Safe Speed Forums

Another

You are closing on another vehicle, there is more than enough time and free lane space to smoothly move to the right and pass.

Does it matter what lane that vehicle is in providing there is at least one available lane to its right?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

What is there is a vehicle closing in on the vehicle that is closing in on the vehicle in L2?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Points for Peegee.

I understand the safety point you are trying to make about the 500ft stopping distance for the lorry however I believe you have also failed to think this through completely.

You contention is that you need a minimum rear clearance of 500ft however this is only the case if your vehicle stopped instantaneously in front of the lorry, something you would find a little uncomfortable I think. It is more likely that your car would take around 200ft to stop so your required safety clearance is in fact 300ft. The greater the speed differential you have over the lorry the greater your stopping distance will be and consequentially the smaller the clearance required. It is also quite possible that you will not have to brake any harder than the lorry, after all if you are in a gap between two lorries the one in front is not going to stop any faster than the one behind you can. Providing you leave at least enough space to allow both yourself and the trailing lorry to react you should be fairly safe though adding at least some margin makes sense and I would not expect anyone to dive into a gap for a couple of seconds to let me past.

The other issue you may encounter by simply thinking 500ft is safe rather than having an understanding of the dynamics of motorways will occur when you come to a stop and the lorry driver behind is either asleep, suffering a heart attack or battling with failed brakes.

Finally, if another driver could pull into the left lane undertake you and pull out again without having less than a two second gap to their front and rear between you or the lorries at any time then you should probably have been in that left lane.

The above is completely my opinion, I in no way represent the views of the owner of this site.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Then there may not be enough time and space to perform the pass which is not the question I asked.

In your case the third vehicle only becomes an issue if either there are no extra lanes to the right or the relative speeds are such that it needs to occupy the same space as the second vehicle during the overtake.

In general then.

If sufficient capacity exists to allow faster vehicles to safely and without deviation in speed overtake a slower leading vehicle does it matter what lane the leading vehicle is in?

I am afraid bed beckons so providing another two pages or so don't get added tonight I hope to finish my train of thought in the morning. If you are interested anyway.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

That also does occur. But when I make this manouvre und return to L1 - I have usually closed in on the MLM whilst in L1. I cannot undertake .. so I then move out into L2 und then into L3 .. overtake und then return to L2/L1 with ample two seconds shown to the village idiot throughout.


If busy - I indicate und merge into the traffic behind the stupid driver .. then .. indicate to merge into traffic in L3 .. then overtake und then return to L2 ahead. Quick glances ahead tell me if more overtaking required of anything in L1 und I continue until I get to point at which I can cruise at reasonable speed in L1.

If the motorways merge as with M6/M55 or M60 wth M61/62/602/A6144/M56 - then it a case of COAST for all the road signs to plan position with regard to the other traffic.

It called using each of COAST as lieber IG intend. (He hardest teacher if he observe your drive objectively I think he stricter than lieber von really )

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

If there's no traffic around, I use whatever lane is most appropriate to the structure of the road (usually more applicable to dual carriageways than motorways mind). Inside lane to turn right, outside lane to turn left etc.
Being on a bike, it's very rare that anyone wants to go faster than me...but on the occassion that Captain Subaru or Mr Beemer grows in my mirrors, I say hello to L1.

I think it does. If someone is sat in L2 when L3 is clear and there's a vehicle closing on them, are they staying in L2 because they're fully aware of the other vehicle and the availability of L3, or because they're a dozy git who hasn't got a clue and would still be stuck in L2 even if L3 wasn't an option but L1 was clear?

Moving over when you become aware of a fast mover behind you shows that you've got at least some situational awareness, it also means that it's the slower moving vehicle that's making the lane change...

_________________
Chris

Surely it all boils down to courtisy and respect for a fellow road user though?

Surely the escence of a good driver is one who doesn't impeed or otherwise affect other road users?

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

They may be a dozy git, they may have seen (or think they have seen) some debris in L1 or have any number of (to them) legitimate reasons for using L2. If they do not affect you other than to having to move over an extra lane and back does this really cause a problem?

Personally I would hope they would pull into L1 or have an obvious reason not to. I try not to be irritated if they do not though, and remember, we are not talking about any blocking to progress.

Edited - I am having a bit of a punctuation holiday.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

As unlikely as some of my scenarios though. You are always going to have some kind of effect so probably the aim of a good driver is to minimise their negative effect on other road users. Which is maybe what you meant?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

But if slower vehicle is in L2 and faster vehicles (note 's') approach in L3, then the second L3 vehicle could already be passing first vehicle in L3 if L2 vehicle was over in L1

Yeah, I'd say same difference TBH but your wording is more like it. You know what I'm getting at anyway.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

I like it. I've spawned a 'brainstorming' topic from it: http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15467

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

If the passing vehicles have to adjust speed then the stated conditions of the question are not met.

