Matt Cooper - Driving in Hard Shoulder

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

This thread isn't/wasn't about speeding until you created that particular straw-man.

The problem being discussed is people who hog the overtaking lanes. Why are you trying to change it?

If you want to start getting technical then this thread was about driving in the hard shoulder. The issue that I brought up is "why" you cannot drive in lane 2. So far 90% of the answers have been "because its the law". Well the posted speed limit is just as much a law and the same people have no problems breaking it.

Another "Debater of the Year Award" candidate methinks.

Padraig Mor

Joker wrote: »

In practice, most gardaí are not in the habit of prosecuting those who undertake

Tell that to the guys in unmarked cars in Cork who sit in the overtaking lane on empty dual carriageways waiting to catch those who pass on the left....

Marcus.Aurelius

GreeBo wrote: »

If you want to start getting technical then this thread was about driving in the hard shoulder. The issue that I brought up is "why" you cannot drive in lane 2. So far 90% of the answers have been "because its the law". Well the posted speed limit is just as much a law and the same people have no problems breaking it.

Another "Debater of the Year Award" candidate methinks.

I think the issue is the smooth flow of traffic. Not the strict interpretation of the law as such.

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

You are assuming that others here break them rules - that pure speculation.
The only one here thats admitted to breaking the law is you.

Its not speculation.
We have people who admit to undertaking and others who admit to driving above the speed limits. I suggest you check the entire thread for yourself.

Marcus.Aurelius

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Tell that to the guys in unmarked cars in Cork who sit in the overtaking lane on empty dual carriageways waiting to catch those who pass on the left....

That (if true) is appaling. There are some gardaí who want to get into Traffic, and get dirty in their methods to up their returns.

Mena

GreeBo wrote: »

Im saying that someone could pull out in front of a speeding car because they dont realise that the car is travelling 50% faster then the posted speed limit.

If you're actually practising correct observation and using your mirrors correctly that would never happen. Unfortunately some people seem to think mirrors are mere fashion accessories in a vehicle.

GreeBo

Joker wrote: »

I think the issue is the smooth flow of traffic. Not the strict interpretation of the law as such.

Agreed.
- Does undertaking increase the smooth flow of traffic?
- Does speeding "when appropriate" increase the smooth flow of traffic?
- Does people stopping on the slip road because they cant merge (for whatever reason" increase the smooth flow of traffic?

/edit

Also, if we think that some ROTR can be followed and others ignored for better traffic flow, then why not change the damn rules so everyone is on the same page. If advanced driving schools are teaching different "rules" because they are both better and safer then surely that means there is something wrong with the rules that the plebs get to learn from.

jiggajt

I am aware that driving in the overtaking lane is illegal but if i am overtaking someone and some knob in a BMW rocks up behind me doing 150. i know that when i pull back in and he accelerates off breaking the law again that he may continue off at a dangerous speed and cause an accident that may kill someone. For every outside lane hogger in this country there is a knob in a BMW so it balances out.

Mena

jiggajt wrote: »

I am aware that driving in the overtaking lane is illegal but if i am overtaking someone and some knob in a BMW rocks up behind me doing 150. i know that when i pull back in and he accelerates off breaking the law again that he may continue off at a dangerous speed and cause an accident that may kill someone. For every outside lane hogger in this country there is a knob in a BMW so it balances out.

There's an easy way to get rid of that BMW envy, just get a better job and buy your own one

Doodee

GreeBo wrote: »

If you want to start getting technical then this thread was about driving in the hard shoulder. The issue that I brought up is "why" you cannot drive in lane 2. So far 90% of the answers have been "because its the law". Well the posted speed limit is just as much a law and the same people have no problems breaking it.

Another "Debater of the Year Award" candidate methinks.

Because you are increasing the chances of causing aggravation on the roads and the likelihood of another driver taking higher risks.
It is also for traffic flow.

Your argument that everyone should drive at the speed limit is as flawed as suggesting that you can eliminate all robberies / murders / whatever.
People will speed, its just the way it is, but if there is a lane free where they can do it with relative safety then it should be kept free as it reduces the risk considerably.

I'm not condoning speeding, but I don't see why people need to sit in the right hand lane either, if they wish to travel at the speed limit then do so in the left, if they need to overtake, move into the right, uing their mirror first, signaling with plenty of time, and then maneuvering.

