Safe Speed Forums

Is it really though?

When I stop to think about it I think I've been doing it ever since I worked it out for myself, which was shortly after I started driving on motorways.

Or put it another way - when was the last time you insisted on your "right of way" over a vehicle joining the motorway...?

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Granted, absolutely.

But it feels perilously close to priorite a droit, and I know we don't want to go there. What would happen for example at 'other junctions' where drivers may assume they had right of way, when in fact they did not? It does need thinking about.

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

Gut feeling also tells me that it'd be trying to get a quart into a pint pot. (perhaps that should be a gallon into a pint pot - because most motorways are already carrying well in excess of their safe capacity).

_________________
Will

My thinking is firstly that it would be something entirely peculiar to motorways, like blue signs etc. thus no valid reason for confusion, and secondly that it would be demarcated by neither lane crossing a dotted line at the merge point, which to me sends out the very useful message that neither lane really has priority, the thing to do is merge.

I guess where I'm coming from is that signage and rules should primarily reduce conflict, and only secondarily be there as a means of resolving the issue of blame following an accident.

In fact, perhaps that might be the best solution - that the law makes no ruling as to which lane has priority?

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

But we're already putting our quarts into pint pots aren't we? Now we're talking about the best rules for pouring.

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

The problem is, until we have a proper policy about speed limits on motorways, this problem won't be solved. If we were allowed higher speeds it would be less of an issue, and we could co-operate better. Priority to the traffic on the motorway sure, but also possibility to swiftly make space available for joining traffic.
IMHO, no maximum speed limit on motorways is the way to go. And it will happen sooner or later.

I think you're trying to enshrine best practice as a rule, and I couldn't agree more with that as a principle.

But I'm still in shock at the idea of having major road traffic give priority. It's nothing less than a giant leap and modifies a 'great principle' of the Highway Code (and the unwritten highway code too).

Just don't expect me to agree in an hour! OK?

It's also critical to examine and consider in fine detail what the ramifications might be.

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

Maybe analysis of different extremes may highlight some issues with the current policy.

In Italy, the road system I am most familiar with, most slip roads are quite short, in the range between 100 yards at the shortest extreme, to maybe 500 yards for the longest.

On thos slip roads, a Give Way sign is placed at the entry of the slip road, at the junction point with the motorway, before the line becomes dotted.

To top that, most of the road approaching the slip road has guard rails (mid size metal walls) which impair visibility for both traffic on the motorway and the slip road.

In Italy, the policy is very simple: ignore the give way sign, otherwise you will have to stop, which is extremely dangerous and will most certainly result in several rear ended vehicles.

The policy instead is to accelerate as fast as possible to hopefully match the speed of the traffic in L1, which on a lucky day is 70mph, on a regular day more like 90mph.
Otherwise, the policy is to force your way through. The traffic on the motorway knows that's going to happen, and usually they will stay well clear of L1 approaching a slip road. The traffic on the slip road is also going to concentrate on accelerating and merging even in the smallest gaps knowing that without doing so, they will never get through.

What this shows is that in the UK we already have an excellent road layout which is far better than most European countries.
Secondly, that there is all the opportunity for *both* motorway and slip road traffic to see each other and accomodate each other.

So although the priority should stay with the traffic on the motorway in order to determine who should stop in case of emergency, the motorway traffic should make every reasonable attempt to ease the merge.

Not a change to the highway code at all. More a change to people's attitude.

Truckers should be clever and keep a wide enough gap between them to enable merging.

Cars should be clever and allow trucks to move to L2 if necessary.

I try and stay well behind or well in front of a truck, even on an adjiacent lane, so that should the truck need to make a sudden lane change, I wouldn't be in his way.

The highway code maybe does not say so, but i would be extremely stupid if I did not stay well away from trucks at all times. Obviously if I want to overtake a truck I make sure that I can overtake quickly enough to be out of his way soon, and certainly do not overtake one near a slip road.

I've purposely stayed out of this one up until now but I really feel I must say something. Sorry if its already been said or if I'm covering old ground, but I really can't be bothered to read 4 pages of arguing in circles.

1) I think to an extent that bobthedog's original post may have been a little obscure and that some of you are talking at cross purposes. I don't think for one minute that bob was suggesting that he and his brethren would purposely block motorists attempting to join the motorway in stationary traffic as someone tried to suggest. He is simply pointing out that there should under normal circumstances be no need for him to make any adjustments in order to allow traffic to join.

2) Pedantic argument achieves nothing.

3) We all have to make accomodation for idiots. We all do it, every time we use the roads because we want to survive unscathed. You have to remember though, that our HGV drivers have to deal with idiots 9 hours a day every single day. The vast majority of car drivers (and I'd suggest a fair number of SS members judging by what's been said) actually have very little understanding of the specific problems associated with driving a laden HGV. You cannot apply the same 'logic' to driving an HGV as to driving a car - it doesn't work.

4) You can't slow or stop quickly in laden HGV! Points to the example of my partner who lost an entire load of palletised, banded chipboard last week when some ****** pulled in front of him on the motorway with no warning and braked hard. Believe it or not he's also had police cars pull the same trick. And before anyone starts with the 'he should have seen what was happening and made adjustment in good time', you can't always predict the actions of idiots.

5) Back to the original point. How many times have we chewed over 'zipper merging'? People just DON'T DO IT. If you remove priority from sliproads you will have carnage. Same goes for basic common courtisy. Most people don't look past their front bumper and certainly aren't capable of anticipating the fact that if they put themselves there they are in the way, but waiting for 5 seconds would solve everything.

