Matt Cooper - Driving in Hard Shoulder

Zulu

GreeBo wrote: »

...The freaks are those who are doing 140kph up the outside lane until the last possible second and then cut across 2-3 other lanes to get their exit.

:rolleyes:
It's YOUR idea that causes them to do this.
They need to cross 2 lanes because of you. Clearly they are overtaking you in the middle lane so they need to move 3->2->1 quickly.

However if YOU were obeying the ROTR you'd be in 1, and overtaking you they'd be in 2, so would only need to complete the overtake to exit.

It's YOUR inconsiderate driving that forces them across multiple lanes.

randomer

Zulu wrote: »

:rolleyes:
It's YOUR idea that causes them to do this.
They need to cross 2 lanes because of you. Clearly they are overtaking you in the middle lane so they need to move 3->2->1 quickly.

However if YOU were obeying the ROTR you'd be in 1, and overtaking you they'd be in 2, so would only need to complete the overtake to exit.

It's YOUR inconsiderate driving that forces them across multiple lanes.

If someone is overtaking at 140kmph, and then cutting across two lanes to get to an exit they are not planning for exiting the road, and are certainly in the wrong. You need to be aware of other drivers, even if what they are doing is incorrect.

If I need to exit a motorway, I will plan to exit the motorway in advance. I will not keep overtaking cars until the last second and then cut across cars to get to the exit. I will move into a lane where I can access the exit in advance.

They should not be overtaking in lane three if they are intending to leave the road very soon. They should merge with the other lanes and wait in turn.

Junior #8

I'm starting to feel the "moral high ground" being taken here, just like all other threads on this subject.


I hate to say it, but motorways are there to move, you should drive as fast as you feel is appropriate, and ALWAYS in the left lane. ALWAYS


Also, if you see in your mirror someone bearing down behind you, don't pull out and try to beat the car in front, before the other one approaches

FuzzyWuzzyWazza

GreeBo wrote: »

Only if we are saying that you cannot drive in lane 2. i.e the whole point of the argument!

Its not a argument, its the law!!!!! you must drive in the leftmost lane, irrespective of you feelings on the matter, the only time you can stay in lane 2 is if you would be constantly moving from lane 1 to 2 all the time due to traffic.

If everyone drives in lane 2 you still have the same merging 'problem', but as has been pointed out before you have just reduced the capacity of the road by one lane, also not every 3 lane road is a motorway, the N7 being the obvious one.

Alun

randomer wrote: »

If I need to exit a motorway, I will plan to exit the motorway in advance. I will not keep overtaking cars until the last second and then cut across cars to get to the exit. I will move into a lane where I can access the exit in advance.

Me too, but in Ireland that often means joining a queue of slow-coaches trundling along bumper to bumper at 80-90km/h for no apparent reason far sooner than you would otherwise normally have to do in any other country where they actually know how to drive.

FuzzyWuzzyWazza

GreeBo wrote: »

Post a link please.

You can be failed for "not making progress", there are minimum speeds on the motorway for a reason. If you read the big blue signs you can even see it for yourself.

Not driving at the limit does not mean you are not making progress. Thats such a stupid statement to make. I mean, take a look at the word "limit", no where does that state or otherwise imply that its a lower limit.

I don't remember seeing anyone doing their dirving test on a motorway!!???

edit: oh and motorway signs are blue

GreeBo

AudiChris wrote: »

various ROTR quotes

NONE of that mentions anything about traffic already in lane 1 slowing to allow you to merge like Stephen_C believes

Stephen_C wrote: »

it is the responibilty of the traffic in the first lane to accomodate you on the road by either slowing down, or moving to the next lane over

So we are agreed that thats rubbish.

