joining motorway

CiniO

slimjimmc wrote: »

To be fair CiniO, there was no mention of trucks in Post #8 or in Post 15 so I'm not surprised you were challenged. The first reference to trucks came in Post 16.

I know there was no reference to trucks bofore post 16.

But in post 50, I was just answering to Mathepac, who was trying to convince me that I'm wrong with trucks being not allowed on right lane.
And the truth is, that they really are not allowed in right lane of the motorway.

What I've written before post 16, was that I was thinking according to rule, that you have to stick to the left lane, if you are not overtaking anyone (on 2 lane motorway). Then while moving on the right lane, to allow to accomodate traffic entering the motorway, would break that rule.

Anyway, as I said, ROTR advice that kind of behaviour, so I'll have to take better look at Road Traffic Act and Regulations, to see how it's stated there. So far I didn't have to for it.

?Cee?view

CiniO wrote: »

I know there was no reference to trucks bofore post 16.

But in post 50, I was just answering to Mathepac, who was trying to convince me that I'm wrong with trucks being not allowed on right lane.
And the truth is, that they really are not allowed in right lane of the motorway.

What I've written before post 16, was that I was thinking according to rule, that you have to stick to the left lane, if you are not overtaking anyone (on 2 lane motorway). Then while moving on the right lane, to allow to accomodate traffic entering the motorway, would break that rule.

Anyway, as I said, ROTR advice that kind of behaviour, so I'll have to take better look at Road Traffic Act and Regulations, to see how it's stated there. So far I didn't have to for it.

Maybe this line from the Rules of the Road will assist your research :rolleyes:

"Avoid causing another driver to brake or change lane to accommodate you while you are on the motorway (aside from joining it)."

You should also be aware that in a Common Law jurisdiction, the statutory rules will really only go so far in identifying the legal position. But you're probably aware of this given your apparent familiarity with Acts and Regulations.

djimi

CiniO wrote: »

I know there was no reference to trucks bofore post 16.

But in post 50, I was just answering to Mathepac, who was trying to convince me that I'm wrong with trucks being not allowed on right lane.
And the truth is, that they really are not allowed in right lane of the motorway.

What I've written before post 16, was that I was thinking according to rule, that you have to stick to the left lane, if you are not overtaking anyone (on 2 lane motorway). Then while moving on the right lane, to allow to accomodate traffic entering the motorway, would break that rule.

Anyway, as I said, ROTR advice that kind of behaviour, so I'll have to take better look at Road Traffic Act and Regulations, to see how it's stated there. So far I didn't have to for it.

Technically by moving into the right hand lane to allow them onto the motorway you would be overtaking them.

Tbh I think its one of those situations where common courtesy takes precidence over the law. If its a quiet stretch of road and there is nothing in the right hand lane then you move into it to allow someone to merge. I cant see any guard in the land having an issue with it; it hurts nobody, so long as you move back into the left lane again of course.

BrianD3

If car A moves into the overtaking lane to facilitate car B merging onto the motorway but car B accelerates to a faster speed by the time he joins the mainline leaving car A overtaking nothing but fresh air - that could technically be an illegal maneouvre by car A. Also, if car A's "courteous" move forces cars already in the overtaking lane to change speed, car A is in the wrong.

I see the above happening on a regular basis.

And as already stated, in Irish legislation it is an offence for a vehicle limited to 80 km/h (HGVs, cars towing trailers etc.) to move into the overtaking lane of a motorway to let someone merge.

In general people don't have a clue how to drive on a motorway and make up little courtesy rules that cause confusion and annoyance. Has it ever occured to people that merging drivers DON'T WANT "help" from drivers on the mainline. And that the mergers would prefer if the cars on the mainline stayed where they are, maintained a steady speed and left the required gap to the car in front (all of which they should be doing anyway)

See the cluelessness in this thread where i'm told I'm a bad driver for driving legally
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62947173

It seems as though most of the people in this country who have a clue how to drive are foreign or learned to drive in a different country

sentient_6

BrianD3 wrote: »

If car A moves into the overtaking lane to facilitate car B merging onto the motorway but car B accelerates to a faster speed by the time he joins the mainline leaving car A overtaking nothing but fresh air - that could technically be an illegal maneouvre by car A.

