Most annoying road practices.

BrianD3

kippy wrote:

My pet hate,
This kind of attitude:

Pre emptive overtaking!! What kind of Bull crap is that?
An awful lot of Irish drivers (ie those who are safe drivers) tend not to want to overtake a vehicle doing anywhere near 100 KPH as it is illegal to do so on parts of many Irish roads.

Who said anything about overtaking where is isn't safe or legal to do so?

Unfortunately many Irish drivers
-seem incapable of or unwilling to overtake even when safe to do so
-at the same time do not leave sufficient gap in front of them for an overtaking vehicle to move into.
-resent being overtaken or make judgements about other driver's reasons for overtaking (eg saying as you have done that they'l only save 15 minutes, shur what's the hurry :rolleyes: You may not care about 15 minutes of your time but a lot of us do)

There is a hysteria out there about overtaking and making prgress. If you drive in any other European country you'll find that the Irish are actually some of the slowest, least decisive drivers in Europe. A typical Irish scenario is a big convoy plodding aloing at 70-80 km/h on national routes with those at the head of the convoy driving up each others arses so nobody can overtake them.

smemon

• no lights on in heavy rain/dark conditions
• cars with NO brake lights at all working (seen 2 in the last week).
• inconsistency in speed.. i.e going from 100km/hr to 90, then maybe 110 :rolleyes:
• people who overtake you when you're bang on the limit..
• people with full lights on at night around town..
• cars with any sort of led/neon/decorative coloured exterior lighting..

_Kaiser_

As BrianD3 says, some people may be happy to plod along at 70/80 in a 100 zone when it's safe and appropriate to do the limit, but that doesn't mean those of us who have somewhere to get to (or simply wish to make decent progress) should have to endure it also when the opportunity arises to overtake in a safe manner.

Besides, with commuter traffic the way it is, that 10-15 minutes saving Kippy refers to can often mean the difference of 30-60 mins when you hit traffic in the city.

Also, often times these same dawdlers are braking for no reason, weaving, chatting on their phones etc - personally I'd rather have someone like that behind me than in front of me.

kippy

Apologies Brian, Perhaps I took too harsh a view on your comments- but "Pre - Emptive" over taking - you have to admit that sounds a bit daft?

I speak from a lot of experience when I say that many overtaking scenarios I witness are done illegally-ie on solid white lines, breaking the speed limit significantly and without due care and attention for other road users.
The thing that annoys me is that in general the car that is being overtaken is doing about 5 KPH (Maybe no even that) less than the legal limit at the time. The car overtakes, and a few miles down the road will have to slow down anyway because of other traffic or lights or some other reason (sometimes as a previous poster mentioned, the build up of traffic in a major town or city). The (often) dangerous overtaking procedure completle negated because of this.
There is nothing wrong with overtaking when it is safe to do so however, may people have the impatient attitude which leads them to overtake when it is not safe to do so, this is a MAJOR problem on irish roads. Trying to save 15-20 minutes here and there while risking the lives of others.

Again apologies, I hope you understand my point. Comments such as pre-emptive overtaking have no place in driving.
Kippy

GTC

If there's a truck or van ahead, its usually helpful to overtake it asap, so that you avoid a convoy situation developing. Pre-emptive overtaking is a good idea in this regard, you now have a clear view of the road ahead, and you have a greater amount of time in which to respond to hazards. Stuck behind a truck/convoy reduces your view of the road and shortens your time in which to react. If you are incapable/unwilling to overtake, leave sufficient room in front to allow another vehicle to overtake you. That bit is in the rules of the road, don't you know.

Honestly

deevey

And what for? To save 10-15 minutes on a journey

10 mins behind a vehicle doing 20kph under the speed limit is 3.3 km behind where we should and would like to be!

do this a few times on a trip of 400 odd miles and it quickly tots up to hours ...

on a trip to the likes of Killarney / Cork / Letterkenny where you have a VERY long trip / do the work / and then trip back in the same day it makes a HUGE difference.

