Safe Speed Forums

A question for all - especially the LGV lads on here.

Scenario - NSL road, over a distance of about 10 miles, with virtually no opportunity to overtake due to visibility, but long sweeping bends rather than tight turns. Perfectly safely driveable by a car at 60mph in right conditions.
Large number of long laybys along the route.

HGV travelling at 40mph (correctly) but causing long queue behind.

Does the LGV failing to pull in at any layby to allow the queue to pass constitute driving without due consideration for other road users ?

Similar scenario could apply to caravans, etc.

To me this is a borderline one - for a tractor, JCB, etc the answer would definately be "yes" - but what about effectively restricting other drivers to 40mph when they would be legally entitled to drive at 60mph if safe so to do.

Thoughts please !!

many moons ago I used to do loads of road work on a tractor and would pull in. Then it became apparent that nobody waved or let me back out again. I do hardly any road work now and am less liberal with my pull in's when I do.

I think if you were to pull the driver of the said HGV, you'd be borderline over the top and may well leave the affected HGV driver feeling like he were being victimised (which they are).

Far better to observe the kamikazee overtaking manoeuvres, nicking where appropriate and then adding your concerned voices at the inquests you attend. You know that the law is wrong, Cotswold - you should take the opportunity to say so.

Obviously if said HGV driver was using his mirrors and had any consideration for other road users he would pull in from time to time and let the queue dissipate. I cause similar problems in France in my car by observing the 90 kph limit on non-urban single carriageways and regularly pull over to let the half-dozen following vehicles past (but in France only complete idiots or w*nkers observe the speed limit - or that's how they see it).
In my view even if you are unintentionally obstructing the progress of other road users (and this includes speeders) you should show reasonable consideration for them. It's your judgement, Cotswold, as to what is reasonable and what is unreasonable.
I'm not sure how you get safely to the head of the queue and pull the mobile road block over, mind.

I believe that in France the law states that if you have more than 6 vehicles in a queue behind you, you HAVE to pull over or find a means to let them pass safely.

Oh believe me, I do

My reason for asking the question is we're looking at forthcoming education campaigns based around motorway services - I'm just wondering whether the "pull over" message is worth including.

It would certainly have to be a very extreme case for me to even contemplate getting the black book our for....

Isn't the problem due to a combination of the speed limit, the delivery schedules and working time restrictions?

I'm sure that they don't want to the be cause of the obstruction, but the stupid limit is the stupid limit and they lose their job if they get caught breaking it, but the job schedule is already hard to achieve due to congestion, and they also lose their job if they were always late beause they kept stopping (it's on the Tacho).

Catch 22 really - I have some sympathy with them (and it's not only because they are bigger than me )

Perhaps it'd be a good idea to reinstate some of the old three lane roads... you know, the ones now littered with chevrons and traffic islands to discourage overtaking. You could alternate use of the central lane for each direction of traffic - two lanes one way and one the other with double whites for half a mile, then the other way round for half a mile. Not suitable everywhere, sure, but they've done this on a stretch of the A303 round Illminster. I think I heard it's only until they can turn it into a proper DC, but that's probably years away and in the meantime it allows drivers to get round slower vehicles safely without having to wait for too long.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Actually I think a three lane road is a very appropriate situation for the use of the double white line system, but I don't like the system as applied to two lane roads. In my opinion the markings are too often wrong, not only by removing overtaking opportunities that should be available, but in some cases offering opportunities that I do not see as being safe.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

That alternate 3 lane bit near Ilminster is a favourite scam van location. This is to catch the frustrated overtaker who has been sitting behind a caravan for miles and is just a little too enthusiastic.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

yeah forgot to mention that. There's a nice little layby they can use part way along it, though I've not seen 'em there myself. It just looks like somewhere they'd use. Or maybe behind the bridge. They were further east last time I was there, nabbing people speeding up early from the 50mph single carriageway bit to the NSL dual carriageway.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Strangely enough the Highway Code makes no mention of this and the official DSA publication makes no mention either

So look at it from the drivers viewpoint
1. If he pulls in and loses time - it's on his tacho - then odds are the operator will not be happy, especially if he's late

2. What are his chances of getting out again I would suggest slim

My answer; tell that nice Mr Brown to put back some of the 40 billion quid into the infrastructure and quickly

I think any BiB who did nick an LGV for this should be woken up and have the facts of life explained to them probably in mono syllabals.

If the RHA had some nuts they could paralyse the country and then we just might get something done about the rubbish infrastructure that masquerades as a road transport system

_________________
Stupid is as Stupid does

Cotswold. A valid question which I will endeavour to answer.

