Undertaking on the motorway

BailMeOut

according to the RSA you can overtake on the left when "traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane." and then goes on to say you must not overtake when "You are in the left-hand lane of a dual carriageway or motorway when traffic is moving at normal speed."

http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-driving/good-driving-practice/overtaking.html

If someone is hogging the outside lane at say 80kph then surly that is not normal speed so would be legal to pass them on the left.

splitting hairs now but rules say you must not pass if in the left-hand lane of a dual carriageway or motorway, no mention of passing if in middle lane!!

djimi

BailMeOut wrote: »

according to the RSA you can overtake on the left when "traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane." and then goes on to say you must not overtake when "You are in the left-hand lane of a dual carriageway or motorway when traffic is moving at normal speed."

http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-driving/good-driving-practice/overtaking.html

If someone is hogging the outside lane at say 80kph then surly that is not normal speed so would be legal to pass them on the left.

splitting hairs now but rules say you must not pass if in the left-hand lane of a dual carriageway or motorway, no mention of passing if in middle lane!!

It means that if you are on the m50 in three lanes of barely moving traffic, its not considered to be undertaking if the left hand land is moving faster than the outer lanes. Or if you are stopped at the lights at Newlands Cross and the cars in the left lane take off faster than the right lane.

It doesnt mean that if the prick in the middle lane is doing 20mph under the speed limit its okay to undertake him.

Zubeneschamali

BailMeOut wrote: »

If someone is hogging the outside lane at say 80kph then surly that is not normal speed so would be legal to pass them on the left.

I undertake too at times (did on Monday last, for example), but it is illegal and you can be done for it. No way is a guard or a judge going to go for "80 kph is slow moving traffic" as an excuse.

mathepac

MrDerp wrote: »

Which is more dangerous?
- undertaking on a motorway
- overtaking on a broken white line on a regional route where the visibility isn't 100% e.g. a bit of a hill or a partial bend in front of you
Which is legal? ...

The first is illegal and dangerous, the second isn't illegal but may be deemed to be careless / dangerous driving.

The rest of your post isn't worth commenting on, it's so childishly about "me me me and my demands and expectations of others on the road."

cjt156

mathepac wrote: »

blah blah blah...smug shyte and stuff about acolytes

If you are in the overtaking lane and there is room for someone to pass you on the left you should not be in the overtaking lane.

What part of that statement do you think is incorrect and so worthy of your derision?

Dartz

djimi wrote: »

It means that if you are on the m50 in three lanes of barely moving traffic, its not considered to be undertaking if the left hand land is moving faster than the outer lanes. Or if you are stopped at the lights at Newlands Cross and the cars in the left lane take off faster than the right lane.

It doesnt mean that if the prick in the middle lane is doing 20mph under the speed limit its okay to undertake him.

Neither does it make sense to cross three lanes of traffic to go around the **** either. That's just as dangerous, if not more so.

If I'm trundling along up the inside lane doing a hundred I amn't going to slow down because someone is doing 80 in the middle. That's pants-on-fire retarded.

Whether it's the law or not doesn't matter, it's stupid and therefore wrong.

corktina

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I undertake myself at times (did on Monday last, for example), but it is illegal and you can be done for it. No way is a guard or a judge going to go for "80 kph is slow moving traffic" as an excuse.

you undertook yourself? :mad: were you hogging the Outside fast lane or something?:eek:

djimi

Dartz wrote: »

Neither does it make sense to cross three lanes of traffic to go around the **** either. That's just as dangerous, if not more so.

If I'm trundling along up the inside lane doing a hundred I amn't going to slow down because someone is doing 80 in the middle. That's pants-on-fire retarded.

Whether it's the law or not doesn't matter, it's stupid and therefore wrong.

Dont get me wrong; I agree with you and there is no way I am crossing two lanes of traffic to overtake some dip**** who is doing 45mph in the middle lane of the Naas dual carraigeway. Im simply clarifying the meaning of that quote from the ROTR or wherever it was from.

mathepac

dillo2k10 wrote: »

It is not just a matter of opinion, it is illegal to drive in the overtaking lane.

The last time I heard from you was in another thread where you appeared to be a learner driver trying to get guidance on "protocol" on motorways, the "who has right of way?" question.

