Motorway Driving - too many idiots

[MotCO]

though often if I leave a big enough gap someone obliges by filling it !.

That is a problem. I leave enough space to stop if I have to, so when someone fills the gap, I have to move back even further. The alternative is to leave a smaller gap which increases the risks of high speed shunts.

 

[corfield]

Mirror, signal, manoeuvre. A pretty basic term that everyone learns on day one. Too basic for you probably.

So why not write that rather than invent an acronym?

Although what that has to do with the continual need to assess each vehicle around you and judge if they or you are closing/opening (relative to you and everyone else) and what your evolving options are as you plan your driving isn’t clear.

“MSM” being relevant of course only when you’ve decided to do something as the process you go through to do it.

Perhaps planning and thinking all the time is too complex for you? Perhaps you just don’t bother to assess all this and just react in an unplanned manner? Time perhaps to consider an advanced driving course…

I think one of the problems is that our motorways are too congested. There is still bad or inconsiderate behaviour though. If lane 1 is solid then the only way someone is going to be able to join at a junction is if they accelerate to a matching speed and hope some one lets them in by slowing a little or moving over into lane 2.

I find as long as the motroway is moving at some kind of “normal” speed there is always a gap within the constraints. That can mean taking joining slowly initially to conserve slip lane length. On short slip lanes into busy traffic it pays to start very slow and even halt if it looks bad. Or accelerate hard to get up to the lane speed or even ahead of vehicles.

The key thing is clarity of intent - what grips me about those that slow down, flash lights etc is the uncertainty it introduces - the joiner‘s best chance of finding a way to safely slot in is for existing vehicles not to change any of the variables the joiner sees in their brief/difficult glimpses of the situation.

I try to aim for lane 2 in these situations but it depends how busy lane 2 is. Of course any overreaction to slow down can lead to a halt and then even worse congestion.

Its the overreaction that gets me, the loons who pull out in front of overtaking traffic with no attempt to speed up and actually it is apparant they would have had no interaction with the joiner anyway.

I have sometimes elected to speed up to above the legal limit to get out of a lane someone needs.

Likewise, I often adjust my speed to get past someone so they can pull out behind me to overtake something ahead of them that I’ve assessed they are catching (assuming me pulling out isnt an option for whatever reason). Slowing I do less often as (a) I’m already going past them and (b) its harder to identify someone has slowed than sped up which then introduces thinking delay and uncertainty for all - as with at say mini roundabouts - clear positive action by one makes it easier and more efficient for all.

Ref undertaking and using horn - I feel it’s better to have both hands firmly in control as me deciding to and then using the horn and it being heard/acted on is probably far too slow vs manoeuvring/braking and resolving a potential collision issue that way in a positive/active manner vs passively relying (partly or wholly) on the other party. Ultimately, it is a risk to undertake and in the event of collision I’d expect to be in the wrong. Having a decent speed differential to thus minimise the exposure time (similar to any overtaking manoeuvre) seems advisable but not too great one cant manoeuvre/brake.

 

[MotCO]

Likewise, I often adjust my speed to get past someone so they can pull out behind me to overtake something ahead of them that I’ve assessed they are catching (assuming me pulling out isnt an option for whatever reason).

I often anticipate vehicles, often lorries who are advancing on slower vehicles, pulling out, so I already move out to create space for them. Lorries take a long time to gain speed, so slowing down waiting for a gap to overtake can be tiresome.

 

[Enthusiast]

The key thing is clarity of intent -

No, actually the key thing is that not everybody on the road possesses the lighting fast reactions, outstanding anticipation and foresight that you believe you do. That's why ploughing along at 90+ in the outside lane is illegal. It's so that the lesser mortals of this world stand a reasonable chance of reaching their destination unscathed without having to contemplate you doing whatever you fancy.

 

[corfield]

No, actually the key thing is that not everybody on the road possesses the lighting fast reactions, outstanding anticipation and foresight that you believe you do.

Best leave projection to the cinema eh ?!