Common sense.

GreeBo

jiggajt wrote: »

I am aware that driving in the overtaking lane is illegal but if i am overtaking someone and some knob in a BMW rocks up behind me doing 150. i know that when i pull back in and he accelerates off breaking the law again that he may continue off at a dangerous speed and cause an accident that may kill someone. For every outside lane hogger in this country there is a knob in a BMW so it balances out.

But you dont drive a navy blue sierra with blue lights on top so stopping him is not your job. (If it was your job you would probably have a better car yourself )

Alun

GreeBo wrote: »

"real life driving" meaning "speed when you think its appropriate"?

Not at all. I mean driving in conditions where others might, for whatever reason, be driving (much) faster than you.

Not at all. You are missing the point. Im saying that someone could pull out in front of a speeding car because they dont realise that the car is travelling 50% faster then the posted speed limit.

You're the one missing the point! You keep on harping on about this thing about people "not realising" there's a faster driver coming up behind you. That's what your mirrors are for FFS! You look once, and see where the vehicle behind you is relative to you, then look again a few seconds later. If the car is closer to you than it was last time, he's gaining on you. I'm sorry, but this is pretty fundamental stuff that anyone should know. Again, the actual speed or the posted speed limit actually is irrelevant despite your protestations to the contrary, it's relative speed that's important here.

Padraig Mor

Joker wrote: »

That (if true) is appaling. There are some gardaí who want to get into Traffic, and get dirty in their methods to up their returns.

Oh it's true alright - I was caught. Was told I would get one point.....was actually two when I got the letter and a potential five (!!!) if I challenged it as I was done for dangerous overtaking (!!!). Note that I was over the current speed limit (but not the forthcoming reclassified one) and made no aggressive moves etc (and in fact waited behind them in the left lane for approx a minute to give them a chance to pull in). It is obviously a deliberate tactic for these guys to up their numbers...

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

It's called undertaking. And it's dangerous.

Actually its called overtaking on the left. Undertaking involves dead people or a commitment to do something.

/edit
Check the above post. "Dangerous overtaking" not undertaking.

GreeBo

Padraig Mor wrote: »

Oh it's true alright - I was caught. Was told I would get one point.....was actually two when I got the letter and a potential five (!!!) if I challenged it as I was done for dangerous overtaking (!!!). Note that I was over the current speed limit (but not the forthcoming reclassified one) and made no aggressive moves etc (and in fact waited behind them in the left lane for approx a minute to give them a chance to pull in). It is obviously a deliberate tactic for these guys to up their numbers...

The probably wanted to get you for speeding but didnt have a camera.
I guess the moral of the story is, dont break any of the rules of the road.

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

Not at all. I mean driving in conditions where others might, for whatever reason, be driving (much) faster than you.

I have no problem with people driving faster than me, its faster than the limit that I have problems with.
If people break the speed limit then it adds another variable into the driving mix. In the same way that you shouldnt undertake removes one.

Alun

GreeBo wrote: »

I have no problem with people driving faster than me, its faster than the limit that I have problems with.
If people break the speed limit then it adds another variable into the driving mix. In the same way that you shouldnt undertake removes one.

Unfortunately, in the real world, people do all kinds of things that they shouldn't. You have to be aware of that fact and respond appropriately, not only for your own safety, but that of others around you. If you don't understand that basic principle, maybe you should hand back your driving licence and take the bus instead.

vibe666

GreeBo wrote: »

Speeding is just as inconsiderate and dangerous to other drivers who may pull out to overtake at 100kph and not realise that you are doing 150kph behind them.

pulling out on top of someone going faster than you is dangerous driving, regardless of what speed they are doing.

there's a pair of little shiny things hanging off your doors which I believe the ROTR require the use of when changing lanes, not to mention looking over your shoulder at the very least and indicating your intentions before deciding whether or not it is safe.

something the tw@t in a Q7 last weekend failed to do by pulling onto the N3 dual carriageway at the clonee on-ramp directly through the left hand lane into the overtaking lane almost on top of me without even indicating. luckily I was only going about 15kph faster than the lane he pulled through but I still had to break sharply and almost swerved into the verge where the barrier is.