But if i was car A id just move back into lane 1? Whats the big deal?

djimi

BrianD3 wrote: »

If car A moves into the overtaking lane to facilitate car B merging onto the motorway but car B accelerates to a faster speed by the time he joins the mainline leaving car A overtaking nothing but fresh air - that could technically be an illegal maneouvre by car A. Also, if car A's "courteous" move forces cars already in the overtaking lane to change speed, car A is in the wrong.

Noone is suggesting that the car on the motorway should move into the path of an oncoming car in the right hand lane. Its pretty obvious that it just applies when the right hand lane is clear and it is safe for the car in the left hand lane to move into it.

Also, as I said above, I cant really see too many guards getting too upset with someone for moving into the right hand lane to allow a car to merge and then moving back into the left hand lane. In fact, Id be pretty pissed off if I was pulled over for this.

BrianD3 wrote: »

In general people don't have a clue how to drive on a motorway and make up little courtesy rules that cause confusion and annoyance. Has it ever occured to people that merging drivers DON'T WANT "help" from drivers on the mainline. And that the mergers would prefer if the cars on the mainline stayed where they are, maintained a steady speed and left the required gap to the car in front (all of which they should be doing anyway)

How would something like this cause confusion and annoyance? I would suggest anyone who gets confused or annoyed by something like this does not belong behind the wheel of a car...

Its a courteous gesture to allow the merging car more space to join the motorway/dual carraigeway. Its something I would only do or like to see done where there is ample opportunity to do so, ie the right hand lane is free and the manouever does not disrupt anyone.

Id also love to meet the driver who would prefer to have to merge in between cars in the left hand lane rather than see them move out to make more room in the left hand lane...

?Cee?view

BrianD3 wrote: »

If car A moves into the overtaking lane to facilitate car B merging onto the motorway but car B accelerates to a faster speed by the time he joins the mainline leaving car A overtaking nothing but fresh air - that could technically be an illegal maneouvre by car A.

The word you should focus on there is technically. As this is not a Civil Law state, you are wrong (not technically wrong).

BrianD3 wrote: »

Also, if car A's "courteous" move forces cars already in the overtaking lane to change speed, car A is in the wrong.

Obviously


Sorry, but this twaddle is just nonsense. I have an ancient aunt who sits in the middle of the road with the same sense of self justification saying "I've paid my taxes, I'm entitled to be here".

Anyone with a basic understanding of Roadcraft understands that you drive according to the conditions and the hazards (including other cars) which are presented. Maintaining a position on the road, because it's your perceived "right" is potentially suicidal.

BrianD3

sentient_6 wrote: »

But if i was car A id just move back into lane 1? Whats the big deal?

Because you must keep left unless overtaking. As I said it could technically be illegal even though someone would never be pulled for it. This may be where CiniO is coming from.

PS if I exceed the speed limit by 100 km/h is it "no big deal" once I "just slow back down" a few seconds later.

?Cee?view

djimi wrote: »

Also, as I said above, I cant really see too many guards getting too upset with someone for moving into the right hand lane to allow a car to merge and then moving back into the left hand lane. In fact, Id be pretty pissed off if I was pulled over for this.

Agreed. And I'm confident that the Guards would take the contrary view. It's quite likely that a driver who refused to move, or who didn't move, could face a charge of Careless Driving or if the circumstances were more serious, Dangerous Driving. A friend some weeks ago who refused to move to allow a car to merge was "pulled" by the Guards and given a severe telling off. For once, I agreed with the boys in blue

ardmacha

The traffic in the slip road has to give way to traffic on the mainline and there is no obligation on the vehicle on the motorway to move to the right lane. However not allowing a vehicle to merge is more than just staying in the left lane, it also means that you are not leaving a gap from the vehicle in front. I wish the Gardai would give a bollocking to more of those who seem to like to drive close to the vehicle in front. I'd also hope they'd give a bollocking to those who amble down the accelaration lane making little attempt to match the speed of traffic on the motorway.