I note you failed to quote where I state I have these “lightning fast reactions”…

Can’t you argue with what I have said rather than invent it?


Clarity of intent is key to everyone driving safely as we know first and foremost what the other people are trying to do and can therefore make our decisions accordingly so that we deconflict in a planned and thus safer manner. If you can’t understand that then no amount of made up acronyms or bluster is going to hide you probably shouldnt be on the road in the first place if not knowing what the cars around you are doing and why isn’t of prime importance to you.

That's why ploughing along at 90+ in the outside lane is illegal. It's so that the lesser mortals of this world stand a reasonable chance of reaching their destination unscathed without having to contemplate you doing whatever you fancy.

No, it isn’t actually.

90 is illegal (as a private driver) because back in the 60s people with shiney sports cars were haring about and “something must be done about it”.

That something couldnt be something that would annoy or inconvenience too many people aka voters, hence 70 was set as a limit given most cars couldnt even get to it and thus few would be affected. The NSL being 60 was the exact same logic.

Now, just as with tax bands, everyone is “captured” by that limit by virtue of the staggering advances in automotive technology since then and usual political inertia at reacting to change given any change would potentially annoy a lot of people aka voters so always much easier to do nothing.

It has nothing to do with any kind of balanced safety assessment and even less to do with your own lack of reactions/driving ability or invented and projected views of others’.

Hence why as a law it is held in such wide contempt, broken by nearly everyone all the time and there is so little enforcement of it because it does not command the respect of society and therefore is inappropriate to excessively hold society to in a culture where dictatorial attitudes are frowned uponto say the least.

 

[Enthusiast]

I note you failed to quote where I state I have these “lightning fast reactions”…

Can’t you argue with what I have said rather than invent it?

You didn't say it. But your implication was quite clear.

Clarity of intent is key to everyone driving safely as we know first and foremost what the other people are trying to do and can therefore make our decisions accordingly so that we deconflict in a planned and thus safer manner. If you can’t understand that then no amount of made up acronyms or bluster is going to hide you probably shouldnt be on the road in the first place if not knowing what the cars around you are doing and why isn’t of prime importance to you.

You still seem to be missing the point. There are some people who perhaps shouldn't be on the road (using your criteria) but they are not likely to be removed from it any time soon. Some of these are less able to "deconflict" in a planned and safe manner than others.

.... back in the 60s people with shiney sports cars were haring about and “something must be done about it”.

I think you'll find it was rather because back in the 60s there were a number of very serious accidents on the newly built motorways which were principally caused by some cars travelling at excessive speeds whilst they were among other drivers who were either unwilling or unable to match those speeds. This is the problem, you see - the UK's roads have to accommodate a wide variety of vehicles driven by people of a wide range of capabilities. So a regulatory balance had to be devised which is somewhere between 0mph (the safest but most inconvenient) and 250mph (perhaps the most dangerous but certainly more convenient). It had nothing to do with people in shiny sports cars (with the possible exception of the boss of AC Cars, who, so the story goes, seemed to treat the unrestricted M1 as the company's test track). Of course you may say that these incidents were not caused by speed but by driver error or ineptitude. You may be right, but the country's road network has to accommodate such drivers and minimise the risk that their errors or ineptitude may cause. Pretty well unarguable is that a Ferrari travelling at 150mph in the outside lane which collides with an old granny who pulls into that lane in her Metro because she is seemingly inept, will cause far more mayhem than if it had been limited to 70mph. Perhaps, as you suggest, the granny should not have been on the road. But I would argue that neither should the driver of the Ferrari as such an excessive speed makes the result of other drivers' inevitable ineptitude so much more serious.

As an aside, what do you propose as an alternative to the law which you suggest is held in such contempt?

 

[AlterEgo]

There will be differing opinions on this but in my opinion, frequent lane-changing/weaving in and out between lane 1 and 2 (just to squeeze in between lorry gaps) is more dangerous than cruising in Lane 2 - especially when going uphill and on a motorway with several junctions fairly close to one another.