Sorry being really pedantic here, if it helps I am not trying to prove that it is OK to be an MLM just trying to see if there is a boundary at which the keep left rule ceases to be necessary.

Is the rule to be-

1) Keep left regardless of whether it affects anyone or not.
Nice and easy and enforceable by a yet to be invented automatic system.

2) Keep left regardless providing it is not unsafe to do so.

3) Keep left if not doing so causes another driver to take an action which they would not have otherwise had to make even if such action has no effect on their safety or progress.

4) Keep left if not doing so affects the progress of another vehicle and/or compromises their safety.

5) Keep left if not doing so affects the progress of another vehicle and/or compromises their safety providing it does not compromise your safety.

6) Keep left if not doing so affects the progress of another vehicle and/or compromises their safety providing it does not compromise your safety or progress.

.
.
.

x) Keep left unless you cannot be bothered and anyway the car behind must be going too fast if they caught you.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

In which case the driver closing in would have probably seen them move out into L2 and (hopefully) would then also be aware that L1 might be blocked.



If it's just one faster vehicle that has to move into L3 to get by, then perhaps not (other than it being the faster vehicle that's making the additional lane changes), but what about when the next fast mover turns up, or the one after that? IMO, we should be looking to minimise the number of lane changes performed overall, not just to minimise the number we individually perform. I think this goes along with the comment sixy made earlier...

_________________
Chris

Possibly or possibly not, I was aiming for the simplest scenario to try and get a simple answer. Find the basic requirement and work up to reality.



Interesting idea.

Car1 L2
Car2 L1->L2->L3->L2->L1
Car1 L2

4 Changes with car2 in control

or

Car1 L2->L1
Car2 L1->L2->L1
Car1 L1->L2

4 changes though arguably car1 should have been in L1

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

your assuming that the captain flash is in l1 :) from my experience thats unlikely.

most pursue their pastime in l3 - on 3 lane motorways.

up north here where our motorways are mainly l1 and l2 - they harass the hell out of people going less than their 80mph+.

Try it sometime coming into glasgow on the last few miles of the two lane m74 - always lorries clogging l1 - and you have to stick to l2. The gaps between lorries aint safe.

But captain flash still sits on your tail and 10 feet and 75mph - bullying his way thru.

Bottomline is that in slowing down these idiots captain flash and co - we're actually making them think about their excessive speed in the eyes of the law. There isnt anywhere for us to go - and the road is too busy to jump out of the way safely - so captain has to slow and be patient - now I just hear hell freezing over...

All anyone asks is that you are considerate to all fellow motorists, and that you don't judge people and become deliberately difficult towards them just because they may be doing something (that doesn't affect you) that you personally feel is not right.

Defensive drivers are reasonable towards everyone, and don't become unreasonable to "get revenge" or teach someone a lesson. All anyone is asking you to do is to be reasonable.

Use the same lane discipline that you would on an unrestricted autobahn. Don't worry about the speed limit in relation to other drivers; the limit is there for you to relate to your own driving, and that's all. Let the police worry about other people's speeds. They don't want you to "help" them, so unless you're in the habit of disobeying the police, please don't.

And BTW...anyone who lane hogs for any length of time ends up slowing down a lot of people behind them, and it won't just be "speeders", because the flow of motorway traffic is more complicated than that. Why should the "non-speeders" suffer as well? By slowing down so many vehicles the lane-hogger is costing the economy a huge amount, as well as creating incredible levels of personal stress (which may lead to accidents), causing people to miss meetings and engagements unnecessarily, and possibly even costing lives or causing grave distress (e.g. someone not being able to get to a dying relative in time). If someone is truly lane-hogging for altruistic reasons then their efforts are badly misguided for those reasons alone. In any event if they are really remotely considerate then they should stop.

"Thank you for not lane hogging"

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

If there's genuinely no gaps to pull left, then that is not being an MLM. I think thats about the 6th time I've had to say that.

You're more misguided if you think you're 'making them think' about anything other than how you're in the way. Granted there are some pillocks out there who will tailgate their way ahead in less-than-free-flowing traffic, but if there is room to move out of their way safely, then do it, because they are a hazard to you as long as they're behind you.

I made a 450 mile round trip at the weekend, all on motorways and main (DC) A roads. There were times when I needed to move into a lane where the flow of traffic was faster than I was travelling and not once was I flashed. The only time I got tailgated was in heavy traffic flowing at about 20 - 30mph by your typical saturday halfwit.

My speed? Somewhere between 70 and 85 depending on the conditions.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.