If you are a learner, refer to page 45 in the Rules of the Road about the current topic which is "Undertaking on the motorway"

Just to point out to you as part of your learning, there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" on a motorway nor is there an "undertaking lane" on a motorway or any other public carriageway.

As there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" it can't be illegal to drive on it. See pages 79 / 80 in the Rules of the Road and other about lane control in tunnels etc.

Always glad to facilitate learning

Connavar

mathepac wrote: »

Just to point out to you as part of your learning, there is no such think as an "overtaking lane" on a motorway nor is there an "undertaking lane" on a motorway or any other public carriageway.

Yes there is no term overtaking lane. They are called lane 2 and lane 3, which you are not supposed to drive in except when overtaking. Unless in special circumstances
http://www.rotr.ie/rules-for-driving/motorways/on-the-motorway.html

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.
On a three-lane motorway, you may stay in this centre lane while there is slower moving traffic in lane 1.
Lane 3

If you are travelling on a three-lane motorway, you must use this lane only if traffic in lanes 1 and 2 is moving in queues and you need to overtake or accommodate merging traffic. Once you've finished overtaking, move back to your left and allow faster traffic coming from behind to pass by.
You must not use the lane nearest the central median (lane 2 or lane 3, depending on the motorway width) if you are driving:

• a goods vehicle with a design gross vehicle weight of more than 3,500 kilograms,
• a passenger vehicle with seating for more than 8 passengers (aside from the driver), or
• a vehicle towing a trailer, horsebox or caravan.

You may use it, however, in exceptional circumstances when you cannot proceed in the inner lane because of a blockage ahead. You may also use it if you are at a location on a motorway where a speed limit of 80km/h or less applies.

mathepac

Connavar wrote: »

Yes there is no term overtaking lane. They are called lane 2 and lane 3, which you are not supposed to drive in except when overtaking. Unless in special circumstances...

Thanks for confirming my point by pointing that out again, but why you chose to direct your lessons at me is a bit of a mystery; I'm not a learner's permit holder, nor am I one of the posters proposing illegal, dangerous driving tactics on motorways.

Thanks anyway.

Connavar

mathepac wrote: »

As there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" it can't be illegal to drive on it.

Sorry I forgot to include this part of your quote.

What I was trying to say is that it is illegal to drive in lane 2(often called the overtaking lane) when not overtaking, except in special circumstances such as accommodating merging traffic

S28382

Ignorant f***ers that drive slow as fu*k in the overtaking lane, it drives me mad, i drive the M9 everyday and the amount of assholes that do it is unreal:mad:

dr.fuzzenstein

mathepac wrote: »

The last time I heard from you was in another thread where you appeared to be a learner driver trying to get guidance on "protocol" on motorways, the "who has right of way?" question.

If you are a learner, refer to page 45 in the Rules of the Road about the current topic which is "Undertaking on the motorway"

Just to point out to you as part of your learning, there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" on a motorway nor is there an "undertaking lane" on a motorway or any other public carriageway.

As there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" it can't be illegal to drive on it. See pages 79 / 80 in the Rules of the Road and other about lane control in tunnels etc.

Always glad to facilitate learning

All correct, but I don't quite get the section I have outlined in bold.
You seem to make the argument that you can drive on any lane you want on the motorway.
According to the AA:

Correct lane use

There’s no such thing as a ‘fast lane’ on a motorway. Traffic should always cruise in the left hand lane. The right hand lane is for overtaking other vehicles; it’s also used when approaching a slip road in order to let traffic join the motorway from the left. On a three-lane or multi-lane motorway the same rules apply. Keep to the left as much as possible. Traffic should never be in the right-hand lane on motorways if the left hand lane is clear.

You're right, there's no "overtaking" lane, but traffic should keep left.
The RSA seems to support this:

• Lane 1 – You should always use this lane for normal driving. Stay in this
lane unless you are overtaking.

There seems to be no penalty points offence for driving in another lane, IMO there should be, but it could be viewed as driving without reasonable consideration, 2 points.
Though I would doubt if anyone has ever been done for that or ever will be.
Driving in the right hand lane at 80 km/h when there's no reason to, is simply being a dick.
If someone does that, I will not wait behind him, I will wait for a while, then indicate right. Then a quick flash. If he/she hasn't moved after a while, I go for it. Life's too short.