Agreed. Lane changes should be tactful. If I am in the middle lane and going to catch a slower vehicle within about 20 seconds of moving into lane 1, I will stay in the middle lane.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Hence why as a law it is held in such wide contempt, broken by nearly everyone all the time and there is so little enforcement of it because it does not command the respect of society and therefore is inappropriate to excessively hold society to in a culture where dictatorial attitudes are frowned upon to say the least.

Er... no? The vast majority of drivers are willing and capable of following the law, which is provided for everyone's safety, and are rightly contemptuous not of said law but of people like you who hold such an idiotic and counterproductive opinion regarding road safety. I sincerely hope I don't come across you on the roads if you are not able to cope with ordinary motorway driving conditions.

 

[Western Sunset]

I must admit that I tend to use lane 2 on the M25 (and keep in it), as so often lane 1 becomes the exit lane for a junction.

 

[MotCO]

Now, just as with tax bands, everyone is “captured” by that limit by virtue of the staggering advances in automotive technology since then and usual political inertia at reacting to change given any change would potentially annoy a lot of people aka voters so always much easier to do nothing.

But there has not been the same staggering advances in the technology of the person behind the wheel. People may be able to react more quuickly than in the past (e.g. witness how people have become more profficient at computer games), but there is still a lot of risk placed on the shoulders of the driver.

 

[corfield]

You didn't say it. But your implication was quite clear.

So I’ve said nothing of the sort then.

This “implication” is entirely your own projection, presumably from a feeling of inadequacy. That’s your issue, not mine.

You still seem to be missing the point. There are some people who perhaps shouldn't be on the road (using your criteria) but they are not likely to be removed from it any time soon. Some of these are less able to "deconflict" in a planned and safe manner than others.

That is you trying to twist your way out of a self created hole.

It remains of prime importance that drivers be able to quickly, accurately and continually assess those around them so as to be able to drive safely in what is inherantly an activity that involves constant and risky interaction with others. Instruction and examination centre on this assessment.

You may be happy with some having poor standards at doing that, or indeed as you stated, its not important at all in comparison to projecting views onto others, but I again suggest that is your problem not mine.

I think you'll find it was rather because back in the 60s there were a number of very serious accidents on the newly built motorways which were principally caused by some cars travelling at excessive speeds whilst they were among other drivers who were either unwilling or unable to match those speeds. This is the problem, you see - the UK's roads have to accommodate a wide variety of vehicles driven by people of a wide range of capabilities. So a regulatory balance had to be devised which is somewhere between 0mph (the safest but most inconvenient) and 250mph (perhaps the most dangerous but certainly more convenient). It had nothing to do with people in shiny sports cars (with the possible exception of the boss of AC Cars, who, so the story goes, seemed to treat the unrestricted M1 as the company's test track). Of course you may say that these incidents were not caused by speed but by driver error or ineptitude. You may be right, but the country's road network has to accommodate such drivers and minimise the risk that their errors or ineptitude may cause. Pretty well unarguable is that a Ferrari travelling at 150mph in the outside lane which collides with an old granny who pulls into that lane in her Metro because she is seemingly inept, will cause far more mayhem than if it had been limited to 70mph. Perhaps, as you suggest, the granny should not have been on the road. But I would argue that neither should the driver of the Ferrari as such an excessive speed makes the result of other drivers' inevitable ineptitude so much more serious.

Nope. They picked a number above that which would impact many people at the time but would create an effect to mitigate the high speeds some could and were driving at.

If you did the same thing now you’d pick somewhere 100-120 based on what cars can get to and that the vast majority don’t drive at that speed.

It’d not be a particularly sensible policy approach imho but it was what they did for obvious political reasons at the time. The same reason we have a NSL of 60 applying to many roads you’d do half of that on.

As for Grannies, Metros and Ferarris that’s your own very stereotypical world and I can’t see what value it adds.

Noting again you put words in my mouth suggesting grannies should not drive. Why do you keep doing this?