And in case you have forgotten what you said earlier

AudiChris wrote: »

If you're in the leftmost lane and you see someone coming down the merging lane, you move into the overtaking lane (if it's clear) until the driver's joined the left lane and you know whether you'll be slotting in behind them because they're going faster than you or whether you'll be staying in the overtaking lane and overtaking them because they're slower than you.
This system removes the need for a dedicated, full-time merging lane

Again nowhere in the ROTR does it state this. So, logically your last sentence is false and we do have a need for a dedicated merging lane.

FuzzyWuzzyWazza

some people seem to do this, and it is just out of curtesy, as regards the ROTR you must guve way to traffic to the right at all times

GreeBo

FuzzyWuzzyWazza wrote: »

I don't remember seeing anyone doing their dirving test on a motorway!!???

Sorry, what? Did you just read one post and totally jump to the wrong conlusion?

FuzzyWuzzyWazza wrote: »

edit: oh and motorway signs are blue

Thats probably why I said

If you read the big blue signs you can even see it for yourself.

GreeBo

randomer wrote: »

The speed "limit" is a limit. It is not a target. Especially on multi lane roads, I regularly drive below the speed limit. I try to drive at the appropriate speed, which in a lot of cases is below the speed limit.

In recent times, I have driven above the posted speed limit, where I thought it to be appropriate. I used to stick rigidly to the 60kmph limit on the M50 from Dublin Airport to Blanchardstown (obviously in the left lane), but I got sick of having HGVs tailgating me, so now I keep up with the car in front.

So how is this law any different than the drive on the left law?

GreeBo

FuzzyWuzzyWazza wrote: »

Its not a argument, its the law!!!!! you must drive in the leftmost lane, irrespective of you feelings on the matter, the only time you can stay in lane 2 is if you would be constantly moving from lane 1 to 2 all the time due to traffic.

OK, you plainly havent been reading the entire thread. I know its the friggin law and I am asking why. Now go away and read the thread before posting any more silly posts.

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

Me too, but in Ireland that often means joining a queue of slow-coaches trundling along bumper to bumper at 80-90km/h for no apparent reason far sooner than you would otherwise normally have to do in any other country where they actually know how to drive.

Ok, so we have traffic doing 80kph in lane 1 and 90kph in lane 2.
But you will overtake all of this in lane 3 just before your exit because you want to get to your exit quicker than the surrounding traffic? and I'm the dangerous driver?

randomer wrote:

They should not be overtaking in lane three if they are intending to leave the road very soon. They should merge with the other lanes and wait in turn.

Is the appropriate way to drive on a motorway. Your way is dangerous and inconsiderate to other drivers who you will barge in in front of.

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

:rolleyes:
It's YOUR idea that causes them to do this.
They need to cross 2 lanes because of you. Clearly they are overtaking you in the middle lane so they need to move 3->2->1 quickly.

However if YOU were obeying the ROTR you'd be in 1, and overtaking you they'd be in 2, so would only need to complete the overtake to exit.

It's YOUR inconsiderate driving that forces them across multiple lanes.

No, its their dangerous driving full stop. This is no different than overtaking on a single lane road and then turning left seconds afterwards. Its stupid and dangerous. Sometimes there will be conditions that mean you cannot drive at the speed you would like to, be it ice or a slower car in front just before you take your exit. Even if everyone drove in lane 1 there could be traffic in lane 2 that these idiots would still overtake.

":rolleyes:" Here, you can have it back.

Alun

GreeBo wrote: »

But you will overtake all of this in lane 3 just before your exit because you want to get to your exit quicker than the surrounding traffic? and I'm the dangerous driver?

Did I actually say that? No, is the answer in case you were wondering. Actually reading and comprehending what others have written is obviously not your forte.

I was just saying that people here drive at abnormally slow speeds on motorways for no apparent reason, forcing me to slow down and move over into lane 1 a) much more and b) much earlier than I would normally have to anywhere else. And, I know perfectly well how to drive on motorways thank you very much. 20 years driving in Germany and the Netherlands taught me that.

randomer wrote:

They should not be overtaking in lane three if they are intending to leave the road very soon. They should merge with the other lanes and wait in turn.

