Driving behaviour when emergency vehicles are approaching.

[61653 HTAFC]

Ashley Neal did a video on this subject sometime last year, about someone being penalised for entering a bus lane to let an ambulance through. His position was that the ambulance driver should have used the empty bus lane themself instead of leaning on the horn to bully the civilian driver into committing an offence.

 

[mpthomson]

In Epsom at least, the ambulances routinely run on blues only and not twos even at speed along the local roads*... except at junctions when they will turn the sirens on briefly.

They do quieten down when in a queue at traffic lights, but often leave the lights flashing.


*Which could have disastrous consequences as there's a large residence for blind people on one of the major routes towards the local hospital...

I did a paramedic placement for a few wks in the early 2000s for something. The sirens are bloody loud in the back, and so they're only used when necessary. It's much easier to talk to a patient or communicate with another medical professional (if fortunate enough to have one) if the siren is off. Most ambulance services have a general policy of it's off unless it needs to be on, so traffic, junctions or built up areas with lots of people about.

 

[ainsworth74]

I quite enjoy Chris Martin's videos on YouTube of his blue light runs. They're quite interesting to watch someone with the driving skills that an emergency response driver has but also I've found them quite useful as a non-emergency driver to see what behaviours I can exhibit as a member of the public to make their life easier. It's also interesting as in some of them he'll highlight good and bad behaviours of drivers around him:

 

[InkyScrolls]

Re earlier in the thread... Policemen are NOT allowed to give authority to anyone to pass LC lights.

 

[westv]

It's interesting that "blues and twos" referred to in this thread is still used despite the two tone siren not being used since the early 80s

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I did a paramedic placement for a few wks in the early 2000s for something. The sirens are bloody loud in the back, and so they're only used when necessary. It's much easier to talk to a patient or communicate with another medical professional (if fortunate enough to have one) if the siren is off. Most ambulance services have a general policy of it's off unless it needs to be on, so traffic, junctions or built up areas with lots of people about.

Believe me, I have seen many very near misses with ambulances and people ( and not just the blind residents I referred to as being the most obvious risk... ) in Epsom - as well as drivers pulling out in front of them - because the sirens were not on - it's surprising how few people take note of the lights only being in operation.

It's surely not beyond the wit of the designers to soundproof the cabins sufficiently to mitigate the noise inside enough to converse?

 

[mpthomson]

Believe me, I have seen many very near misses with ambulances and people ( and not just the blind residents I referred to as being the most obvious risk... ) in Epsom - as well as drivers pulling out in front of them - because the sirens were not on - it's surprising how few people take note of the lights only being in operation.

It's surely not beyond the wit of the designers to soundproof the cabins sufficiently to mitigate the noise inside enough to converse?

Not without significantly increasing the weight, and most ambulances already run fairly close to weight limits because of all the kit they carry. The vans they're based on have a payload of not a lot over a ton empty.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I do think sirens are a bit too loud now, to the extent that in built up areas when you suddenly hear a siren start up (because an emergency vehicle is approaching an intersection) you can't actually tell which direction it's coming from at first because the sound resonates off all the surrounding buildings. If it's so loud that it affects the vital work being done in the back (even if that's just talking to the patient) then perhaps a "less is more" approach is needed? Or at least having variable volume options- the loudest setting being used on motorways for example.

 

[Lockwood]

Things that I see a fair bit that are annoying:

Dropping anchor without thinking (less common now)
Putting a left signal on and knocking a couple of mph off
Finally stopping at a traffic island, instead of just ahead or behind it
Finally stopping next to an incoming vehicle that has stopped, forming a road block. Or near enough that it's quite a wiggle to get through.
Car one pulls over. Car two overtakes car one. Car two then realises what is going on and does something else daft.

