Matt Cooper - Driving in Hard Shoulder

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 3:53pm

AudiChris wrote: »

^^^^^^^^^^

Oh for the love of god. Thats in reference to the point that drivers in lane 1 are supposed to get out of the way for drivers who are trying to merge.

C'mon Chris, it was only 3 days ago. If you cant follow whats going on, probably better to stop posting.

AudiChris wrote: »

If you're in the leftmost lane and you see someone coming down the merging lane, you move into the overtaking lane

GreeBo wrote:

an ability to read and retain more than one post/point at time seem to be abilities sorely lacking on this thread.

/me shakes head

L1011 · 03-11-2008 4:02pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Yawn. That entire page was pasted in a post days ago. But like the spear throwing, shield wielding terrier that you are you just wont accept that Im NOT debating the point that its in the ROTR, Im asking why and if there is a need for a dedicated merging lane.

Logical reasoning and an ability to read and retain more than one post/point at time seem to be abilities sorely lacking on this thread.

Yes. By you.

Its been explained to you many, many times why its the law. Its been explained to you many, many times why there is no need for a dedicated merging lane. Yet you keep insisting it hasn't been.

Zulu · 03-11-2008 4:03pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Yawn. That entire page was pasted in a post days ago.

I know, and that was after I posted it the first time, when you kept arguing against it.

But like the spear throwing, shield wielding terrier that you are

What the hell is that? an insult or something??

you just wont accept that Im NOT debating the point that its in the ROTR, Im asking why

...which has been explained again and again to you, however no reason was acceptable to you, and I suspect, no reason ever will be acceptable to you.

and if there is a need for a dedicated merging lane.

Which has also been discussed, explained, refuted to everyone else satisfaction. If the ROTR are followed correctly and if people are considerate to each other, there is no issue merging.

While people have offered you reasons, references, opinions, explanations, you've simply dismissed them and ignored them. You've continuously attempted to build straw man arguments in an attempt to drag the topic away from a point you have clearly lost and can not defend (without resorting to blatant ignorance).

...and yet you'd imply that others are dogged! :rolleyes:

vibe666 · 03-11-2008 4:04pm

what about if someone overtakes you on the inside lane in a hearse?

isn't that undertaking?

Zulu · 03-11-2008 4:13pm

Very good

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 4:17pm

You can also undertake to overtake on the left

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 4:23pm

Zulu wrote: »

What the hell is that? an insult or something??

err "Zulu" ?

Zulu wrote: »

If the ROTR are followed correctly and if people are considerate to each other, there is no issue merging.

Thats a lot of IFs. Im just raising the point, and it has been admitted by various people on here, that its not always possible to merge onto a motorway. In fact for some people it seems thats its never possible.
Now we either throw them off the road, oblige drivers in lane 1 to let them in (which I happen to do) or make a merging lane like we already have on certain parts of the M50. (right, technically its not designed for long merging but its been agreed that you would be dim to not use it for that)

Zulu wrote: »

While people have offered you reasons, references, opinions, explanations, you've simply dismissed them and ignored them. You've continuously attempted to build straw man arguments in an attempt to drag the topic away from a point you have clearly lost and can not defend (without resorting to blatant ignorance).

There are supposed to be two sides to a debate, otherwise it gets very silent. I have neither dismissed not ignored any post, where I have seen issues or contradictions I have raised them appropriately. Im not dragging the topic anywhere (admittedly it left the hardshoulder point pretty early) but Im still trying to make the point for a merging lane.

Zulu · 03-11-2008 4:31pm

GreeBo wrote: »

err "Zulu" ?

Ah right. Very good. I missed that one!

Thats a lot of IFs.

Not really, it's two. Any proposal from you has had the same if not more.

Now we either throw them off the road,

How's about we just

1) educate them
2) lead by example

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 4:38pm

Zulu wrote: »

Ah right. Very good. I missed that one!

Zulu wrote: »

Not really, it's two. Any proposal from you has had the same if not more.