Is the appropriate way to drive on a motorway.

Which is exactly what I do. Did I say otherwise?

Your way is dangerous and inconsiderate to other drivers who you will barge in in front of.

You mean what you assume is "my way" based on, well, nothing at all really apart from your inability to actually read what people are writing, as opposed to making it up as you go along.

Zulu

GreeBo wrote: »

No, its their dangerous driving full stop. This is no different than overtaking on a single lane road and then turning left seconds afterwards. Its stupid and dangerous. ... Even if everyone drove in lane 1 there could be traffic in lane 2 that these idiots would still overtake.

Perhaps they would, but you going out of your way to encourage them isn't helping the problem on iota.
So your defence here is - "I'm breaking the law, driving inconsideratly and dangeriously, because I want to prevent others from breaking the law, driving inconsideratly and dangeriously".

That is moronic.

FuzzyWuzzyWazza

GreeBo wrote: »

OK, you plainly havent been reading the entire thread. I know its the friggin law and I am asking why. Now go away and read the thread before posting any more silly posts.

I have read the entire tread, I don't need to explain to you why it the law, just like I don't have to explain to you why its against the law to kill people, the fact is it is a law and must be obayed, when u are in charge and can change the law the we'll all drive in the middle lane, reducing the roads capacity and increasing congestion.

EDIT: for some reason I thought you said green signs, my mistake.

Big Nasty

GreeBo wrote: »

OK, you plainly havent been reading the entire thread. I know its the friggin law and I am asking why. Now go away and read the thread before posting any more silly posts.

It's the law just like shooting someone is against the law - it's just plain dumb!

Why it's dumb has already been explained. :rolleyes:

I.S.T.

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

What type of driving licence do you have?

Do you have any form of advanced driving training?

What motorway do you most frequently drive on and how often do you drive on it (daily/weekly/etc)?

GreeBo, still ignoring my question I see.

L1011

GreeBo wrote: »

So you agree that its not always possible to merge onto the motorway and you think that these cars should stop on the slip road? You need to go chat with MYOB then as he thinks you are a moron and a crap driver.

Stop spinning my posts. Nothing of the sort was said. If - as can happen but extremely rarely if you actually match speed properly - you are entirely unable to merge with the traffic on the mainline you stop until you are capable of merging. As, 99 times out of 100, this happens when the mainline is entirely static, this isn't particularly hard.

Now, will you answer the question IrishSpeedTraps, myself and kbannon have asked you, multiple times? Its only a post above now.

peasant

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

GreeBo, still ignoring my question I see.

MYOB wrote: »

Now, will you answer the question IrishSpeedTraps, myself and kbannon have asked you, multiple times? Its only a post above now.

He has answered it:

GreeBo wrote: »

Not that it has any bearing on the point, full, no, m50, daily.

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

Did I actually say that? No, is the answer in case you were wondering.

ah I seem to have misread your post. It was late I guess. Apologies.

Alun wrote: »

Actually reading and comprehending what others have written is obviously not your forte.

Attack the post not the poster. Childish jibes like this just take away from your point.

Alun wrote: »

apart from your inability to actually read what people are writing, as opposed to making it up as you go along.

What I said above.

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

Perhaps they would, but you going out of your way to encourage them isn't helping the problem on iota.
So your defence here is - "I'm breaking the law, driving inconsideratly and dangeriously, because I want to prevent others from breaking the law, driving inconsideratly and dangeriously".

That is moronic.

Im not encouraging them at all. You have totally missed my point. There will always be some traffic thats "legally" in lane 2. Now if someone comes from lane 1 and overtakes lane 2 and then immediately exists the motorway, the reason for the car being in lane 2 is irrelevant.

How in any way, shape or form am I saying I am trying to control anybody elses driving? You are confusing me with someone who lives in lane 3 doing the posted limit to "stop the speeders"

GreeBo

FuzzyWuzzyWazza wrote: »

I don't need to explain to you why it the law

No you dont, but if someone asks why its the law in a thread, dont bother posting if you are not going to answer the question. You must be loads of fun at debates.