Prior to the rigid enforcement of speed limits by mobile and fixed cameras sites, only ‘token’ notice was taken of the 40mph on single carriageway roads. The drivers don’t like it. Motorists don’t like it. The trade associations have spoken out against it. Even a Peer, a former driver, has addressed the House of Lords on the matter. But the Government seems unwilling to budge on the matter. After all “Speed Kills” is what we are all led to believe.

With regard to pulling into lay-by’s to allow traffic to pass, as has already been mentioned, getting out again can be a problem and could even make roads more dangerous. What you need to remember is that from stationary, even a moderately laden large vehicle will take somewhere in the region of 15-20 seconds, to reach just 20mph, and will probably require three or four gear changes. And then there is the fuel penalty. With such vehicles averaging in the region of 8 – 12 miles per gallon, and fuel amounting to approximately 30% of a vehicle’s running costs, there is an interest in maximising fuel usage.

A few years ago the Treasury set aside £100 million for the Transport Energy/Best Practice programme, which encompassed the SAFED (Safe and Fuel Efficient Driving) scheme. £56 million was later clawed back by the Treasury and the funding ended just when, in my opinion, the benefits were becoming visible. The principle mantra of the SAFED scheme was, ‘to keep the wheels moving’, principally by advanced observation and anticipation.

To quote from some of the training material from the scheme, 0-40mph typically burns 0.54 litres of fuel. Slowing to 15mph and then returning to 40mph typically consumes 0.42 litres of fuel. A 23% saving in fuel usage, along with savings in harmful gasses and particulates. With bonuses often linked to fuel savings, there is a valid disincentive against pulling in to allow vehicles to pass.

For many years E.U. Legislation has demanded that speed limiters for these type of vehicle are set to 56mph (Or more correctly, 85kph + or – 5%) and as such, manufacturers produce vehicles with a final drive ratio that ensures that the rev counter sits at the most economical point when travelling at that speed. However, at 40mph, in top gear, the needle invariably rests just below the ‘economy’ band and renders the vehicle sluggish and unresponsive. At 45mph, the vehicle is more ‘comfortable’ both in driving terms in relation to responding to gradients, and cab vibrations.



Remember that it is not the user that is restricting the progress of other motorists. It is the Legislators. On most Primary routes they could easily be driven at speeds of 45mph and 55mph with no detriment to safety.

The counter argument of course is that over the years the maximum weight has risen from 32 tonnes to 44 tonnes, and therefore, by definition, these vehicles pose a greater threat.

What is conveniently overlooked in this argument is the engineering advances that have taken place over the years. In the old days, if you ran out of air, you ran out of brakes. Nowadays, if you run out of air, the vehicle stops. All are fitted with ABS or EBS. Not to mention ESP (Electronic Stability Program) or RSP (Roll Stability Program), or that manufacturers are developing accelerometers to warn of lateral instability. There is even a ‘Lane Follow’ system that detects when a vehicle starts to drift out of it’s lane and plays a ‘rumble’ warning through the appropriate radio speaker.



It’s not just about stopping. Many of the larger companies now use ‘tracking’ devices whereby they can constantly monitor a vehicle position, direction, and speed, with written warnings and dismissal for those not adhering to Company policy. Additionally, it is not unknown for VOSA, when visiting an undertaking based some distance from the nearest Dual Carriageway or Motorway, to examine the speed traces and take action against drivers exceeding the limits on nearby roads.

I can appreciate the frustrations, mainly because 40mph is so damned boring. When you’ve finished your sandwiches, drunk your tea, had a good scratch around the sweaty bits, your still sitting there looking for something to occupy the mind. You almost want to get a book out to read. And believe me, some do.



It would not receive the support of the RHA or the FTA and, for the reasons explained, runs contrary to Government funded training.