I would say that the difference is that "my way" makes bad driving safer for everyone else whereas yours requires everyone to obey the ROTR. I dont think thats going to happen, at least it hasnt yet.:o

Zulu wrote: »

How's about we just

1) educate them
2) lead by example

Do you really think thats enough? It would seem to me that if there is an unwritten rule to allow people to merge, it should be made a written rule and should be enforced. (speaking of which during my M50 spell at lunch 2 garda bikes passed my (no lights/sirens and speeding up the outerlane in a 60kph posted works area) tsk tsk :cool:

Zulu · 03-11-2008 4:48pm

GreeBo wrote: »

I would say that the difference is that "my way" makes bad driving safer for everyone else whereas yours requires everyone to obey the ROTR. I dont think thats going to happen, at least it hasnt yet.:o

Thats madness. Safer bad driving, is still bad driving. What we need is good driving - as per the ROTR.

L1011 · 03-11-2008 4:50pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Do you really think thats enough? It would seem to me that if there is an unwritten rule to allow people to merge, it should be made a written rule and should be enforced.

But theres no unwritten rule except in your head!

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 4:55pm

Zulu wrote: »

Thats madness. Safer bad driving, is still bad driving. What we need is good driving - as per the ROTR.

Not safer bad driving, but make the bad driving of others safer for everyone else. If you cant merge properly I dont want you panicking as your lane ends and charging into mine.

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 4:57pm

MYOB wrote: »

But theres no unwritten rule except in your head!

Link to the rule regarding making way for someone trying to merge or stop posting please.

L1011 · 03-11-2008 4:58pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Link to the rule regarding making way for someone trying to merge or stop posting please.

Where was I talking about merging? Firstly, I've never mentioned rules about merging - other than that you're oblidged to merge safely. Secondly, I'm referring to your "merge lane" "unwritten rule" that only exists in your head!

GreeBo wrote: »

Not safer bad driving, but make the bad driving of others safer for everyone else. If you cant merge properly I dont want you panicking as your lane ends and charging into mine.

Good drivers don't panic. No drivers own a lane - and "your" lane when driving should be lane 1 unless overtaking.

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 5:05pm

MYOB wrote: »

Where was I talking about merging? Firstly, I've never mentioned rules about merging - other than that you're oblidged to merge safely. Secondly, I'm referring to your "merge lane" "unwritten rule" that only exists in your head!

You are actually making me cry with this rot you keep posting. The unwritten rule is the one about drivers in lane 1 allowing mergers to join.

MYOB wrote: »

Good drivers don't panic. No drivers own a lane - and "your" lane when driving should be lane 1 unless overtaking.

1) We dont have 100% good drivers on the roads.
2) I never said I owned a lane. Im talking about if I am in lane 1 and someone panics and trying to force their way into my lane.

I'm going to just stop responding to you. Most other people seem to be able to maintain a flow of whats happening around them their heads and are able to respond with sensible, relative comments. Audi_Chris and your good self have proven yourselves particularly inept at this and its tiring to keep explaining the same things and quoting your owns post back to you just so you can keep up with the big kids.

L1011 · 03-11-2008 5:17pm

GreeBo wrote: »

You are actually making me cry with this rot you keep posting. The unwritten rule is the one about drivers in lane 1 allowing mergers to join.

Rot? You're the one MAKING YOUR OWN RULES UP AS YOU GO ALONG.

If you're crying, I'd be delighted - you're probably the most inpenetrable person ever to post on this forum. 4 days, 20 pages, and you still cannot accept you're wrong about middle lane hogging.

Marcus.Aurelius · 03-11-2008 5:20pm

Keep it civil lads.

The law is keep left unless overtaking. This helps with traffic flow.

There is no law for merging, only guidelines from ROTR, which is insufficient in detail anyway. If it improved traffic flow and safety, then it's a nice idea.

Until then you must merge at the posted speed limit to minimise the danger of merging at an incorrect speed.

-Chris- · 03-11-2008 5:30pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Audi_Chris and your good self have proven yourselves particularly inept at this and its tiring to keep explaining the same things and quoting your owns post back to you just so you can keep up with the big kids.

GreeBo, can you do me a favour please?

Can you state, clearly and concisely, in bullet points what exactly you're contending at the moment.

It seems to me that you've been arguing a series of points that have been largely disputed or conclusively refuted over the course of this thread.

I will admit that, at this point I'm pretty confused as to what exactly you're trying to prove or convince others of. There is overlap of posts as various posters reply to current and previous posts of yours.