Guy:Incognito

Today, like many other days, I was in the driving lane doing an indicated 100, so probably actually 95 and was going faster than the 80% off the traffic which was in the other 2 lanes. Are some people really saying I should then slow to 80-90 and block that lane too or maybe move out and join those idiots?

mathepac wrote: »

Undertaking is both dangerous and illegal, if you don't agree get the road traffic laws changed, until then we simply obey them.

So we (as in the people driving at or under the speed limit in the driving lane) have to obey the laws, but the people driving at or under the limit int he overtaking lane, overtaking no one, dont?

mathepac

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

All correct, ...

I Know it's all correct.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

... but I don't quite get the section I have outlined in bold...

What's not to understand? Lane control in tunnels and on motorways is subject to the overhead signs, amongst other controls.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

...
You seem to make the argument that you can drive on any lane you want on the motorway..

Where do I do that?

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

... You're right, there's no "overtaking" lane, but traffic should keep left.
The RSA seems to support this: ...

I know all this. Where have I argued the opposite? And I'm glad the RSA agrees with me, it means they're capable of learning.

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

... If someone does that, I will not wait behind him, I will wait for a while, then indicate right. Then a quick flash. If he/she hasn't moved after a while, I go for it. Life's too short.

And hopefully the cops see you and you get done for "intimidating driving tactics", technically careless driving because it's illegal.

mathepac

Connavar wrote: »

Sorry I forgot to include this part of your quote.

What I was trying to say is that it is illegal to drive in lane 2(often called the overtaking lane) when not overtaking, except in special circumstances such as accommodating merging traffic

I'm sure some of the people posting their dangerous illegal nonsense here call themselves drivers, that doesn't make them drivers. I'm still not sure what you are trying to educate me on - where have I posted anything that contradicts you post?

Zubeneschamali

mathepac wrote: »

And hopefully the cops see you and you get done

I hear they are buzzing around on squadrons of flying pigs these days.

mathepac

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Today, like many other days, I was in the driving lane ...

Practising your golf, eh? Good idea, you don't seem to understand the names of lanes on motorways though.

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

... in the driving lane) have to obey the laws, but the people driving at or under the limit int he overtaking lane, overtaking no one, dont?

Hey you seem to be great at the ould golf but I suggest you need to brush up on your knowledge of motorways.

Anyway be it golf or motoring you have to obey the laws man, otherwise where would we be? Chaos man, anarchy on the golf courses and the roads.

Merch

Reg'stoy wrote: »

Increasing the speed limit won't change a thing, besides as someone who crosses the M50 twice (at least) a day I've grown accustomed to it.

I consider lack of indication as uncourtious and downright rude to other road users. Indication is just that, an indication that I am about to change my road position and not a 'woah there boss you'd better slow down cause I'm moving in front of you'. The amount of drivers who I've heard say sure I was indicating and when you ask was it safe to move, they reply again; but I was indicating.

I would love it if everyone taught as much about there own driving as much as they did/do about others, if that was the case we'd be a lot more courtious to each other.

I think that 120km/h is acceptable at certain times, when its busy and there are ques of traffic at certain exits, like clondalkin/lucan a lower limit would be ok. The thing is the 120km/h is the max speed allowed but its dependant on the conditions, so we wouldn't even need a lower limit at certain times as people should drive to the conditions (chances?)

The indicating thing, I've heard people say it like it means something definite, they dont realise its only an indication of intent, not a right of way. Some dont indicate at all, some think its a right of way, others do it wrong! .

mathepac wrote: »

Undertaking is both illegal and dangerous,if you don't agree get the road traffic laws changed, until then we simply obey them.

Ok it is illegal, but technically, actually what is more dangerous about it than overtaking??
If its that other/certain drivers dont expect you to be there, well they should, but they dont expect anyone to be overtaking them either, when they are in lane 2 or 3, If those people obeyed the laws we wouldn't have a problem?

mathepac wrote: »

The first is illegal and dangerous,

Why is it considered dangerous? why do you consider it dangerous?
other than that its written down that it's not allowed?
If people followed rules rigidly and blindly we'd likely have more accidents on the road?
Competent drivers should expect people to be where they least expect/they intend to move to when changing lane and be prepared accordingly, ok so maybe some people aren't as competent or dont care, so we have to take account for this by saying something isnt allowed?