The split speed limits for Cars and trucks in the UK are pointless

I spent most of my driving life over there. being a British citizen and heve lived here for 5 years. The speed limits here are exactly the same for cars and trucks alike, if anything I usually find my self being held up by car drivers.
I spent 4 years driving for Tesco before eventually moving here, so I know what it's like to drive at exactly 40 mph

To have two different speed limits for the same highway is stupidity

The damm trucks are limitted to 56 mph anyway

My truck is a Volvo VN 610 and I usually pull a 53 foot trailer, overall it is 72 feet long and has a gross of 80,000 lbs (40 US tons) it has a speed limitter It's set at 80 mph

some very good and interesting points made here by both sides.
firstly should environmental issues outweigh those of road safety?
if trucks were to pull in everytime that a queue of other vehicles (please keep in mind that not every driver abides by the speed limit for their vehicle) formed behind them they would incur a dramatic fuel usage penalty over a 15 mile stretch of road, the weather conditions each day would dictate the clean air penalty to the environment in that area but it definately would not be as good as a vehicle in contiuous motion.

road safety affects those persons using the roads but environmental issues affect everyone on the planet.

secondly as the speed limit for hgv's on these roads is 40mph is there actually a law or even any legal case that they are driving without due consideration for other road users?
i wish that all truck drivers would drive at 40mph on these roads but i know that they don't, if they all stuck to the same speed (the legal speed limit) then it wouldn't look silly to other road users (who quite often don't realise that the speed limit for hgv's on these roads is only 40mph) when a speeding truck driver makes the decision to overtake a law abiding truck driver when the opportunity arises and thus prevents a number of cars from passing the truck - which in turn only antagonises the other drivers that then feel they have been cheated out of the opportunity to travel faster than 40 mph.

finally if a car travelling at 60mph, quickly catches a truck up that is travelling at 40 mph then how much more quickly will that car catch up with a truck moving from a layby onto the road then accelerating to 40mph, would you think it safe practice for cars on the hard shoulder of the motorway to pull onto the motorway from the hard shoulder without building up speed to match that of the traffic already using the motorway?

what the representatives of the transport industry needs is the support of the rest of the road users to change this ridiculous dissparity in speed limits on these single carriageway roads, not a blanket change but an educated review of what would be a sensible speed for different vehicles on the same road, some single carriageway roads wouldn't be safe for trucks to travel at more than 30mph but others would be safe at 50 or 60 mph (if trucks didn't already have speed limiters preventing 60mph being reached).
so next time you get stuck behind a truck doing 40mph on a single carriageway road - contact your mp and express your concern at the difference between the speed limits for vehicles on that type of road - chances are that even your mp will not be aware of the difference in speed limits.

Typical........(and here choosing a word that will not cause offence to Kate)......American. All they ever want to talk about is size.

Hi Pat.

A question that I should have posed in my reply to the originator is, "Was the nature of the road such that the vehicle in question could have, at various locations, attained speeds of 45mph or even 50mph, without becoming inherently dangerous?"

My american truck driving experience included driving new (in 1997) Pete 377 with 430hp detriots and Alison 6 speed autos, pulling combine harvesters on trailers 85 feet long to the back of the trailer with the unloading auger hanging over the back, 12 feet wide and 14 foot 6 high. The combines are much bigger now.

Then driving down the marias (sp) valley on I 15 in Montana with the speedo off the clock, it ran out of digits at 85mph. I have video footage of me and a mate driving through Nervada on I 80 ( I think, it was 7 years ago) doing 85 and NOT gaining on a Pete 379 extended hood. He was hauling ass.

I know you wouldn't want to annoy Kate

I know there is a vast differnce in driving there. I still think the split speed limits are stupid
Why not bring the cars down to 50 mph on such roads and raise the HGV's up to meet them.

A fully laden truck staying at a constant 40 mph hardly ever gets into top gear if at all How much extra fuel is being used and how much extra polution in the air

I was under the impression that the powers that be see it as highly desirable to have mile after mile of single file traffic being forced to drive at low speed.

A road I drive along to work each day has recently had the last reasonable overtaking opportunity removed, so the speed along several miles of road is now limited to that of the slowest vehicle. The road has a 40mph limit, but often the traffic will move at approx 20mph average because it is quite heavily used by lorries and they become the limiting factor. I can only conclude that the reason the overtaking opportunity was removed is to quite deliberately cause this to happen to reduce speeds along the road.

So, far from wanting to punish lorry drivers for holding up a queue of traffic, I would expect the authorities to want to commend them for doing their bit to keep speeds down. After all, nobody has a "right" to be able to achieve the speed limit, it's an upper limit, not a target to aim for. The speed limit is the speed which if you exceed it, you're 100% definitely going too fast, not the speed which if you don't achieve it you're going too slow. Take roads with humps on, for example - these roads will often be 30mph limits, but the humps can make the effective speed limit around 10-15mph. Do we have a right to complain because we're being prevented from achieving the speed limit? The answer is surely no, otherwise most humps would be long since gone.

I've been advocating this for ages but the Highways Agency will only allow it on hills. They mark up the roads like this all over France but the "not invented here" syndrome seems to apply in the UK instead of common sense.