I have to say I'm pretty disapointed by this thread. I realise that it was a little bit abrupt for bobthedog to join and start effectively ranting like that (no offence bob), but the reactions he received were pretty poor. I thought that we were supposed to be road safety campaign, working for better and safer roads for ALL road users? It seems to me that increasingly this forum is becoming anti-truck. Yet our truck drivers are amongst the best in the world and have got a wealth of useful input to make here.

Get a grip guys, and enough with the pedantic sh*t.

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

Interesting point. What say you JT? Who should do the emergency stop in extremis?



Yes. This comes up again and again in these forums. It's approaching the status of a golden rule.

suspend overtaking near slip roads

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

The logic is mainly about 'being prepared' and if dynamic ability is less then being prepared is even more important.

As for 'anti-truck', will all anti-truck users please leave immediately. You're not welcome here.

If anyone sees 'anti-truck' posts, please let me know. I haven't seen any. But I have, and I've said it before, seen truckers with fears of anti-truck sentiment.

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

Who does it now? In reality? Is it the guy steaming down the sliproad who hasn't seen what's going on until the last minute, or is it the guy on the motorway who has had the opportunity of seeing the potentially disastrous in extremis situation developing?

Put it another way: if you have priority is this a reason not to slam the brakes on to avoid a collision?

In reality it matters little who has priority in terms of deciding who takes emergency evasive action - we do that by instinct, not according to law. What priority does is avoid these situations developing, and the current slip road system is I believe counter-productive.

So I say give no-one priority. Don't say that the main road has priority, or that the slip road has priority, simply take away the lines and leave a big long funnel, with suitable notices announcing to "merge ahead". Give everyone the responsibility of making space.


Yes, it's absolutely basic isn't it? Yet who was ever taught this?

Actually it's not so much about "overtaking", but about being alongside other vehicles when passing slip roads, isn't it? Whilst this ought to mean one and the same, now we have SPECS cameras people cruise along side by side for miles, or sitting in each others blind spots etc. Imagine how much worse it'll be again if we were to get speed limiters or any stricter form of speed enforcement...

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

O sixy, I'm so pleased you too feel a sense of anti truck members here as well..
I was branded paranoid, and a silly little boy for making the very same observation known within this thread..

I also must admit to being a little dissapointed by some of the reply's here, I understood the sites function was aimed at educating motorist's across the board in an effort to improve road safety, something of which you will know is a great interest of my own..
To be fair i have been visiting this site off and on for almost a year, and normally i'm very impressed with what is discussed, and how it's done..

I have already said I am a wagon driver, and I choose to post here to give others the benefit of my own experiences, I'm not trying to say I'm right, wrong, or indifferent, it's just a view..

To be truthful, I don't think there is a quick fix to this merging problem, due to too many drivers driving with blinkered vision. I.e, they know where they want to be, how to get there, and sod all and anybody that gets in the way.
I have drove 532 miles today, over 5 different motorways, and have purposely took greater notice of whats happening with merging traffic, and I can safely assure you all that near enough every potential incident was caused by the combination of the following 2 things...

Incorrect speed...
&
Poor observations..

_________________
Dave

She's wrong.



I've tried this with hints. I've tried with humour.

You will NOT come here and insult forum users without good cause.

If you produce evidence of 'anti-truck' sentiments, I will deal with them appropriately. Otherwise you are out of order and owe forum members an apology.

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

Not really sure what i should be apoligising for to be honest, I've NOT accused ANYBODY of being a truck hater, i just made a comment based on observations....

But if it suits, i'll make the apology, on the proviso that i receive one for the personal insult!!

_________________
Dave

See your PMs.

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

Another pissed off paranoid trucker here.


Do any of you really think that changing the rules will make a blind bit of difference? The great majority of the fukkwits we have to put up with would have to get someone to read them for them and would still interpret them in any way that suited their particular circumstances.

Those that aren't complete fukkwits don't need the rules changing for them anyway.

This thread is pointless.

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

I'm not sure the rules need changing, but i do think they need to be more clearer, and more direct.

Like rigpig mentioned in an earlier post, this would eliminate the ability to bend the rules to fit certain circumstances, and would have offenders banged to rights..

I also think that new drivers MUST receive a minimum of at least 5 hours motorway tuition before the magic ticket is issued.
I find it hard to believe that ANYBODY can jump on a motorway within minutes of passing the test, with no form of instruction given..

_________________
Dave

It strikes me that the dangers of making hard and fast rules, is that the circumstances of every junction should then be matched.
Clearly, some junctions are worse than others - Lancaster north (Jctn 34) on the M6 for instance.
Site of a fatal crash, and several near misses every week, this junction really is an accident waiting to happen.
Those northbound on the M6 who are aware, try to pull into lane 2 in advance, and give drivers entering from the left a chance. Some dont care and press on regardless in lane 1, and leave the entering vehicles to their own devices.
IF you know this junction, then CLEARLY it is a site where giving way to traffic entering from the left is a good idea.

Note the M6 is raised well above the start of the on ramp, and that the preceding 3/4 mile are downhill, so vehicles passing the onramp are invariably "tanking it a bit" while those on the on ramp are struggling uphill.
My own preference would be to take one lane off to the left, and bring it back as an entrance lane, as is the case at Broughton, near Preston. But until they do, give the poor guy on the onramp a chance and give way, or pull out.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I agree 100%.


Odd how the truckers (ie those that spend more time on the motorways than anyone else on average) seem to all think along the same lines.

I wonder why