Can I do the same and criticise you for things it looks good to criticise someone for regardless whether they’ve said anything even remotely like it?

As an aside, what do you propose as an alternative to the law which you suggest is held in such contempt?

Ahhh the old “you have to solve it or you can’t have an opinion on it” approach. Ironic on a discussion forum. There are lots of alternatives, all are politically “courageous” which is why nothing has changed or is likely to. I suppose I could dedicate my life to trying to right the poor law but I’ve many more interesting things I want to do so I just ignore it and get on with them. As the vast majority of people do. That’s called facts and life.

But there has not been the same staggering advances in the technology of the person behind the wheel. People may be able to react more quuickly than in the past (e.g. witness how people have become more profficient at computer games), but there is still a lot of risk placed on the shoulders of the driver.

True, but that forms a sub argument if you were to try and set a limit based on the same or modified approach. It doesn’t change the fact that as cars have evolved, such speeds are very easily reachable and sustainable and cars handle and above all, brake, far, far more reliably and effectively etc. You could argue that actually now people are not being constrained by the original technology and aren’t the limit. Since equally as you say ref gaming experience/reactions; after decades of exposure to this that their ability has changed through training, experience and a world in which this travel and speed are routine - just as we see kids are au fait with technology their olders struggle to master. It should not be a surprise that a generation brought up as childrrn in vehicles moving at 60-70+ are more adept at doing that themselves than their forebears who lacked that formative experience.

There’s always going to be risk of course, I’m not sure it is “placed”, as risk is outcome x probability - responsibility is what I presume you mean? I’d personally argue higher speeds are low risk but there seems a very backward looking shouty brigade who will insist they aren’t, depsite apparantly never having done it themselves and thus having no experience to base that view on…

Indeed, my assertion based on experience that its less stressful at 90 in the outside lane vs 60-70 constantly moving around the other lanes is dismissed by people who’ve never done it. A bizarre approach to understanding anything if you ask me as I find it a very interesting fact that I know to be true, but then these idiots also make things up when they can’t find any other fault so hey ho there is probably little to be gained from them as they hurl their invented brickbats about the place.

Er... no? The vast majority of drivers are willing and capable of following the law, which is provided for everyone's safety, and are rightly contemptuous not of said law but of people like you who hold such an idiotic and counterproductive opinion regarding road safety.

That’s a lovely soap box you’ve got, but it’s very ignorant view as even a little bit of driving about will show you.

I sincerely hope I don't come across you on the roads if you are not able to cope with ordinary motorway driving conditions.

And I’ve said that where? Or are you another who when you can’t find fault with someone, just makes something up? Do you work for the Post Office by any chance?

 

[CS2447]

Currently in Bulgaria , the standard of driving here is very bad

 

[Enthusiast]

If you did the same thing now you’d pick somewhere 100-120 based on what cars can get to and that the vast majority don’t drive at that

Somehow I think not. You seem to believe the limit was chosen because at the time not many cars could achieve it and it therefore it would only upset a small minority. I think if you have that reasoning there's little point in continuing the discussion.

 

[warwickshire]

Just had it today, someone in a Fiat Punto, on M40 between Junction 15 to Junction 16, doing around 50 MPH in the middle lane, hogging it, shortly after on M42 approaching Junction 4 Shirley, bit whilst awaiting to turn off and in a small traffic jam, some tradesman, ie from a building company due to name on bonnet, was
In broad daylight on his mobile.

 

[Peter Sarf]

..........................


Its the overreaction that gets me, the loons who pull out in front of overtaking traffic with no attempt to speed up and actually it is apparant they would have had no interaction with the joiner anyway.

In all cases it is sudden manoeuvres that are dangerous. Sometimes a sudden manoeuvre is unavoidable.

Ref undertaking and using horn - I feel it’s better to have both hands firmly in control as me deciding to and then using the horn and it being heard/acted on is probably far too slow vs manoeuvring/braking and resolving a potential collision issue that way in a positive/active manner vs passively relying (partly or wholly) on the other party. Ultimately, it is a risk to undertake and in the event of collision I’d expect to be in the wrong. Having a decent speed differential to thus minimise the exposure time (similar to any overtaking manoeuvre) seems advisable but not too great one cant manoeuvre/brake.