BrianD3

churchview wrote: »

Anyone with a basic understanding of Roadcraft understands that you drive according to the conditions and the hazards (including other cars) which are presented. Maintaining a position on the road, because it's your perceived "right" is potentially suicidal.

So tell me this, do you stop on roundabouts if you see someone approaching the roundabout in case they drive out in front of you. After all, relinquishing your priority would be the "courteous" thing to do as well as guaranteeing that they won't drive into you.

Seeing as I don't do the above, is that "potentially suicidal" as well.

The word you should focus on there is technically. As this is not a Civil Law state, you are wrong (not technically wrong).

I'm wrong? It states in legislation that drivers must keep left unless overtaking. Prove to me that case law differs from this. Are you suggesting that nobody has ever been pulled for not keeping left on a motorway.

How would something like this cause confusion and annoyance? I would suggest anyone who gets confused or annoyed by something like this does not belong behind the wheel of a car...

Its a courteous gesture to allow the merging car more space to join the motorway/dual carraigeway. Its something I would only do or like to see done where there is ample opportunity to do so, ie the right hand lane is free and the manouever does not disrupt anyone.

Id also love to meet the driver who would prefer to have to merge in between cars in the left hand lane rather than see them move out to make more room in the left hand lane...

If cars on the mainline are obeying the law and leaving the required distance between each other then there is no need for anyone to move lanes to facilitate a single car. It's a huge gap.

And yes it does cause confusion because the mergers are tracking the cars on the mainline and evaluting their speed and position. If drivers start moving lanes and slowing down or speeding up, it does cause both confusion and annoyance. Also, drivers become so accustomed to drivers moving to a different lane to let them merge that it becomes the norm and people start thinking it's a legal requirement. When the opposite is the case.

mathepac

churchview wrote: »

... It's quite likely that a driver who refused to move, or who didn't move, could face a charge of Careless Driving or if the circumstances were more serious, Dangerous Driving. A friend some weeks ago who refused to move to allow a car to merge was "pulled" by the Guards and given a severe telling off. For once, I agreed with the boys in blue

I think I said something amazingly close to this in post 13. - great minds etc. etc.

When I did my UK driving tests many moons ago the key elements focusing all the instructors' activities were "Care, Courtesy & Consideration". Sadly, despite increased regulation and testing, nowadays even the IAM caption their advanced driving courses with the words "Drive & Survive", a reflection on our modern driving environment.

BrianD3

churchview wrote: »

Agreed. And I'm confident that the Guards would take the contrary view. It's quite likely that a driver who refused to move, or who didn't move, could face a charge of Careless Driving or if the circumstances were more serious, Dangerous Driving.

Rubbish. If that were the case, then failing to stop on a main road to let someone emerge from a road of lesser importance would also be dangerous driving. And no, I don't care about what some Garda may or may not have said to your friend.

It clear from the thread that people don't even know the basics. When merging onto a motorway you give way to traffic already on the motorway. When joining a roundabout you give way to traffic already on it. When joining a main road from a side road you give way to traffic on the main road. When changing from one lane to another you give way to traffic already in that lane.

Simple stuff but it appears that Irish drivers have difficulty with the concept of "give way".

?Cee?view

BrianD3 wrote: »

So tell me this, do you stop on roundabouts if you see someone approaching the roundabout in case they drive out in front of you. After all, relinquishing your priority would be the "courteous" thing to do as well as guaranteeing that they won't drive into you.

Where did I mention being "courteous". It's call defensive driving. As for the Roundabout example...:rolleyes:

BrianD3 wrote: »

I'm wrong? It states in legislation that drivers must keep left unless overtaking. Prove to me that case law differs from this.

