speed limits

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Passing up the inside unless in queing traffic is not being carefull as you put it.

You won't be surprised to learn that I disagree . Or more precisely, I believe you are oversimplifying. It is possible to do it carefully, and it is possible to do it non-carefully. Of those two alternatives, there is only one that I would advocate (hint: it's the first one).

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Just how can you be "confident" that a car is not going to change lanes when you are undertaking it

Same way I can be confident (but never certain) that a vehicle won't change lanes on me when I am passing on the right: observation, anticipation and planning. What do you do when you're preparing to overtake?

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

seeing something coming up behind on the inside is likely to cause a realisation that maybe they should be in the LH lane

A very real possibility. Certainly it would be foolish to blindly continue past without giving them the opportunity to notice your approach and seeing how they react. That is all part of considering the situation with care, and again is the sort of thing I'd rather hope would go without saying.

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Moving to the left?. Given that you don't see any issue in passing on the left when any sensible driver would actually pull to the right and pass on the outer side rather risk a run up the inside, I rather thought you wouldn't have too many issues with a sneaky undertake?.

You rather thought wrong (and I'm surprised, because I don't think I've said anything that should have given you that impression - very much the opposite in fact). And you've lost track of where this started. There is no outer side. To reiterate (this started when I replied to jase1 on page 5): it's a two lane road. I'm driving in lane 1. Up ahead I see vehicle slower than me, driving in lane 2 for no apparent reason and staying there. I'm catching them up and we're staying in our respective lanes. One of the options I'm considering at this point is continuing past in lane 1.

One more to add to the list of things that ought to be obvious but (worryingly) seem not to be: considering the manoeuvre is not the same thing as committing to the manoeuvre. Considering happens first, takes some time, involves all the observation, anticipation and planning I mentioned before, and does not necessarily result in committing.

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

I know you didn't say very slow, I read that much from your post, assuming that means you feel the best course of action is to whip down the inside quickly then you are an accident waiting to happen.

There is always the possibility that when you say "whip down the inside quickly", the picture it paints in my mind is not the picture you wanted to paint, so I may be misinterpreting, but "whip down the inside quickly" does not invoke for me an image of careful consideration and assessment prior to committing.

Bongles wrote: »

I'm driving in lane 1. Up ahead I see vehicle slower than me, driving in lane 2 for no apparent reason and staying there. I'm catching them up and we're staying in our respective lanes. One of the options I'm considering at this point is continuing past in lane 1.

A better option would be to read the Highway Code and consider investing in a motorway driving course.:D

Lum wrote: »

The Highway code is not a book of law.

There is no law that prohibits what Bongles suggested, and the advice in the HC for this is a "should not" not a "must not". Only "must not" entries are law, "should not" entries are in fact quite legal.

Problem with the HC is it only works if everybody follows it. Once one person breaks it (e.g. by failing to keep left) then a lot of the advice in the HC no-longer works.

Then forget the highway code, lets all do it our own way:eek:. after all it says not to do U turns at mini roundabouts but that 1 gets nicely forgotten too, (sorry, pet hate).

Of course I do understand what you are saying, but the police action of charging with careless or even dangerouse driving does encompass not driving withine the code, and anyone that thinks it's safe to pass on the inside with a high speed differential is going to have an interesting driving history.

Bongles is making a big deal here of 2 lanes V 3. There is no real difference in the way you should approach these, so what would your view be on likely police action if there was a "coming together of 2 cars under these circumstances?? I bet it's not too dissimilar to mine and I'm sure the other 95% of drivers. Anyway don't the police make their own laws;)

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Then forget the highway code, lets all do it our own way:eek:.

No. Let's understand why the Highway Code offers the advice it does. And let's understand that, unless otherwise specified, it's advice, and when it has unintended consequences (if you're driving at a safe and legal 70 in lane 1 and you catch up with me pootling along at 60 in lane 2, it is noone's intention that you should have to slow down and wait indefinitely for me to change lanes) then it's not inappropriate to consider going against that advice.

It's not completely risk free - nothing in driving ever is. And if you really don't feel comfortable doing it then don't (don't ever do anything you don't feel comfortable doing). You can always slow down and sit behind (preferably in lane 2 so you don't form a rolling roadblock ). But as motorway driving goes, approaching a vehicle in the wrong lane, assessing whether it seems settled in that lane, assessing its reaction to other traffic, assessing it's reaction to your approach, looking for reasons why it might be in that lane, looking for reasons why it might change lanes, and having done all that, sometimes deciding to continue past, seems a lot lower risk than, for example, managing standard rush hour high-speed formation driving.

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Of course I do understand what you are saying, but the police action of charging with careless or even dangerouse driving does encompass not driving withine the code,

"Not driving within the HC" is not the definition of those offences though. A prosecution for one of those offences might offer evidence of going against HC advice to support the argument that the driving was below the required standard. And a defence in such a case would have the opportunity to explain the reasons behind the decision to go against HC advice, and the precautions taken before doing so. If the reason was, "I was in a rush" and the precautions were along the lines of, "well, nothing really" then that's probably not a very strong defence .

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

and anyone that thinks it's safe to pass on the inside with a high speed differential is going to have an interesting driving history.

You can't generalise. It would be wrong to say, about the situation we're discussing, "it's safe to pass on the inside". And it would be wrong to say "it's dangerous to pass on the inside". It might well be safe, but you won't know until you consider each occasion on its merits.

cyclonebri1 wrote: »

Bongles is making a big deal here of 2 lanes V 3.

Two reasons for that: mainly because the post I originally responded to happened to explicitly state it was about 2 lanes rather than 3 . And also, with only two lanes the possibility of moving from lane 1 to 3 and back again to pass the other vehicle doesn't exist.

Bongles - (cylconebri1 has already made some of my points) I'm not sure you've got your reading of the Highway Code right. I can't quote it verbatim, but I think my interpretation is closer than yours.
Put it this way, I'd expect to get pulled over if the police saw me overtake on the left.
If the HC say's 'don't' overtake on the left, then DON'T.
'A Queue of slow moving cars' - this isn't defined, so can be anything from 2 cars at 65mph down in my book depending on the situation. I'm not aware of anything that says motorways aren't included in that. The only place you're allowed to overtake on the left is a one-way street.
In the example I gave I was driving the same road as you, a dual carraigeway. If I approach someone in lane 2 and I'm in lane one, I will GENERALLY move out, flash etc. As you see above, you're not meant to overtake on the left, so you should at least attempt to do the right thing, and maybe educate a pleb along the way! Don't just throw the HC out the window the second you see some numpty disobey it!
Just flying through on the left leaves you open to the car suddenly moving in on you when the driver wakes up!
Direct Debacle repeats the method I suggest, as does jase1 with the vid. I get the odd 'wave' from drivers too, some of whom will move straight back out again.
Strider - you shouldn't expect automatic road rage from every single person on the road.