Depending how fast you are going determines whether both hands are on the steering wheel or if it is time to use the horn. If you need your hands for something and you feel the need to have both hands on the steering wheel then its time to slow down. Of course in a lot of cases it is brake first and ask questions later - for example if a collision at a junction is inevitable.

I often anticipate vehicles, often lorries who are advancing on slower vehicles, pulling out, so I already move out to create space for them. Lorries take a long time to gain speed, so slowing down waiting for a gap to overtake can be tiresome.

Yes. I will slow down to make a gap if I can see the vehicle ahead and on my left is catching up with something. Frustrates my efforts when they then put the brakes on. I know drivers that do that. Brakes first then work out how to get round the vehicle in front. You can confirm they needed to overtake because they used their brakes !. Now they have lost the speed they had and will now find it harder to get out of lane 1.

But we have to remember that not everyone's ability and confidence is the same. At some point ability declines with age. Confidence grows with experience except in the case of the bullet proof young where it needs to decline !.

No, actually the key thing is that not everybody on the road possesses the lighting fast reactions, outstanding anticipation and foresight that you believe you do. That's why ploughing along at 90+ in the outside lane is illegal. It's so that the lesser mortals of this world stand a reasonable chance of reaching their destination unscathed without having to contemplate you doing whatever you fancy.

People have to assume reaction times of others might be lower than their own - and not get angry about it.

I must admit that I tend to use lane 2 on the M25 (and keep in it), as so often lane 1 becomes the exit lane for a junction.

Yes its a tricky one that. Often not knowing whether lane 1 is going to disappear up the slip road leads people to hang around in lane 2. I see it a lot on the M25 6 lane stretch past Heathrow. From the A23 to the M26 however I found there was very little using lane 1 until the point where the anticlockwise M25 turns off itself.

---

On the subject of lorries. I find Sunday night (losely) Dover/Felixtowe bound is very busy with lorries, correspondingly Saturday as the day progresses has fewer and fewer lorries. Reason is that the French prohibit HGVs on Sundays. Monday will also be quiet in the opposite direction. Not checked that observation recently.

 

[bramling]

You didn't say it. But your implication was quite clear.

You still seem to be missing the point. There are some people who perhaps shouldn't be on the road (using your criteria) but they are not likely to be removed from it any time soon. Some of these are less able to "deconflict" in a planned and safe manner than others.

I think you'll find it was rather because back in the 60s there were a number of very serious accidents on the newly built motorways which were principally caused by some cars travelling at excessive speeds whilst they were among other drivers who were either unwilling or unable to match those speeds. This is the problem, you see - the UK's roads have to accommodate a wide variety of vehicles driven by people of a wide range of capabilities. So a regulatory balance had to be devised which is somewhere between 0mph (the safest but most inconvenient) and 250mph (perhaps the most dangerous but certainly more convenient). It had nothing to do with people in shiny sports cars (with the possible exception of the boss of AC Cars, who, so the story goes, seemed to treat the unrestricted M1 as the company's test track). Of course you may say that these incidents were not caused by speed but by driver error or ineptitude. You may be right, but the country's road network has to accommodate such drivers and minimise the risk that their errors or ineptitude may cause. Pretty well unarguable is that a Ferrari travelling at 150mph in the outside lane which collides with an old granny who pulls into that lane in her Metro because she is seemingly inept, will cause far more mayhem than if it had been limited to 70mph. Perhaps, as you suggest, the granny should not have been on the road. But I would argue that neither should the driver of the Ferrari as such an excessive speed makes the result of other drivers' inevitable ineptitude so much more serious.

As an aside, what do you propose as an alternative to the law which you suggest is held in such contempt?

The gist of the above seems to be that as some people lack driving ability, everyone has to be debased to the same low level - which also seems to then mean that those with lower ability don’t improve.