You can't read one bit of legislation and ignore the entirety of the other legislation and law that surrounds it. Let's try a straightforward example to show how the mysterious way the law works.

Shooting someone, thereby killing them is against the rules; it's murder. But, it's not against the rules if it's done in self defence. However, applying your "logic" mitigating factors, and other circumstances or iterations on the rules are irrelevant and the simple instant rule must be applied to the exclusion of everything else.

So, using your method of applying the Law - wife shoots husband dead. But, husband attacked wife with the same gun, shot her in the knee, shot her in the arm, broke her nose, yet she still managed to grab the gun and kill him. Your logic says - she killed him, she broke the rule, she's guilty, even though she is clearly not guilty as there's a whole body of other law that says she isn't.

BrianD3 wrote: »

Are you suggesting that nobody has ever been pulled for not keeping left on a motorway.

No, that would be a stupid suggestion.

Anan1

sentient_6 wrote: »

I tend to always move out to let people merge in & i appricate when people do the same for me. What drives me mental though is when you tipping along in the left & slightly ahead is a car merging. No problem ill move to let him in, & some dick ripping up behind in the overtaking tears by just as you'd like to move out. I find this happens alot at the athlone by pass where there is alot of exits in a short distance. I wish the cough*bmw dicks*cough relaxed with the 160 kmph overtaking on this one section, cos of all the merging.

Any competent driver should be able to merge without cars in the driving lane having to move for them, TBH. Although 160km/h is a bit fast for sections of the Athlone bypass, there's one bend where even 120km/h is pushing it in the overtaking lane.

?Cee?view

BrianD3 wrote: »

Rubbish. If that were the case, then failing to stop on a main road to let someone emerge from a road of lesser importance would also be dangerous driving. And no, I don't care about what some Garda may or may not have said to your friend.

It clear from the thread that people don't even know the basics. When merging onto a motorway you give way to traffic already on the motorway. When joining a roundabout you give way to traffic already on it. When joining a main road from a side road you give way to traffic on the main road. When changing from one lane to another you give way to traffic already in that lane.

Simple stuff but it appears that Irish drivers have difficulty with the concept of "give way".

Are you capable of understanding the difference between not giving way (the merger) and aggressively refusing to move (the "mergee")?

?Cee?view

Anan1 wrote: »

Any competent driver should be able to merge without cars in the driving lane having to move for them, TBH. Although 160km/h is a bit fast for sections of the Athlone bypass, there's one bend where even 120km/h is pushing it in the overtaking lane.

...and of course all of it is subject to a 100km/h limit. It's the one I always stick to as the Boys in Blue are always on that stretch.

BrianD3

churchview wrote: »

Are you capable of understanding the difference between not giving way (the merger) and aggressively refusing to move (the "mergee")?

What's aggressive about driving legally. Please explain what is aggressive about leaving a correct gap to the vehicle in front, keeping left and driving at an appropriate and legal speed while maintaining position.

And while you're at it you can answer my roundabout question instead of rolling your eyes at it.

You can't read one bit of legislation and ignore the entirety of the other legislation and law that surrounds it. Let's try a straightforward example to show how the mysterious way the law works.

Shooting someone, thereby killing them is against the rules; it's murder. But, it's not against the rules if it's done in self defence. However, applying your "logic" mitigating factors, and other circumstances or iterations on the rules are irrelevant and the simple instant rule must be applied to the exclusion of everything else.

Self defence is specifically covered in legislation. Facilitating drivers merging onto the motorway because of some made up courtesy rule is not.

sentient_6

Anan1 wrote: »

Any competent driver should be able to merge without cars in the driving lane having to move for them, TBH. Although 160km/h is a bit fast for sections of the Athlone bypass, there's one bend where even 120km/h is pushing it in the overtaking lane.