 

[mpthomson]

I do think sirens are a bit too loud now, to the extent that in built up areas when you suddenly hear a siren start up (because an emergency vehicle is approaching an intersection) you can't actually tell which direction it's coming from at first because the sound resonates off all the surrounding buildings. If it's so loud that it affects the vital work being done in the back (even if that's just talking to the patient) then perhaps a "less is more" approach is needed? Or at least having variable volume options- the loudest setting being used on motorways for example.

Worth noting that it's fairly rare to use sirens/lights when transporting a patient now. If it's that urgent to get them to hospital them they'll use Helimed wherever possible, mainly for speed but also because it comes with an A&E consultant normally.

 

[zero]

Some drivers habit of stopping dead when an emergency vehicle is on blue lights even though they have a clear run going the other way or in a different lane can be tedious

I've never seen any driver in the UK stop if they are not in the way of an emergency vehicle with lights on, i.e. in the situations you mention where they are in a different lane that is not obstructed or going in the opposite direction. I can't recall any situation where drivers have not acted sensibly and made way where possible.

About 10 years ago I had the opportunity to work with paramedics involving riding an ambulance in service and they did tell me that they never expect anyone to break the law to let them pass.


However in Canada when I was in the car with my relatives, they told me that there (and in the US) you must always stop as soon as it is safe and practical regardless of which way the emergency vehicle is going. The only exception would be on a dual carriageway where the emergency vehicle could not possibly cross the median strip.

But looking this up on google now, I can't find clear rules saying you must stop, and it differs between states and provinces but in general you do need to slow down significantly even if the emergency vehicle has a clear run, which you don't necessarily need to do in the UK. You are also required to give one lane of space if the emergency vehicle is stopped by the roadside, which in the UK would often be not possible on narrow one-lane roads.

In Australia, drivers seem to not give way to emergency vehicles if they would not ordinarily be required to give way to any vehicle, I have seen a fire engine with siren on trying to turn right from a side road onto a main road with no traffic lights, wait for over 5 minutes until there was a gap in traffic in both directions.

 

[mangad]

You don’t need to be caught by a copper, just a camera.

I am happy not to oblige and risk being penalised. The law is an ass here, though in most cases emergency vehicles are trained to simply go around the traffic lights if they can.

The law is not an ass. The law is protecting everyone.

Reality is an emergency responder has been trained how to drive through red lights. Most people haven't. A driver going through a red light (any red light indeed) has the potential to cause an accident. What if there's a car coming round on green that is unaware of the emergency vehicle, and the car going through red collides with them? The road to purgatory is paved with good intentions after all. I have seen people make bad, unsafe judgement calls when at a red light because the blue lights make them panic.

The emergency driver won't thank you for going through on red. They equally won't be sat behind you cursing at you for not doing it. They know the rules, and they have the training to know the best way for them to get where they need to do, given the road conditions. It really is far better all round if everyone else sticks to the law, for the good of everyone. The law is what it is for a very good reason.

 

[AlterEgo]

The law is not an ass. The law is protecting everyone.

Reality is an emergency responder has been trained how to drive through red lights. Most people haven't. A driver going through a red light (any red light indeed) has the potential to cause an accident. What if there's a car coming round on green that is unaware of the emergency vehicle, and the car going through red collides with them? The road to purgatory is paved with good intentions after all. I have seen people make bad, unsafe judgement calls when at a red light because the blue lights make them panic.

The emergency driver won't thank you for going through on red. They equally won't be sat behind you cursing at you for not doing it. They know the rules, and they have the training to know the best way for them to get where they need to do, given the road conditions. It really is far better all round if everyone else sticks to the law, for the good of everyone. The law is what it is for a very good reason.

The law is actually an ass if it is penalising people who are intending on assisting emergency staff who are rushing to save people’s lives. But sure I’ll wait at the light for 30 seconds instead of edging five yards forward because that’s the law, grateful every time I’m lucid in my car and the ambulance isn’t on its way to *my* stroke.