In the above situation it’s a driving test fail to cause another motorist to have to suddenly change course or slow down, so essentially granny in her Metro shouldn’t be there if she can’t change lanes without screwing up. Of if her judgement is that poor then maybe at least she shouldn’t be attempting to change lanes in the first place?

 

[507021]

It'd be good if we could have one thread about driving that doesn't involve bashing BMW drivers. It's an outdated and lazy stereotype.

 

[MotCO]

It'd be good if we could have one thread about driving that doesn't involve bashing BMW drivers. It's an outdated and lazy stereotype.

Yes, they now drive Audis or Mercs

 

[stuu]

Yes, they now drive Audis or Mercs

No, they have moved on to Teslas

 

[bramling]

It'd be good if we could have one thread about driving that doesn't involve bashing BMW drivers. It's an outdated and lazy stereotype.

Agree the BMW stereotype is well out of date. They are way too common nowadays for any kind of stereotype to apply.

 

[LowLevel]

I enjoy these threads. They bounce around a bit. Everyone agrees lane hoggers and trundlers are annoying. Someone sneakily confesses to being a bit naughty in getting past them. The Advanced Motorist in Alan Partridge driving gloves turns up and quotes the Road Traffic Act. A debate ensues.

At the end, the correct conclusion is reached - the real enemies are Minicab Drivers and people still operating a mid 2000s Honda Jazz. Unpredictable.

 

[birchesgreen]

I love how threads on driving quickly end up bad tempered and erratic in direction, just like the average road on Britain.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I love how threads on driving quickly end up bad tempered and erratic in direction, just like the average road on Britain.

They do tend to make for broadly entertaining, if somewhat polarised, threads, though!

 

[Western Sunset]

At least nobody mentioned cyclists...

 

[Mcr Warrior]

At least nobody mentioned cyclists...

Not seen all that often on motorways, as they're not permitted. Very, very occasionally seen, just not that often.

 

[Dave W]

I enjoy these threads. They bounce around a bit. Everyone agrees lane hoggers and trundlers are annoying. Someone sneakily confesses to being a bit naughty in getting past them. The Advanced Motorist in Alan Partridge driving gloves turns up and quotes the Road Traffic Act. A debate ensues.

At the end, the correct conclusion is reached - the real enemies are Minicab Drivers and people still operating a mid 2000s Honda Jazz. Unpredictable.

What's wrong with a Jazz!? I've had 3

The gist of the above seems to be that as some people lack driving ability, everyone has to be debased to the same low level - which also seems to then mean that those with lower ability don’t improve.

Well, yes. Lowest common denominator is how it is - are you suggesting we make the speed limit a ton and if we all crash it's Mabel's fault for doing 45mph in lane 2? I'm sure you'll be smugly thinking "I told you so" as you're being crushed to a pulp by the lorry caught up in it...

The OP mentioned the M1 - it's a joke most days south of Milton Keynes but especially so once inside the M25. The variable speed limit ends, HGV traffic is vastly reduced, the prospect of the journey being over soon looms and local users - look there's Mabel in her Jazz again!!! - with zero UK motorway understanding are rife. The result is an utterly lawless strip of tarmac. I once overtook a guy doing 55mph in lane 2 and then moved back (sensibly) to lane 1 - only to find a Range Rover doing over a ton launching up the inside of the lot and nearly doing the lot of us in.

 

[sprunt]

Yes, they now drive Audis or Mercs

It's all three of them. If I'm being tailgated by someone who seems to want to be able to read my dashboard, odds on it's a BMW, Audi or Merc.

 

[OscarH]

It's all three of them. If I'm being tailgated by someone who seems to want to be able to read my dashboard, odds on it's a BMW, Audi or Merc.

You're missing brand new Range Rovers off that list!

 

[75A]

+ Mercedes Sprinter vans.

 

[MotCO]

You're missing brand new Range Rovers off that list!

They're usually on the hard shoulder! No pre-conceptions here!