of the M1. Lane 3 was full of snow and you couldn't drive in it. So yet again lane 1, the lane you should drive in was furthest away from the danger.

I take it you've not been retested in your 26 years of IAM membership? They're just happy to take your money ignorant in the fact you're a liability on the road.

k3lvc

God help the OP if he ever comes back and reads all this drivel - he's enough on his plate as a new driver in a temperamental Corsa without having to fathom out all of this as well :rotfl:

Mercdriver

k3lvc wrote: »

God help the OP if he ever comes back and reads all this drivel - he's enough on his plate as a new driver in a temperamental Corsa without having to fathom out all of this as well :rotfl:

KNowing him he'll just open up another 3 threads on the subject