I'm primarily thinking about driving from the galway direction. Especially coming up on the first exit/entrance(tuam?) with the very short merging lane. You can have people still hammering up on the right from the motorway. & also traffic trying to merge from the roscommon exit/entrance just before the bridge.

Coming from the dublin side i agree there are a few bends take one has to carefull enough on alright. Alot of traffic tends not to slow down after the motorway though which makes the merging situation a little worse than normal on that whole stretch.

corktina

Once a driver signals his intention to carry out a maneovre, a vehicle approaching from the rear should take whatever actions are necessary to avoid colliding with that vehicle. In a slip road situation, that means you accomodate that person in merging NOT you speed up and drive alongside him to stop him merging. Having to stop or slow down on an acceleration lane is highly dangerous and any one forcing someone to do that is a very dangerous driver.Whether thats the law is not relevant, its what a good driver will do.

?Cee?view

BrianD3 wrote: »

What's aggressive about driving legally. Please explain what is aggressive about leaving a correct gap to the vehicle in front, keeping left and driving at an appropriate and legal speed while maintaining position.

Nothing. That's not the situation that's been discussed here. The situation that's at controversy is where a driver refuses to allow another to merge - completely different.

BrianD3 wrote: »

And while you're at it you can answer my roundabout question instead of rolling your eyes at it.

OK. A Motorway is not a Roundabout. Are you being obtuse on purpose?

BrianD3 wrote: »

Self defence is specifically covered in legislation.

...as is careless driving. Your point?

Listen, don't bother replying. Life is too short. You keep steadfastly sticking to the rules (as you interpret them), wondering why everyone else can't drive, and maybe getting into accidents. I'll control my driving, avoiding situations where an accident might occur. It's called defensive driving. Hopefully we won't meet on the roads.

?Cee?view

sentient_6 wrote: »

I'm primarily thinking about driving from the galway direction. Especially coming up on the first exit/entrance(tuam?) with the very short merging lane. You can have people still hammering up on the right from the motorway. & also traffic trying to merge from the roscommon exit/entrance just before the bridge.

That bit is lethal alright.

Two approaches are suggested on this thread.

1. Be aware that cars merge from there very often quite dangerously, but stay in your lane, possibly crash straight into their arse, or get sideswiped, but hey, you can have a warm feeling of justification when meeting St. Pete

or,

2. Drive defensively. Acknowledge that while yes, you can stay in the driving lane, it may be safer to move over to prevent potential maiming or death. Give the other driver a cheery wave if you pass him and continue on your merry way...

R.O.R

corktina wrote: »

Once a driver signals his intention to carry out a maneovre, a vehicle approaching from the rear should take whatever actions are necessary to avoid colliding with that vehicle. In a slip road situation, that means you accomodate that person in merging NOT you speed up and drive alongside him to stop him merging. Having to stop or slow down on an acceleration lane is highly dangerous and any one forcing someone to do that is a very dangerous driver.Whether thats the law is not relevant, its what a good driver will do.

Whether the car on the slip road has it's indicator on or not, it's still up to that car to take the necessary actions to merge safely. Any indication does not give you right of way - the manouver can only be completed if safe to do so.

A lot of people seem to think that indication gives them a right of way, when it doesn't.

If I'm on a slip road, as soon as I can see the main carriageway I'm planning which gap I'm aiming for. Sometimes this means speeding up to the speed limit, sometimes this means easing off the acclerator a bit, but unless the main line traffic has come to a stop then I've never had to brake or go all the way to the end of the slip road.

If I'm on the main carriageway, approaching a junction, it's the same as above. As soon as I can see the traffic on the slip road I will adjust my speed to allow them to merge safely, if the overtaking lane is too busy to safely move in to. I'll move out in to the overtaking lane if my speed means we would end up at the same point at the same time - and I'm not going to cause anyone in the overtaking lane to slow down.

mantaman

BrianD3 wrote: »

So tell me this, do you stop on roundabouts if you see someone approaching the roundabout in case they drive out in front of you. After all, relinquishing your priority would be the "courteous" thing to do as well as guaranteeing that they won't drive into you.

