Attention Irish Motorists

Vegeta

scargill wrote:

This is the only real solution - we need an awful lot more of roads like this.

That is a much better solution, definitely agree with that

jd

In California, on SCs there are periodically small lay-bys with advance warning given. As per the signs, Slower moving vehicles must pull in and let traffic by..
jd

prospect

Saruman wrote:

On a slightly different note.... we need to have more "slow lanes" on country roads... plenty of places we can put them... all thats required is a few hours of re painting the lines. I love driving to cork.. as soon as i hit county cork there are slow lanes every few miles. I do not worry being stuck behind a truck or slow driver as i know in a few mins i can overtake him when he moves into a slow lane.

correct.
And all this is doing is forcing slow drivers to move out of the way.

However, if slow drivers were more considerate, they would not need to re-design the roads! Think about it, all I am asking is that slower drivers move over into the hard shoulder to allow someone pass. Your suggestion is to change the colour of the line from yellow to white, and hey presto, it is essentially the same thing.

RiderOnTheStorm

Vegeta wrote:

Pulling over will enhance the safety of the motorist doing the over taking but not yours

yup! why should i enhance the safety of the speeder (who is doing something illegal) and reduce my safety (me who is obeying the law)

dont get me wrong. I pull over all the time. I am only talking about when I am going at max speed limit, and car comes up behind me and prob wants to overtake. If he turns on indicator (indicating he wants to overtake) and we are all going at speed limit, I may (depending on avail of hardshoulder) pull over. I will not pull into HS when going max limit just because someone is behind me.

Vegeta

jd wrote:

In California, on SCs there are periodically small lay-bys with advance warning given. As per the signs, Slower moving vehicles must pull in and let traffic by..
jd

What's an SC, sorry for dumb question?

Lived in San Diego last year and just curious

prospect

RiderOnTheStorm wrote:

yup! why should i enhance the safety of the speeder (who is doing something illegal) and reduce my safety (me who is obeying the law)

How exactly does it reduce your safety?

jd

Vegeta wrote:

What's an SC, sorry for dumb question?

Lived in San Diego last year and just curious

Single Carriageway.

They call those lay bys turnouts..
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21656.htm

21656. On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow-moving vehicle, including a passenger vehicle, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway at the nearest place designated as a turnout by signs erected by the authority having jurisdiction over the highway, or wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following it to proceed. As used in this section a slow-moving vehicle is one which is proceeding at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

How exactly does it reduce your safety?

It is less safe than the main lane.

By Its design it is inteded to be a buffer between fast moving traffic and objects like junctions, house entrances, field entrances, broken down vehicles, cyclists, pedesrians etc.

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

It is less safe than the main lane.

By Its design it is inteded to be a buffer between fast moving traffic and objects like junctions, house entrances, field entrances, broken down vehicles, cyclists, pedesrians etc.

But if they change the colour of the line it will become safe!!!!!?????

Also, it is a perfectly safe lane, as it is designed to be used by emergency vehicles at speed.

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

But if they change the colour of the line it will become safe!!!!!?????

Also, it is a perfectly safe lane, as it is designed to be used by emergency vehicles at speed.

no but if they change the colour and there is a hard shoulder out side that lane like the ones on the way to Cork Saruman was talking about.

If its such a safe lane then why don't they let us drive on it the whole time and just respray them all white? Oh yeah cos as i said its designed as a buffer to keep motorists away from potentially dangerous obstacles

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

If its such a safe lane then why don't they let us drive on it the whole time and just respray them all white? Oh yeah cos as i said its designed as a buffer to keep motorists away from potentially dangerous obstacles

So lanes without this 'buffer' you speak of, are unsafe. So, I presume you do not drive on any of the single lane roads that cover the majority of this country?

Also, they are not designed as a buffer, they are designed as an emergency lane. They are for emergency vehicles, emergency stops, and as per the ROTR, for slow moving vehicles to move into to allow faster vehicles pass.

Good God people, it is written in the Rules of the Road, what is the argument here?

maidhc

Vegeta wrote:

...Oh yeah cos as i said its designed as a buffer to keep motorists away from potentially dangerous obstacles

But when there is clearly no potentially dangerous obstacle... i.e. most of the time...

I fully accept your general point, but there are times when it is perfectly safe. If people come to a decison it is safer to remain on the road that is fine, what irks me is the "holier than thouness" of some drivers, and I am not suggesting you are one of those.