As someone else posted .. might only be the differnce of 15 mins for you .. but could be the differnce of getting into, or trying to leave a big city before or during rush hour !!! adding hours to journey time.

Inconsistant driving speed is possiblty gripe on irish roads, not to mention the fcekers that insist on speeding up well past the speed limit as you try to overtake.

If you or your car is not capable of travelling AT the speed limit for the majority of a trip IMHO you shouldnt be driving - sorry if this offends and obviously there are exceptions e.g. trucks .. but they generally pull over to let you through soon as they can.

maybe set up speed "targets" rather than limits , and cameras at the 100m mark after a major junction to ensure new traffic has put their boot down to prevent convoys

I see Slow as NOT always safe.

TwoShedsJackson

GTC wrote:

If there's a truck or van ahead, its usually helpful to overtake it asap, so that you avoid a convoy situation developing. Pre-emptive overtaking is a good idea in this regard, you now have a clear view of the road ahead, and you have a greater amount of time in which to respond to hazards. Stuck behind a truck/convoy reduces your view of the road and shortens your time in which to react. If you are incapable/unwilling to overtake, leave sufficient room in front to allow another vehicle to overtake you. That bit is in the rules of the road, don't you know.

Honestly

You may or may not be doing this on purpose but 95% of your posts, this one included, reek of condescension.

_Kaiser_

GTC wrote:

If there's a truck or van ahead, its usually helpful to overtake it asap, so that you avoid a convoy situation developing. Pre-emptive overtaking is a good idea in this regard, you now have a clear view of the road ahead, and you have a greater amount of time in which to respond to hazards. Stuck behind a truck/convoy reduces your view of the road and shortens your time in which to react. If you are incapable/unwilling to overtake, leave sufficient room in front to allow another vehicle to overtake you. That bit is in the rules of the road, don't you know.

Honestly

Exactly.. anything that restricts your view of the road ahead and affects your ability to react, should be treated as a potential hazard and be overtaken as soon as it is safe (and legal) to do so.

This in my opinion includes tractors, trucks, vans, buses, and dawdlers...

BrianD3

Pre-emptive ovetaking may sound like aggressive driving but it isn't really. Basically it's overtaking (safely) when you get a chance that reduces the probability of being held up later. With experience you can develop a feel for overtakes that will save you time and overtakes that won't.

A classic example of where a pre-emptive overtake would save time - you are behind a truck on a wide straight road, he's doing 90 km/h which you are relatively happy with. So you don't overtake even though the road is clear. 2 miles up the road the road changes from being wide and straight to being twisty, narrow, hilly. The truck now slows down to a crawl, comes to a dead stop every time he meets an oncomng vehicle etc You cannot overtake and regret not doing so earlier when you had the chance.

Similiarly, due to the nature of his vehicle a trucker can have major difficulty passing a tractor where a car would have no problem. In the above scenario substitute the hilly section of road with a tractor.

It's not just trucks that will hold you up in the above scenarios. Many car drivers are indecisive, erratic and completely unaware of the frustration they cause to vehicles behind. They can be doing 110 km/h one minute and for no good reason 70 the next. They're slow when the limit is 100 km/h yet speed through urban areas. They tailgate the car in front, they overtake when it's not safe and dither about overtaking when it is safe. They floor it on straights and hammer on the brakes when they meet oncoming traffic even though the road is wide. etc.

With this sort of carry on it's no wonder people get frustrated and want to get past whenever they get a chance. Even if that means passing the car in front at a time when it is doing the posted limit

PS I drive nearly 40k miles per year on mostly single carriageway roads and every day I see dangerous overtaking so I'm certainly not advocating that either.

_Kaiser_

TwoShedsJackson wrote:

You may or may not be doing this on purpose but 95% of your posts, this one included, reek of condescension.