Seeing as I don't do the above, is that "potentially suicidal" as well.

I'm wrong? It states in legislation that drivers must keep left unless overtaking. Prove to me that case law differs from this. Are you suggesting that nobody has ever been pulled for not keeping left on a motorway.

If cars on the mainline are obeying the law and leaving the required distance between each other then there is no need for anyone to move lanes to facilitate a single car. It's a huge gap.

Quick check on RSA, this piece is from motorway rules:

Lane 1

The normal 'keep left' rule applies. Stay in this lane unless you are overtaking.
Lane 2

On a two-lane motorway, use this for overtaking only and move back into lane 1 when you have finished.
You may also use this lane to accommodate traffic merging from the left.

?Cee?view

mantaman wrote: »

Quick check on RSA, this piece is from motorway rules:

Lane 1

The normal 'keep left' rule applies. Stay in this lane unless you are overtaking.
Lane 2

On a two-lane motorway, use this for overtaking only and move back into lane 1 when you have finished.
You may also use this lane to accommodate traffic merging from the left.

Mantaman, you're wasting your time! This has been pointed out already but he refuses to accept it. We are to just accept he is right, answer his questions and acknowledge that he can ignore others' questions.

Get with the programme

?Cee?view

R.O.R wrote: »

Whether the car on the slip road has it's indicator on or not, it's still up to that car to take the necessary actions to merge safely. Any indication does not give you right of way - the manouver can only be completed if safe to do so.

A lot of people seem to think that indication gives them a right of way, when it doesn't.

If I'm on a slip road, as soon as I can see the main carriageway I'm planning which gap I'm aiming for. Sometimes this means speeding up to the speed limit, sometimes this means easing off the acclerator a bit, but unless the main line traffic has come to a stop then I've never had to brake or go all the way to the end of the slip road.

If I'm on the main carriageway, approaching a junction, it's the same as above. As soon as I can see the traffic on the slip road I will adjust my speed to allow them to merge safely, if the overtaking lane is too busy to safely move in to. I'll move out in to the overtaking lane if my speed means we would end up at the same point at the same time - and I'm not going to cause anyone in the overtaking lane to slow down.

I don't think you're disagreeing with each other. I think you're just each looking at it from a different point of view.

Of course, putting on the indicator doesn't give the right of way, but also seeing an indicator or seeing that a person may be about to undertake a manoeuvre, should lead the other driver to either take evasive action or anticipate the need to take it.

sentient_6

churchview wrote: »

That bit is lethal alright.

Two approaches are suggested on this thread.

1. Be aware that cars merge from there very often quite dangerously, but stay in your lane, possibly crash straight into their arse, or get sideswiped, but hey, you can have a warm feeling of justification when meeting St. Pete

or,

2. Drive defensively. Acknowledge that while yes, you can stay in the driving lane, it may be safer to move over to prevent potential maiming or death. Give the other driver a cheery wave if you pass him and continue on your merry way...

& that's exactly what i do. i just dont like when people insist on overtaking when approaching merging traffic. Thus making it difficult for traffic in lane one to move out.

Henry Ford III

These threads are a little depressing.

It's little wonder our driver standards are so low, and accident rate so high when many don't know how to join a motorway properly.

p.s. Even if they did I'd have doubts in many cases they have the skill to execute the manouver properly.

BrianD3

churchview wrote: »

Nothing. That's not the situation that's been discussed here. The situation that's at controversy is where a driver refuses to allow another to merge - completely different.

Read it again. while maintaining position You seem to think that this constitutes aggressive driving or refusing to allow another driver to merge.

OK. A Motorway is not a Roundabout. Are you being obtuse on purpose?

The roundabout example was to illustrate the concepts of priority and giving way. You seem to have difficulty with these concepts.

...as is careless driving. Your point?