"because it is!":pac:

FuzzyWuzzyWazza wrote: »

EDIT: for some reason I thought you said green signs, my mistake.

np

GreeBo

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

GreeBo, still ignoring my question I see.

:rolleyes:

Alun

GreeBo wrote: »

ah I seem to have misread your post. It was late I guess. Apologies.

Accepted.

Attack the post not the poster. Childish jibes like this just take away from your point.
What I said above.

Apologies. But this thread was rapidly descending to such ridiculous levels, it was rapidly becoming impossible to discern between what was meant seriously or half jokingly, let alone making judgements on whether people (not just you) had misread posts or not.

GreeBo

MYOB wrote: »

Stop spinning my posts. Nothing of the sort was said.

So when you said

MYOB wrote: »

If you are unable to merge in the space provided, you're not a good driver.

MYOB wrote: »

Its always possible if you're a good driver. You, clearly, are not.

MYOB wrote: »

You slow down to their speed. It is you responsibility to join the road at the speed traffic is travelling at, any good driver is able to do this.

You meant what exactly?

MYOB wrote: »

Now, will you answer the question IrishSpeedTraps, myself and kbannon have asked you, multiple times? Its only a post above now.

I actually answered several posts if not pages ago. Still waiting for you to give your details...

L1011

GreeBo wrote: »

You meant what exactly?

If traffic is moving, you will (with extremely rare exceptions) be able to merge if you are a good enough driver to match the speed of the traffic on the road. This is what I've said in every single post.

At this stage, its clear you HAVE to be a troll.

Zulu

GreeBo wrote: »

You are confusing me with someone who lives in lane 3 doing the posted limit to "stop the speeders"

Living in lane 2 is the same thing.

Lane 1 is the lane you are supposed to be in.

Marcus.Aurelius

I've read the thread so far and am amazed at the attitudes here.

The DJELR is examining proposals for a new offence for not keeping left unless overtaking. The hope is that it will carry a fine of 250 and 3 pts. It is something that we in Traffic Corps have mooted for quite a while; we find that it is a major cause of disruption and delay on motorways, and has led to some extreme accidents.

The Aussies have had this law in force for years, not to mention dual carriageways in city roads with side roads all over it, with very few accidents. Their driving test system is excellent, see www.rta.nsw.gov.au for details.

To be honest, if you cannot merge with traffic after 500 m of on-ramp and plenty of signposting, then you should probably hang up your keys permanently. As for lane discipline, there is a definite selfishness displayed by many drivers, driving along for ages in the overtaking lane, overtaking slowly while traffic builds up behind them. If there is room to move in for a moment to allow the faster moving traffic to pass, it makes the whole driving experience so much more comfortable for all involved.

I am reluctant to say that we have on occasion tugged people for not moving in when we are driving along, and occasionally prosecuted drivers for not yielding when we use sirens/lights. It shows a level of disrespect that would not have been tolerated 10 years ago, I am somewhat unsure as to how it became so prevalent.

Anan1

Joker wrote: »

I've read the thread so far and am amazed at the attitudes here.

The DJELR is examining proposals for a new offence for not keeping left unless overtaking. The hope is that it will carry a fine of 250 and 3 pts. It is something that we in Traffic Corps have mooted for quite a while; we find that it is a major cause of disruption and delay on motorways, and has led to some extreme accidents.....

...I am reluctant to say that we have on occasion tugged people for not moving in when we are driving along, and occasionally prosecuted drivers for not yielding when we use sirens/lights.

In my experience Garda cars (both marked and unmarked) are no better than average when it comes to keeping left. I was actually pulled once for undertaking a plainclothes Garda in a completely unmarked car. Granted he was extremely polite, but he was all on his own in the overtaking lane, 70mph, not a car in sight.