I'd have to disagree. Whilst I'm not the biggest fan of the Gardai in general, I find GTC's post interesting (gives the other side's view), fair and reasonable (if only all his colleagues where as copped on - no pun intended! - when it comes to enforcement) and informative/educational (which in my opinion is the biggest issue out there).

TwoShedsJackson

Kaiser2000 wrote:

I'd have to disagree. Whilst I'm not the biggest fan of the Gardai in general, I find GTC's post interesting (gives the other side's view), fair and reasonable (if only all his colleagues where as copped on - no pun intended! - when it comes to enforcement) and informative/educational (which in my opinion is the biggest issue out there).

Actually I frequently agree with what he says, but a lot of his posts come off to me as having a touch of the *ye mere mortals listen to the word of the almighty Traffic Copper* e.g. the last two sentences of his last post are fairly un-nessecary.

I fully agree with what he suggests in the actual body of the post.

Johnny Storm

Being undertaken on the left while going straight accross a medium sized roundabout. This has happened to me several times in Limerick (for some reason).

GreeBo

Johnny Storm wrote:

Being undertaken on the left while going straight accross a medium sized roundabout. This has happened to me several times in Limerick (for some reason).

Were there two lanes exiting the roundabout?

High&Low

smemon wrote:

• no lights on in heavy rain/dark conditions

A lot of drivers don't seem to understand that lights serve two purposes, to see with and to be seen by others.

Drove to Galway from Dublin at the weekend and the rain was very heavy and it was pretty dark too, couldn't get over the number of drivers who were driving without their lights on. In a number of european countries if it is raining you are legally obliged to turn on your lights.

I also noticed a couple of people who had their lights on when it was raining and once it stopped they turned them off, why???

I personally drive with my lights on all the time, it makes you more visible on the road especially if you are on a national road you can be seen more clearly if someone coming from the opposit direction is overtaking...

Malice

Has anyone noticed this fairly recent (to me anyway) phenomenon of cars pulling out of junctions heading left but using the hard shoulder as some sort of merging lane? I see it regularly in Galway and I don't mind admitting it startles me every time I see it. You never know whether they are going to stay in the hard shoulder or continue pulling out into your lane and also you just have to assume that they looked along the hard shoulder and seen no obstructions (pedestrians, cyclists, parked/broken down cars etc.) before pulling out but I'm pretty sure in most cases they haven't.

RobAMerc

smemon wrote:

* no lights on in heavy rain/dark conditions

I totally agree here - it should be law if your wipers are on your lights should be on - I cannot get over the number of idiots appearing out of the haze when out driving in the rain.

I also nearly had a head on with a car in July when at 10.30 at night on the main Dublin/Cork road this idiot didn't think it necessary to turn on their lights.

I was about to overtake another car when I saw this guy oncoming at the last second.

I have no doubt if this had to have been an accident "SPEED" would have been sited as the main cause simply because I was overtaking.:rolleyes:

LFCFan

RobAMerc wrote:

Does anyone else get very nervous in the right hand lane of a two lane dual - carriageway roundabout when going straight on

If you're going straight on through a dual lane roundabout with 3 exits, you should be in the left lane. You only go into the right hand lane when going to the 3rd exit or if you need to go back the way you came.

ballooba

LFCFan wrote:

If you're going straight on through a dual lane roundabout with 3 exits, you should be in the left lane. You only go into the right hand lane when going to the 3rd exit or if you need to go back the way you came.

I may be wrong here but isn't there a bit of confusion on the correct way to use roundabouts for the 2nd exit (i.e. two schools of thought). Can't you use either lane? What do they do in the UK?

GreeBo

ballooba wrote:

I may be wrong here but isn't there a bit of confusion on the correct way to use roundabouts for the 2nd exit (i.e. two schools of thought). Can't you use either lane? What do they do in the UK?

If there are two lanes on the exit then (if taking the second exit) you can be in either lane.
(unless they have changed this in the new version of ROTR?)