Vegeta

maidhc wrote:

But when there is clearly no potentially dangerous obstacle... i.e. most of the time...

I fully accept your general point, but there are times when it is perfectly safe. If people come to a decison it is safer to remain on the road that is fine, what irks me is the "holier than thouness" of some drivers, and I am not suggesting you are one of those.

Lads i have already said i would pull in if on a slow moving vehicle (tractor etc) as they would do the following

up hold a hell of a lot of traffic
Be travelling relatively slowly and be capable of stopping if someone pulled out onto the hard shoulder

If i were driving a car doing about 10kph under the speed limit i would not pull in as

the hard shoulder is not a safe place for driving a car at 90 or so kph. At this speed if the hard shoulder was clear and you moved in, suddenly a car comes out of its driveway, you have less time to react due to speed and a greater stopping distance.
If some guy wants to over take me and I am doing a reasonable speed let him take the risk. I will drive as close to the broken yellow line as possible for him but i will not enter the hard shoulder.



Below are the first two paragraphs from wikipedia when hard shoulder is entered there are a few interesting things highlighted

"A hard shoulder or simply shoulder is a reserved area alongside the verge of a road or motorway. Generally it is kept clear of all traffic. In the event of an emergency or breakdown, a motorist can pull into the hard shoulder to get out of the flow of traffic and obtain an element of safety. A hard shoulder also allows some extra flexibility should a motorist need to take evasive action, as it is a buffer area between the main thoroughfare and the edge of the road. Emergency vehicles such as ambulances and police cars may also use the shoulder to bypass traffic congestion. These uses lead to the alternate names breakdown lane and emergency lane.

The shoulder is usually slightly narrower than a full traffic lane. In some cases, particularly on old rural roadways, shoulders do not exist or are made of gravel rather than hard asphalt or concrete. These are known as soft shoulders in comparison. Because the road surface changes at that point, they are less safe if they need to be used for emergency maneuvers, so modern practice is to build a hard shoulder whenever possible. To save money, the hard shoulder is sometimes not paved to the same thickness as the through lanes, so if vehicles were to attempt to use it as a through lane regularly, it would rapidly deteriorate. The shoulder also often collects various bits of debris that can make driving there unsafe."

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

the hard shoulder is not a safe place for driving a car at 90 or so kph. At this speed if the hard shoulder was clear and you moved in, suddenly a car comes out of its driveway, you have less time to react due to speed and a greater stopping distance.
If some guy wants to over take me and I am doing a reasonable speed let him take the risk. I will drive as close to the broken yellow line as possible for him but i will not enter the hard shoulder.

Do you drive at 90km/h on a national route with no hard shoulder?

Wikipedia is not the Irish ROTR

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

Do you drive at 90km/h on a national route with no hard shoulder?

Wikipedia is not the Irish ROTR

I generally drive to the conditions or speed limit which ever is lowest.

The Irish ROTR are so perfect they are being re-drafted. I never claimed wikipedia was the rules of the road. You asked why the hard shoulder was less safe and I gave you reasons which are not in the rules of the road. Maybe if they were called the dangers of the road it would have been in there.

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

The Irish ROTR are so perfect they are being re-drafted. I never claimed wikipedia was the rules of the road. You asked why the hard shoulder was less safe and I gave you reasons which are not in the rules of the road. Maybe if they were called the dangers of the road it would have been in there.

And I hope the re-draft makes it even more clear to slow moving vehicles to try and avoid causing un-necessary tail backs.

I am pretty sure the hard shoulders referred to in wikipedia are those of other countries, as i have never seen a gravel one in ireland.

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

And I hope the re-draft makes it even more clear to slow moving vehicles to try and avoid causing un-necessary tail backs.

I am pretty sure the hard shoulders referred to in wikipedia are those of other countries, as i have never seen a gravel one in ireland.

Ireland is refered to on the page so it was included. Also do you think the hard shoulder system was invented here or engineered here. We copied another country (probably England)

I want to ask a question here. How exactly would one know if the driver behind wants to over take? He would have to display some form of driving action to indicate he wanted to pass you?

prospect

If I am driving and observing in my rear view mirror what is happening behind me, and I notice that a car is continually gaining on me, when the time is right, and it is safe for all concerned, I'll move slightly to the left and allw the car pass safely.