Guy:Incognito

mathepac wrote: »

Practising your golf, eh? Good idea, you don't seem to understand the names of lanes on motorways though.
Hey you seem to be great at the ould golf but I suggest you need to brush up on your knowledge of motorways.

Anyway be it golf or motoring you have to obey the laws man, otherwise where would we be? Chaos man, anarchy on the golf courses and the roads.

I see , just like in the thread on consumer issues, you dont actually answer any posts, you just spout rubbish while quoting them.

None of what you said is an answer to what I posted.

I'll even teach you how. Try making actual point, showing how your right and what the actual way to do something is. You know, like th eway others are.

John_Rambo

mathepac wrote: »

Practising your golf, eh? Good idea, you don't seem to understand the names of lanes on motorways though

He understands the ROTR for fooks sake, will you stop obsessing with what people call the lanes.

I sometimes drive on the M50 on weekdays, it's a different story, most people stay in the left lane (lane one before mister nomenclature hits the roof) unless overtaking the trucks. Fair enough you get the odd one in the middle lane (lane two), these seem to be out of towners not sure what exit they are taking, particularly coming towards the Malahide road exit. You get the odd smugger who's just too lazy to use the road properly in the right hand lane (lane three) doint 120kph... During the weekend the rules are out the window, particularly on Sunday evening when the daysul brigade get back from getting mammy to do the laundry.

I don't think it should be 120kph. Too much going on.

Guy:Incognito

John_Rambo wrote: »

I sometimes drive on the M50 on weekdays, it's a different story, most people stay in the left lane (lane one before mister nomenclature hits the roof) unless overtaking the trucks. Fair enough you get the odd one in the middle lane (lane two), these seem to be out of towners not sure what exit they are taking, particularly coming towards the Malahide road exit. You get the odd smugger who's just too lazy to use the road properly in the right hand lane (lane three) doint 120kph... During the weekend the rules are out the window, particularly on Sunday evening when the daysul brigade get back from getting mammy to do the laundry.
.

You must catch it on good days. I use it on average twice a day (weekends and weekdays) and the lane dicipline is appalling. At most, 15-20% of the traffic uses the inside lane. About 50% is in the middle lane (rarely even going as fast as the speed limit) and the other 30% or so is in the outside lane.

dr.fuzzenstein

mathepac wrote: »

I know all this. Where have I argued the opposite?

I might have gotten this wrong, it was just this bit:

As there is no such thing as an "overtaking lane" it can't be illegal to drive on it.

You seem to make the argument that since there is no overtaking lane, it is ok to drive on it.
If I have misunderstood, my bad.
As for getting caught, if a tourist/elderly person/someone just being obnoxious is blocking the right hand lane of a completely clear motorway at 80 km/h, I will try to move them over and failing that pass on the left.
Yes it's technically illegal, no I don't do it very often (2-3 times a year at most) and I'm being careful about it. But I'm not sitting behind that person for my hour (now hour and twenty minutes thanks to Mr Slow And Oblivious) of my commute.
It does happen rarely and I know I pays my money and takes my chances.

I used to overtake on the inside, pull out ahead of the obstacle and gently slow down, till the other guy was trying to overtake me on the inside.
Then speed up and repeat the process till the other guy was at boiling point.
The floor it and goodbye.
So you see I have calmed down, it used to drive me crazy, but then I was on the road and had things to do and places to go.

John_Rambo

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

You must catch it on good days. I use it on average twice a day (weekends and weekdays)

Do you find the weekend worse?

Guy:Incognito

John_Rambo wrote: »

Do you find the weekend worse?

TBH no, I just find it equally bad.

John_Rambo

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

TBH no, I just find it equally bad.

Weird, I find it much better in the middle of a weekday than the weekend. Much more commercial traffic that tend to stay in the left lane, most of the middle lane slowly overtaking at about 100Kph and the right lane with the odd one overtaking again at bigger speeds.

When I say most, I mean about 75%, the rest usually clueless.

mathepac

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I see ... you dont actually answer any posts, you just spout rubbish while quoting them.

None of what you said is an answer to what I posted.

I'll even teach you how. Try making actual point, showing how your right and what the actual way to do something is. You know, like th eway others are.

I'm under no obligation to answer your questions or any one else's.

I've made the same point repeatedly - "undertaking is illegal and dangerous". If you understand that my work here is done, if you don't then I'm very much afraid you never will.

mathepac

Merch wrote: »

... Competent drivers should expect people to be where they least expect/they intend to move to when changing lane and be prepared accordingly, ok so maybe some people aren't as competent or dont care, so we have to take account for this by saying something isnt allowed?