Zulu

GreeBo wrote: »

Actually its called overtaking on the left. Undertaking involves dead people or a commitment to do something.

/edit
Check the above post. "Dangerous overtaking" not undertaking.

Undertaking.

It's bad practice to correct someone when you are wrong.


Fail.

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

Undertaking.

It's bad practice to correct someone when you are wrong.


Fail.

Seriously. Please dont tell me you are quoting wikipedia as a reliable source of ANYTHING?

Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world.

This article does not cite any references or sources.

Undertaking or, in British English overtaking on the inside

Must try harder.

GreeBo

Alun wrote: »

Unfortunately, in the real world, people do all kinds of things that they shouldn't. You have to be aware of that fact and respond appropriately, not only for your own safety, but that of others around you. If you don't understand that basic principle, maybe you should hand back your driving licence and take the bus instead.

Exactly. There are lots of people who have difficult merging and they are often in front of you. We should be aware of this and :
A) Make slip roads much longer and not obscured for 90% of their length.
Create specific merging lanes (like the ones that are now appearing on the newer sections of motorway
C) Change the ROTR to get drivers to accommodate merging traffic.
D) Make rushhour motorway driving part of the driving test.


Im just back from driving on the M50. The design of the slip road for joining heading north at Firhouse/Knocklyon makes it impossible to see traffic in lane 1 until you are 15m from merging with them. Only the fact that the hardshoulder is now a driving lane make it possible to merge safely on this stretch.
This is a perfect example of why a merging lane is often required and would be safer than both not having one AND using lane 2 as a driving lane.

veryangryman

Zulu - You need to be beaten up for that stupid "Fail" sig...

Not just for this post - for every one you use that for. One beating for each. :pac:

Steve

^^^^^
/gets popcorn

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

Undertaking.

It's bad practice to correct someone when you are wrong.


Fail.

Overtaking on the left

ROTR wrote:

REMEMBER You must normally overtake on the right. However, you are allowed to overtake on the left in the situations listed below.

:pac:........................Zulu.................

Zulu

veryangryman wrote: »

Zulu - You need to be beaten up for that stupid "Fail" sig...

Not just for this post - for every one you use that for. One beating for each. :pac:

The "fail" isn't a sig, but however...

...that's twice in this thread? Two beatings?? I'd suggest there are worse crimes being committed here. Saying "fail" or advocating violence towards other posters being amongst the least of them. :rolleyes:

@GreeBo, my point is proven. People, and in that I include you, know what I am talking about.

GreeBo wrote:

This is a perfect example of why a merging lane is often required and would be safer than both not having one AND using lane 2 as a driving lane.

Perhaps, but the point is that lane 2 isn't a driving lane, it's an overtaking lane, and it shouldn't be used as such.

-Chris-

GreeBo wrote: »

Overtaking on the left

Funny that you couldn't be ar$ed going onto the ROTR website when you were asking the rest of us to prove that you're supposed to drive left/overtake right....

Zulu

GreeBo wrote: »

Overtaking on the left

How to use lanes correctly.

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

Perhaps, but the point is that lane 2 isn't a driving lane, it's an overtaking lane, and it shouldn't be used as such.

But that perhaps is the whole point of my original question. If you "concede" that there perhaps is a need for a non-ending merging lane then thats all I want to achieve. I was just trying to start a discussion about it when the "its the law" nazis hopped on board.

AudiChris wrote:

Funny that you couldn't be ar$ed going onto the ROTR website when you were asking the rest of us to prove that you're supposed to drive left/overtake right....

Funny that you STILL dont get that I wasnt asking anyone to prove anything; I was asking WHY and if perhaps there is a need for merging lane.
Actually its not funny, its just sad. Sad for you.

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

How to use lanes correctly.

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.

-Chris-

GreeBo wrote: »

Funny that you STILL dont get that I wasnt asking anyone to prove anything; I was asking WHY and if perhaps there is a need for merging lane.
Actually its not funny, its just sad. Sad for you.

GreeBo wrote: »

'Fraid not. Your so called "proper lane" discipline is totally made up and exists only in your head. If this was law then there would be no need for my argument. However its not a law and its not even mentioned in the ROTR so I still say its safer to use lane 1 as a merging lane.

If you think its not only in your head then please show us all where it says it in ROTR.

^^^^^^^^^^