Its that simple, and that safe. Everyone is happy. There is no excuse for staying in lane and forcing your poor driving ability on others. If you are not capable at driving at the posted limit, then have the good grace not to hinder others.

Jumpy

prospect wrote:

and you have no right to attempt to enforce the law.

Of course you do.

You cannot punish someone, that is for the courts to decide, but you can enforce the law if it is necessary to do so.

Just so you are aware of where I stand on this issue people -

a) Agree with having slow drivers move out of the way
b) Disagree with drivers following the speed limit having to move out of the way for speeders.
c) castrating tailgaters.

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

If I am driving and observing in my rear view mirror what is happening behind me, and I notice that a car is continually gaining on me, when the time is right, and it is safe for all concerned, I'll move slightly to the left and allw the car pass safely.

Its that simple, and that safe. Everyone is happy. There is no excuse for staying in lane and forcing your poor driving ability on others. If you are not capable at driving at the posted limit, then have the good grace not to hinder others.

What if the car behind doesn't want to pass? You cannot be sure that every car to gains on you wants to pass.

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

What if the car behind doesn't want to pass? You cannot be sure that every car to gains on you wants to pass.

then I indicate and move back out. No harm done.
Its not brain surgery guys, its quite simple.

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

then I indicate and move back out. No harm done.
Its not brain surgery guys, its quite simple.

How can you be sure that in 10 seconds more time he wont decide to over take you.

Will you just sway in and out of the hard shoulder when ever you deem it safe for the guy behind to pass.

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

How can you be sure that in 10 seconds more time he wont decide to over take you.

Will you just sway in and out of the hard shoulder when ever you deem it safe for the guy behind to pass.

I cant be sure, but when he/she starts moving closer again, and put on their right indicator, I will move in again. Why wouldn't I, it doesn't cost me anything.

I highlighted part of your point in bold to illustrated the kind of over-hyped exaggeration that "your side" of this debate are prone too.

Now, can I ask a question.
A single lane carriageway with a hard shoulder, and a 100Km/h limit.
You are driving along happily at your preffered speed of 90km/h and catch up on a car doing 50km/h. There is no real safe overtaking manouvre available, and the driver of the slower car won't move over to let you by.
The traffic builds up behind you.
After a few miles of this he slows down more and puts on his right indicator to turn into his house. But the oncoming traffic has no break in it as far as the eye cans see. You have obviously been keeping a good distance from him, so here are your options:
1. Slow down and come to a complete stop behind him, on a main road, and wait until he can turn before you proceed. Extreemly unsafe.
2. Move into the hard shoulder and pass his stationary car and continue on your journey, where you can go a 90km/h again. Safe & Legal

Is the hard shoulder good enough for you in this scenario? Is it good enough when it suits your goals?

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

I cant be sure, but when he/she starts moving closer again, and put on their right indicator, I will move in again. Why wouldn't I, it doesn't cost me anything.

I highlighted part of your point in bold to illustrated the kind of over-hyped exaggeration that "your side" of this debate are prone too.

Now, can I ask a question.
A single lane carriageway with a hard shoulder, and a 100Km/h limit.
You are driving along happily at your preffered speed of 90km/h and catch up on a car doing 50km/h. There is no real safe overtaking manouvre available, and the driver of the slower car won't move over to let you by.
The traffic builds up behind you.
After a few miles of this he slows down more and puts on his right indicator to turn into his house. But the oncoming traffic has no break in it as far as the eye cans see. You have obviously been keeping a good distance from him, so here are your options:
1. Slow down and come to a complete stop behind him, on a main road, and wait until he can turn before you proceed. Extreemly unsafe.
2. Move into the hard shoulder and pass his stationary car and continue on your journey, where you can go a 90km/h again. Safe & Legal

Is the hard shoulder good enough for you in this scenario? Is it good enough when it suits your goals?

To start with I have already stated if driving that slow for a given speed limit i would pull in if there was 1 maybe 2 cars behind me. My problem is with people doing 100kph expecting people as you say travelling approx 90kph to pull in

A massive difference between pulling into a hard shoulder to drive one car length or a slow driver pulling in and having the build up or traffic box him in for a few hundred metres.


Again to sum it all up.

If driving slightly under the limit it is safer to stay on the main road than pull into the hard shoulder. If the hard shoulder is indeed designed for loats of traffic sher go out and paint them white and let everyone on them.