You are living in a dreamworld if you think that maintaining your position in lane 1 while drivers are merging = aggressively refusing to let drivers merge = careless driving.

mantaman wrote:

On a two-lane motorway, use this for overtaking only and move back into lane 1 when you have finished.
You may also use this lane to accommodate traffic merging from the left.

ROTR is not the law, I was talking about actual legislation. The ROTR can be ambiguous and may seem to conflict with the law - an example of this is what the ROTR has to say on hard shoulder usage. This has been done to death on this forum.

Going back to the overtaking lane, in the scenario I described in my first post the merging traffic does not want or need the traffic on the mainline to move into the overtaking lane. So the mainline traffic ends up in the overtaking lane not overtaking anything. This may be an offence. The ROTR quote above may or may not be a defence.

CiniO

BrianD3 wrote: »

ROTR is not the law, I was talking about actual legislation. The ROTR can be ambiguous and may seem to conflict with the law - an example of this is what the ROTR has to say on hard shoulder usage. This has been done to death on this forum.

Any link to a thread about this hard shoulder? I'm interested.

Besides, what I found in ROTR wrong, is that it states that buses are not allowed to use overtaking lane on motorways (the same as trucks).
But in real, they are allowed - that comes from Road traffic regulations.
It comes from old regulations, when buses were allowed only to drive 80km/h on motorways. But this has changed, it was also changed in newest issue of ROTR, but they never bothered changing info about using overtaking lane.

BrianD3

CiniO wrote: »

Any link to a thread about this hard shoulder? I'm interested.

There have been several but this is probably the best
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055131641

Check out the posts by user "cyclopath2001". I normally strongly disagree with everything this user says but he may be right on the hard shoulder situation.

?Cee?view

BrianD3 wrote: »

ROTR is not the law, I was talking about actual legislation. The ROTR can be ambiguous and may seem to conflict with the law

BrianD3 wrote: »

This may be an offence. The ROTR quote above may or may not be a defence.

You're quite the legal expert. Before you start relying on the law, perhaps you might learn how to use it. Read up on Statutory Interpretation and Consistency (Internal and External). All of it can be distilled to - "look at the full picture", which you are apparently too myopic to be able to do.

mantaman

BrianD3 wrote: »

Read it again. while maintaining position You seem to think that this constitutes aggressive driving or refusing to allow another driver to merge.

The roundabout example was to illustrate the concepts of priority and giving way. You seem to have difficulty with these concepts.

You are living in a dreamworld if you think that maintaining your position in lane 1 while drivers are merging = aggressively refusing to let drivers merge = careless driving.

ROTR is not the law, I was talking about actual legislation. The ROTR can be ambiguous and may seem to conflict with the law - an example of this is what the ROTR has to say on hard shoulder usage. This has been done to death on this forum.

Going back to the overtaking lane, in the scenario I described in my first post the merging traffic does not want or need the traffic on the mainline to move into the overtaking lane. So the mainline traffic ends up in the overtaking lane not overtaking anything. This may be an offence. The ROTR quote above may or may not be a defence.

I meet people with this mentality every day of the week, and to be honest it gets very tiring. Safe motoring should be prority, at all times.

Ok, scenario for you. You are in left lane of motorway, middle of long line of cars, all keeping safe distance from each other. Car comes from merging lane, and according to your beliefs, everybody keeps position. So merging car has no option but to slot in infront of you. You are now not a safe distance from car in front, you are breaking the law?

Anan1

corktina wrote: »

Once a driver signals his intention to carry out a maneovre, a vehicle approaching from the rear should take whatever actions are necessary to avoid colliding with that vehicle. In a slip road situation, that means you accomodate that person in merging NOT you speed up and drive alongside him to stop him merging. Having to stop or slow down on an acceleration lane is highly dangerous and any one forcing someone to do that is a very dangerous driver.Whether thats the law is not relevant, its what a good driver will do.