I always find it interesting when people dive in to defend a law and explain it is there and always has been because they keep seeing incorrect behaviour. The law isn’t preventing those people making odd judgment calls at red lights, so what’s it there for? It isn’t making the roads any safer. Moving to enable an emergency vehicle to make progress should be a specified defence to the offence.

I can’t say I’ve ever seen anyone do something unsafe at lights owing to an emergency vehicle in 20 years and maybe 250,000+ miles of driving.

 

[Mat17]

At some red lights the ambulance could be sat there for two minutes or so, maybe even longer.

 

[mangad]

I can’t say I’ve ever seen anyone do something unsafe at lights owing to an emergency vehicle in 20 years and maybe 250,000+ miles of driving.

Lucky you. I certainly have. A few months ago I'm at the front of the traffic lights on red. Ambulance a bit behind me. There's two lanes of traffic (one straight on that I'm on, one for turning). Ambulance patiently waiting. We're sat there for about 30 seconds. All as expected. Then someone behind us honks their horn as if to say "IDIOTS, MOVE FOR THE AMBULANCE". The person turning right immediately - and I mean, IMMEDIATELY, completely without thinking - jerks forward through the red light. It's not a controlled move. It's not thought about. It's not planned. It was pure reaction. A kneejerk reaction to someone beeping their horn.

Now thankfully they didn't hit anyone, and nothing hit them. There was no collision of vehicles. No one crossing the road was hurt. But that's exactly why I didn't move until the lights changed. I'm not qualified to make split second judgements on what was safe driving. So I obey the law.

Ten seconds later, the lights changed. The ambulance went through.

It's easy to say things like things like "Well I'd want people to do that if I was having a stroke". Very easy. Who doesn't want the ambulance on the scene as fast as possible? But I'm sure no one, not one person, wants any accidents to happen as that ambulance is on the way to the scene. Because an accident caused by a well meaning person, is still one that will delay the ambulance.

Everyone wants to do the best thing. So maybe we should be guided firmly by what the experts say. Maybe the people in charge of the ambulances? Well the Association of Ambulances Chief Executives have a website. They have a page called "Ambulance approaching? Safety tips for letting it past." Near the top of that page is the following:

At traffic lights


An ambulance won’t want you to go through a red traffic light. So don’t break the law or take any risks by moving past the light. If you’re first in the queue at a red light, stay where you are, and leave the ambulance to find its way around you.

The ambulance won't want you to go through a red traffic light. Listen to the responders. That's absolutely the best thing to do.

And if you think the law should be changed, maybe take it up with the Police, Fire Brigade and Ambulance Services yourself - see what they think of the idea. Because 100%, their views are the only ones that matter on that subject.

 

[AlterEgo]

Lucky you. I certainly have. A few months ago I'm at the front of the traffic lights on red. Ambulance a bit behind me. There's two lanes of traffic (one straight on that I'm on, one for turning). Ambulance patiently waiting. We're sat there for about 30 seconds. All as expected. Then someone behind us honks their horn as if to say "IDIOTS, MOVE FOR THE AMBULANCE". The person turning right immediately - and I mean, IMMEDIATELY, completely without thinking - jerks forward through the red light. It's not a controlled move. It's not thought about. It's not planned. It was pure reaction. A kneejerk reaction to someone beeping their horn.

Yes it’s often a kneejerk reaction and not something people do knowing whether or not it is legal or otherwise. The law isn’t preventing anything here, it is only penalising it retrospectively.

Now thankfully they didn't hit anyone, and nothing hit them. There was no collision of vehicles. No one crossing the road was hurt. But that's exactly why I didn't move until the lights changed. I'm not qualified to make split second judgements on what was safe driving.

Yes, you are. You’re a human being with the faculties to drive a vehicle. You make small split second decisions about what is safe and what is not every time you drive. Most of us are quite aware of the variance of risk between, say, edging forward five yards into dead space, and belting into the middle of a box junction while traffic is flowing. You’d be able to make a split second decision on what was safe if the car behind you immediately exploded; you’d move forward through the red light!