If the driver behind wants to overtake let him take the risk. its not like you are slowing him down that much. What, he might loose out 6 miles for an hours worth of driving.

If the driver behind is being courteous he should not expect the motorist in front to pull in.

sneakyST

I will always try to avoid going into the hard shoulder for the reasons stated above by others .i.e. potholes and parked cars(yes i've seen it) etc.

I will try and make overtaking as easy as possible for the driver behind by:
being aware that someone is approaching who is driving faster than me
Moving as far left as possible
reducing my speed a little before the coming car is near.
If you reduce your speed a little then the driver behind has better momentum and this usually results in an easy overtake (as long as the opposite lane is not choco full of traffic)
You can also look at the traffic coming the other way and can make an overtaking opportunity for the other driver by adjusting your speed.
Driving is not about just looking in front of you....

Most of the time the road is wide enough to fit two cars on the same side without the need for the HS. I dont understand why they didnt make some of these roads 2 lanes each way.

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

To start with I have already stated if driving that slow for a given speed limit i would pull in if there was 1 maybe 2 cars behind me. My problem is with people doing 100kph expecting people as you say travelling approx 90kph to pull in

A massive difference between pulling into a hard shoulder to drive one car length or a slow driver pulling in and having the build up or traffic box him in for a few hundred metres.


Again to sum it all up.

If driving slightly under the limit it is safer to stay on the main road than pull into the hard shoulder. If the hard shoulder is indeed designed for loats of traffic sher go out and paint them white and let everyone on them.

If the driver behind wants to overtake let him take the risk. its not like you are slowing him down that much. What, he might loose out 6 miles for an hours worth of driving.

If the driver behind is being courteous he should not expect the motorist in front to pull in.

I really don't see your "logic"

Why cant you move out of the way at 90Km/h? What is the difference?

You say:
"If driving slightly under the limit it is safer to stay on the main road than pull into the hard shoulder"

And yet you also say:
"To start with I have already stated if driving that slow for a given speed limit i would pull in"

You make no sense?

Vegeta

prospect wrote:

I really don't see your "logic"

Why cant you move out of the way at 90Km/h? What is the difference?

You say:
"If driving slightly under the limit it is safer to stay on the main road than pull into the hard shoulder"

And yet you also say:
"To start with I have already stated if driving that slow for a given speed limit i would pull in"

You make no sense?

at 50kph (which you refer to in your story) you have much more time to spot , react and slow down.

at 90kph nearly double that speed, you have less time to spot, react and stop.

Pretty simple really i thought that was pretty much common knowledge

Carb

prospect wrote:

Now, can I ask a question.
A single lane carriageway with a hard shoulder, and a 100Km/h limit.
You are driving along happily at your preffered speed of 90km/h and catch up on a car doing 50km/h. There is no real safe overtaking manouvre available, and the driver of the slower car won't move over to let you by.
The traffic builds up behind you.
After a few miles of this he slows down more and puts on his right indicator to turn into his house. But the oncoming traffic has no break in it as far as the eye cans see. You have obviously been keeping a good distance from him, so here are your options:
1. Slow down and come to a complete stop behind him, on a main road, and wait until he can turn before you proceed. Extreemly unsafe.
2. Move into the hard shoulder and pass his stationary car and continue on your journey, where you can go a 90km/h again. Safe & Legal

Is the hard shoulder good enough for you in this scenario? Is it good enough when it suits your goals?

I was stuck behind a guy one evening coming home from Dublin who chose option 1 on three occasions, even though there was nearly enough space to go pass the inside of the car without touching the hard shoulder. It nearly caused an accident every time.

prospect

Vegeta wrote:

at 50kph (which you refer to in your story) you have much more time to spot , react and slow down.

at 90kph nearly double that speed, you have less time to spot, react and stop.

Pretty simple really i thought that was pretty much common knowledge

But this applies to driving at all times, obviously 50km/h gives you more time to react than at 90km/h. But does this mean you always drive at 50km/h? Or does it mean you only drive at 90km/h when there is a hard shoulder?

jd

Vegeta wrote:

My problem is with people doing 100kph expecting people as you say travelling approx 90kph to pull in


.

I can't see the problem, I do it when safe if that is the speed I'm comfortable driving at that particular time.
The other thing to remember is that your speedometer can overstate your speed by up to 15%- you may only be doing approx 80km/hr.