If you can summarise I'd be grateful.

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 5:50pm

AudiChris wrote: »

If you can summarise I'd be grateful.

See where civility gets ya?

1) Merging is not an exact science as there are factors beyond our control on the roads (i.e other drivers)
2) Existing slip roads are often inadequate (too short and view of lane 1 is obscured)
3) Some drivers panic when the slip road ends and they force their way in or come to a complete stop.
4) Some drivers are idiots who speed down the slip road and fire across the hatching into whatever lane they end up in.
5) Some drivers are idiots and dont leave adequate space between the car in front.
6) There is nothing in the rules of the road specifying that drivers in lane 1 should yield or otherwise to merging traffic. It actually states the opposite.
7) New stretches of M50 upgrade have lanes than can be successfully used for merging on and off the motorway. We should have more of these.
8) In the absence of these I questioned if using lane 1 for this purpose was more useful/safer and what is the reason for the ROTR stating you cannot drive in lane 2.
9) Perhaps lane 1 could have a lower speed limit than the other lanes? Then it can be used for merging and for driving slower than the limit. (so HGV's, slow drivers etc can live here, faster cars (who would be in lane 2 anyway according to ROTR) can stay in lane 2 and overtakers in lane 3. I think this would reduce the amount of overtaking required by most drivers and compared to staying in a single lane, overtaking is the most dangerous (legal) maneuver on the road.
10) Obeying some ROTR and ignoring others at your discretion is silly and dangerous.

I think thats it!

L1011 · 03-11-2008 5:52pm

GreeBo wrote: »

10) Obeying some ROTR and ignoring others at your discretion is silly and dangerous.

Like you do, then?

Mitch Connor · 03-11-2008 5:53pm

GreeBo wrote: »

See where civility gets ya?

1) Merging is not an exact science as there are factors beyond our control on the roads (i.e other drivers)
2) Existing slip roads are often inadequate (too short and view of lane 1 is obscured)
3) Some drivers panic when the slip road ends and they force their way in or come to a complete stop.
4) Some drivers are idiots who speed down the slip road and fire across the hatching into whatever lane they end up in.
5) Some drivers are idiots and dont leave adequate space between the car in front.
6) There is nothing in the rules of the road specifying that drivers in lane 1 should yield or otherwise to merging traffic. It actually states the opposite.
7) New stretches of M50 upgrade have lanes than can be successfully used for merging on and off the motorway. We should have more of these.
8) In the absence of these I questioned if using lane 1 for this purpose was more useful/safer and what is the reason for the ROTR stating you cannot drive in lane 2.
9) Perhaps lane 1 could have a lower speed limit than the other lanes? Then it can be used for merging and for driving slower than the limit. (so HGV's, slow drivers etc can live here, faster cars (who would be in lane 2 anyway according to ROTR) can stay in lane 2 and overtakers in lane 3. I think this would reduce the amount of overtaking required by most drivers and compared to staying in a single lane, overtaking is the most dangerous (legal) maneuver on the road.
10) Obeying some ROTR and ignoring others at your discretion is silly and dangerous.

I think thats it!

seems fair enough in general - if people in Lane 1 were to leave enough room for people in Lane 2 to move into as required.

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 6:02pm

Tauren wrote: »

seems fair enough in general - if people in Lane 1 were to leave enough room for people in Lane 2 to move into as required.

Agreed.
I dont think what Im proposing would be much different than what anyone following the ROTR explicitly already does today.

I would say that if you drive at the posted limit you will spend 95% of your time in lane 2 anyway, with another 4% in lane 3. So all this arguing is about the 1% of time that you dont spend overtaking and merging in about out of lane 1.

To me it seems obvious that staying in lane 2 is safer than having to overtake and the merge back every few minutes but I can sense that I'm hitting some opposition on here

I.S.T. · 03-11-2008 6:19pm

Wow, 25 posts by Greebo just today in this thread, I think someone needs to get out more often

. I think you are becoming a bit obsessed about this, don't you?

BTW, someone mentioned you have a full licence (didn't answer how for long) and drive on M50 daily. I think you should realise that the M50 is no normal motorway. It is often described as a car park. If this is the only motorway you regularly drive on I think you need some more experience before you decide all the current rules need to change.