Absolutely, but it helps if the driver pulling out does their bit too. I find changing lanes to accomodate merging traffic is generally only necessary when they trundle out at a lower speed than the flow of traffic.

@sentient_6: There are a few junctions where the flow of traffic can be just too fast to merge safely without co-operation from traffic already on the road; I think your example is one of them.

Esel

RandomAccess wrote: »

DAMN - had a big response typed up and F**** session timed out.. How the hell do I get it extended?? Always bloody happens.

Click the 'Remember Me' box when logging in. Be aware though that if yo don't log out when finished, the next time you or anyone else using the same computer goes to Boards, they will be automatically logged in to your account.

djimi

Okay so I just checked this with my gf who is currently learning to drive and she said that she has been told by her instructor that it is perfectly okay for a car in the left lane of a dual carraigeway (and presumably motorway) to move to the right hand lane in order to allow traffic to merge to the carraigeway. I dont have ROTR or legislation to back that up, but that is what she was told by her driving instructor. Its not a requirement for the cars on the carraigeway to give way, but its not against the law for them to do so if they wish.

And for those who think they know more than the rules of the road; the ROTR are considered the bible for those learning to drive. If you do something that is allowed according to the rules of the road, I dont see how you can be prosecuted for it, and if you are Id imagine it wouldnt last two minutes in court.

?Cee?view

djimi wrote: »

And for those who think they know more than the rules of the road; the ROTR are considered the bible for those learning to drive. If you do something that is allowed according to the rules of the road, I dont see how you can be prosecuted for it, and if you are Id imagine it wouldnt last two minutes in court.

The amateur lawyers here will probably disagree with you

Esel

Where the ROTR say 'must', it means there is a law governing the subject matter. Where it says 'should', there is no legal requirement involved.

Guy:Incognito

djimi wrote: »

I see a lot of people say the traffic on the motorway should not have to move, which is technically true. However, I will move into the right hand lane when possible to allow traffic to merge onto a dual carraigeway/motorway; I consider it common courtesy. Is this not considered to be the done thing? Right or wrong, I always consider someone to be a right prick if they persist in driving in the left hand lane with the right hand lane free when Im trying to merge.

If your keeping proper distances there should be no need to move anywhere because there will be ample room for the merging traffic to join between you and the car in front or you and the car behind. You can then briefly adjust your speed by letting off the accelerator (not by braking people, you should never have to brake on a motorway under normal circumstances) to create the appropriate gap again.

djimi

Stekelly wrote: »

If your keeping proper distances there should be no need to move anywhere because there will be ample room for the merging traffic to join between you and the car in front or you and the car behind. You can then briefly adjust your speed by letting off the accelerator (not by braking people, you should never have to brake on a motorway under normal circumstances) to create the appropriate gap again.

Where I will tend to move is where I am on a motorway and I see a car coming down the slip road and I judge that they will reach the merge line at the same time I do, so we will essentially be side by side. I will move over (if safe) to the right hand lane so that neither of us has to slow down to accomodate the other one. They merge in, I either overtake them or they go ahead of me. Whole thing takes about 10 seconds and theres no inconvenience on either side apart from me having to change lanes.

Also to be fair there are a lot of muppets who will try cut in in front of you and what not, so sometimes its easier just to give them room and let them get on with it...

mdebets

Stekelly wrote: »

If your keeping proper distances there should be no need to move anywhere because there will be ample room for the merging traffic to join between you and the car in front or you and the car behind. You can then briefly adjust your speed by letting off the accelerator (not by braking people, you should never have to brake on a motorway under normal circumstances) to create the appropriate gap again.

That's actually not true. If you keep proper the distance for your speed and a car merges in front of you, this distance is cut in half (or worse if he can't merge properly in the middle) making it immediately unsafe for you, him and the car in front of you.
What you should do is anticipating that someone wants to merge and letting off the accelerator before you reach the merge point, increasing the distance to the car in front of you to double the safety distance.