It's easy to say things like things like "Well I'd want people to do that if I was having a stroke".

Not if, but when.

Very easy. Who doesn't want the ambulance on the scene as fast as possible? But I'm sure no one, not one person, wants any accidents to happen as that ambulance is on the way to the scene. Because an accident caused by a well meaning person, is still one that will delay the ambulance.

But those incidents are happening anyway regardless of the law. Those decisions are already being made and many people don’t in fact know it’s illegal to pass a red light even by a little bit to allow an emergency vehicle to pass. Because I see people edge over the line all the time to allow vehicles past.

Everyone wants to do the best thing. So maybe we should be guided firmly by what the experts say. Maybe the people in charge of the ambulances? Well the Association of Ambulances Chief Executives have a website. They have a page called "Ambulance approaching? Safety tips for letting it past." Near the top of that page is the following:

It doesn’t help to be so patronising when if you read the thread it’s quite clear I know what the law is and make clear I follow it. I simply disagree with it and think there should be a defence to going through a red light, where it is reasonable to do so, in order to assist an emergency vehicle with lights on in attending an emergency faster.

And if you think the law should be changed, maybe take it up with the Police, Fire Brigade and Ambulance Services yourself - see what they think of the idea. Because 100%, their views are the only ones that matter on that subject.

No, they are not. Those services work for all of us; I’d quite like the law to permit them to get to me faster if I have another stroke or have an intruder or a fire.

 

[BingMan]

And if you think the law should be changed, maybe take it up with the Police, Fire Brigade and Ambulance Services yourself - see what they think of the idea. Because 100%, their views are the only ones that matter on that subject.

No. The views of the general driving public are equally important

 

[bramling]

The law is actually an ass if it is penalising people who are intending on assisting emergency staff who are rushing to save people’s lives. But sure I’ll wait at the light for 30 seconds instead of edging five yards forward because that’s the law, grateful every time I’m lucid in my car and the ambulance isn’t on its way to *my* stroke.

I always find it interesting when people dive in to defend a law and explain it is there and always has been because they keep seeing incorrect behaviour. The law isn’t preventing those people making odd judgment calls at red lights, so what’s it there for? It isn’t making the roads any safer. Moving to enable an emergency vehicle to make progress should be a specified defence to the offence.

I can’t say I’ve ever seen anyone do something unsafe at lights owing to an emergency vehicle in 20 years and maybe 250,000+ miles of driving.

Just because something is on blue light doesn’t mean it’s something life threatening.

On balance I’d say it’s riskier to have people taking chances with red lights, a quick judgement call is particularly risky as there’s a high likelihood someone could get it wrong and cause an accident, plus when people do things according to their own rules then it’s also going to make it difficult for the emergency services drivers to anticipate what is going to happen.

Meanwhile, on an individual level - as far as I’m concerned the state nowadays treats me with contempt, so I’m not going out of my way to help out.

 

[Bikeman78]

On another forum I have read about a council seeking to exact a penalty charge where a driver dipped into a bus lane to let an emergency vehicle pass. Of course the photographic evidence proffered omitted the pictures which would have shown that happening.

Which is why I will never move into a bus lane. It makes more sense for the emergency vehicle to use it.

 

[Mojo]

I was on the A46 (2 lane dual carriageway section) the other day in very slow moving traffic when I noticed vehicles parting the way behind me to allow an ambulance on blue lights to come up through the middle, I duly did the same and the ambulance was on its way into the distance. A few minutes later once the traffic had subsided, I found myself, driving in the inside lane, catching up with the same ambulance which was driving along at 60mph in the outside lane (it was not overtaking any vehicles). I was very tempted to overtake, but wasn't sure if it was wise to, but eventually at the next roundabout the ambulance moved over to the inside lane and numerous vehicles overtook which I decided to as well.