Alun · 03-11-2008 6:22pm

GreeBo wrote: »

I would say that if you drive at the posted limit you will spend 95% of your time in lane 2 anyway, with another 4% in lane 3. So all this arguing is about the 1% of time that you dont spend overtaking and merging in about out of lane 1.

Only if it's really busy, and lane 1 is clogged up with trucks, maybe, otherwise very definitely not. I've seen people hogging lane 2 on the M50 at 11pm on a Sunday night with not a single other car in sight. There's no excuse for that kind of muppetry.

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 6:25pm

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

Wow, 25 posts by Greebo just today in this thread, I think someone needs to get out more often . I think you are becoming a bit obsessed about this, don't you?

BTW, someone mentioned you have a full licence (didn't answer how for long) and drive on M50 daily. I think you should realise that the M50 is no normal motorway. It is often described as a car park. If this is the only motorway you regularly drive on I think you need some more experience before you decide all the current rules need to change.

Wow, checking how many posts someone else posted on a thread, I think someone needs to get out more often.

And yes, I have only ever drive on the M50, Im so lucky that it always goes where I want.:rolleyes:
Dont be a tool.
Of course I have driven and continue to drive on various different motorways in various different counties and countries. The M50 and to a lesser extent the M1 are the motorways that I regularly use, which is what the question was.

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

I think you need some more experience before you decide all the current rules need to change.

Please see my "tool" response.
Oh and welcome to Ignoresville, population 2.

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 6:30pm

Alun wrote: »

Only if it's really busy, and lane 1 is clogged up with trucks, maybe, otherwise very definitely not. I've seen people hogging lane 2 on the M50 at 11pm on a Sunday night with not a single other car in sight. There's no excuse for that kind of muppetry.

I'd argue against "really busy". Even if the road is only moderately busy and there are cars every 100m in lane 1; thats enough to stay in lane 2 imho.

Not another car in sight is a different issue altogether. Its the same thought pattern as the guys who jump from lane 2 into lane 3 on the M50 as soon as it begins even if there isnt another car anywhere near them.

Related question. Do you think the normal motorway rules should apply when the motorway is down to two lanes of 60kph?
Chances are that everyone is at least doing the limit so there should be no reason to overtake, leaving us with a totally empty lane 2?

Alun · 03-11-2008 6:35pm

GreeBo wrote: »

I'd argue against "really busy". Even if the road is only moderately busy and there are cars every 100m in lane 1; thats enough to stay in lane 2 imho.

But cars equally spaced every 100m in lane 1 is about as rare as no cars at all. You tend to get 'bunches' of cars in lane 1, with gaps of much more than 100m between them, and in that case, yes, I'll pull in to it.

GreeBo · 03-11-2008 6:41pm

Alun wrote: »

But cars equally spaced every 100m in lane 1 is about as rare as no cars at all. You tend to get 'bunches' of cars in lane 1, with gaps of much more than 100m between them, and in that case, yes, I'll pull in to it.

Maybe its just the times I drive at (though I do drive at pretty varied times!) but I dont think Ive ever been on the road when there arent cars frequently in lane 1 traveling much slower than I am. I would have to keep hitting the brakes and merging in, wait for the other traffic in lane 2 to pass by and hope I still had enough speed to get back into lane 2 to overtake before the next convoy gets to me.

I guess thats a combination of terribly slow traffic in lane 1 and idiots on top of each other in lane 2 though. But this is the point of my suggestion. We are never going to get both sets of these people to change their habits so why not make it safer by allowing driving in lane 2?:o

Any comments on my other question?

Alun · 03-11-2008 6:42pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Any comments on my other question?

I can't be arsed.

Anan1 · 03-11-2008 6:48pm

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

BTW, someone mentioned you have a full licence (didn't answer how for long) and drive on M50 daily. I think you should realise that the M50 is no normal motorway. It is often described as a car park. If this is the only motorway you regularly drive on I think you need some more experience before you decide all the current rules need to change.

GreeBo does not hold a full license and therefore cannot legally drive on motorways. In all fairness, can you imagine any tester putting up with his 'theories'?:D

Matt Cooper - Driving in Hard Shoulder

Comments