LFCFan

ballooba wrote:

I may be wrong here but isn't there a bit of confusion on the correct way to use roundabouts for the 2nd exit (i.e. two schools of thought). Can't you use either lane? What do they do in the UK?

but if you're in the right hand lane and taking the second exit, you could be cutting in front of the person in the left hand lane taking the 2nd exit??

lightening

GreeBo wrote:

If there are two lanes on the exit then (if taking the second exit) you can be in either lane.
(unless they have changed this in the new version of ROTR?)

This is correct from what I remember... It is illegal to do it if there is only one lane.

GreeBo

LFCFan wrote:

but if you're in the right hand lane and taking the second exit, you could be cutting in front of the person in the left hand lane taking the 2nd exit??

thats why you can only do it if there are two lanes on the exit

J_R

GreeBo wrote:

If there are two lanes on the exit then (if taking the second exit) you can be in either lane.
(unless they have changed this in the new version of ROTR?)

They did not change the rules in the new ROTR, only attempted to make it clearer

Going straight ahead;

* Approach in the left-hand lane but do not signal yet.
* Signal left after you have passed the exit before the one you want.
* You may follow the course shown in the illustration by the broken red line in situations where:

* the left-hand lane is only for turning left or is blocked or closed, or
* when directed by a Garda.

Going Straight Ahead

Stay in the left-hand lane, but do not indicate "left" until you have passed the first exit. Where conditions dictate otherwise, you may follow the course shown by the broken red line.

edit:

You STAY LEFT. You may only use the red dotted line when as stated:-

* the left-hand lane is only for turning left or is blocked or closed, or
* when directed by a Garda.

Alun

In the UK, where a roundabout has multiple lanes at the entry there will nearly always be road markings indicating which lane to be in. The UK Highway Code says (amongst other things)

When taking any intermediate exit
* select the appropriate lane on approach to and on the roundabout, signalling as necessary
* stay in this lane until you need to alter course to exit the roundabout

The RotR says to only follow the line where you keep to the right hand lane in case of a two-lane on / two-lane off roundabout when the left hand lane is blocked, closed or a Garda instructs you to do so, but (conveniently) avoids mentioning road markings indicating the contrary. Later on they say you can do it "where conditions dictate otherwise" whatever that's supposed to mean.

In practice though, it's not really practical to do otherwise, especially in the case of roundabouts where 99% of the traffic takes the straight through option. Take the Loughlinstown roundabout at the N11/M11 junction, for example. It's hardly sensible to expect all the traffic coming along the N11 to suddenly all cram into the left-hand lane just before the roundabout, just for the odd car that wants to turn right into the hospital.

GreeBo

they dont cover what I like to call "motorway roundabouts" where its necessary to drift to the left as you pass each exit...no wonder barely anyone else does it...:rolleyes:

ballooba

LFCFan wrote:

but if you're in the right hand lane and taking the second exit, you could be cutting in front of the person in the left hand lane taking the 2nd exit??

As would you be if you had taken the entrance before the person in the left hand lane and it was your third exit and their second?

ballooba

GreeBo wrote:

they dont cover what I like to call "motorway roundabouts" where its necessary to drift to the left as you pass each exit...no wonder barely anyone else does it...:rolleyes:

Those are so badly marked it is ridiculous.

M1 roundabout at Lusk/Rush/Swords is terrible.
N7/M50 Roundabout actually has lines appearing from under a barrier at the side of the road at the moment.

Johnny Storm

GreeBo wrote:

Were there two lanes exiting the roundabout?

No.

GreeBo

Johnny Storm wrote:

No.

Then why were you in the inside lane on the roundabout?:cool:
You are in the wrong lane, the driver in the left lane assumed you were taking the third or subsequent exit...

Johnny Storm

GreeBo wrote:

You are in the wrong lane, ...

D'oh!

GreeBo wrote:

the driver in the left lane assumed you were taking the third or subsequent exit...

I really dont think so