A competent driver is one who has great spatial awareness, obeys the guidelines / laws for separation in two dimensions, who obeys the laws and the ROTR, is cognizant of driving conditions, whose behaviour is predictable and transparent to those around him. His movements are smooth and relaxed behind the wheel and he never takes risks by getting into situations where he is not in control. The keys to being a competent driver are care, courtesy and consideration at all times.

Here endeth the lesson.

Merch

mathepac wrote: »

A competent driver is one who has great spatial awareness, obeys the guidelines / laws for separation in two dimensions, who obeys the laws and the ROTR, is cognizant of driving conditions, whose behaviour is predictable and transparent to those around him. His movements are smooth and relaxed behind the wheel and he never takes risks by getting into situations where he is not in control. The keys to being a competent driver are care, courtesy and consideration at all times.

Here endeth the lesson.

But why do you think it is dangerous? thats what I am trying to find out?

People can be spatially aware undertaking, aware of conditions and those around them and make their movements known and transparent and do all that when undertaking.
It seems that it is some almost redundant act, that no one really knows why its done but continues to do it anyway because thats the way its always been done.
I think it was possibly introduced as a guideline of how to overtake in a 1 and 2 lane scenario, in multi lane scenarios greater than that it becomes a bit redundant as its silly to ask everyone to cram into one lane/side and have to weave back and forth (that is unsafe, as more lane changes) across a motorway to pass individual slow moving traffic.
In a perfect world, people wouldn't hog the offside lane/s but it happens, you cannot compensate for some peoples lack of awareness.

I think overtaking is preferable but I think if the relative difference in speed is low, that its safe to undertake. If its to be applicable then it wouldn't be an issue if people didn't avoid lane 1 and only drive in lane 2 and 3.
I dont think care, courtesy or consideration are being applied by road users that block lane 2/3, I agree that care, courtesy and consideration are necessary but its seems to me its something that a driver undertaking can be but one hogging a lane has not thought of at all.

I assume you dont undertake? so what do you think is dangerous about it?

mathepac

Merch wrote: »

But why do you think it is dangerous? ...

But I don't think it is dangerous, I know it is.

booth70

Bottom line:

The concept of motorway driving is relatively new to drivers in Ireland.....we've only had motorways for the last 10 years or so while most of Europe have had it for the last 50 years

Therefore it will be another decade or so before people here learn to drive correctly on motorways

irelandrover

mathepac wrote: »

But I don't think it is dangerous, I know it is.

Are you just going to keep saying things like this or are you going to explain why it is dangerous?

John_Rambo

irelandrover wrote: »

Are you just going to keep saying things like this

Or worse, are you just going to keep finding big words like cognizant?

(American spelling from google )

Zubeneschamali

mathepac wrote: »

I've made the same point repeatedly - "undertaking is illegal and dangerous".

To use one of your own childish debating tactics: there is no reference to undertaking in law or the rules of the road, so it can't be illegal.

dr.fuzzenstein

mathepac wrote: »

A competent driver is one who has great spatial awareness, obeys the guidelines / laws for separation in two dimensions, who obeys the laws and the ROTR, is cognizant of driving conditions, whose behaviour is predictable and transparent to those around him. His movements are smooth and relaxed behind the wheel and he never takes risks by getting into situations where he is not in control. The keys to being a competent driver are care, courtesy and consideration at all times.

Here endeth the lesson.

A: If a driver is sitting at 80 km/h in the "fasht" lane on a completely clear motorway and I can't get him to move over by flashing and indicating right, I will pass him on the inside.
B: For any further questions and arguments, refer to point A

Merch

mathepac wrote: »

But I don't think it is dangerous, I know it is.

Ok, well I'm trying to find out what you know about it to be dangerous?

If its a law that was introduced far enough back, maybe its relevance isn't related to multi lane/motorway driving.

I'm actually trying to see the pro's and cons of the situation.
Is it still applicable on a modern motorway?
If it is to be enforced then it should be done so rigidly but so should action about those blocking an outside lane (2/3). The thing is I think that is more difficult to do as it requires something more expensive and difficult, ie driver education. So it looks like it is the cheap and easy option to safety to me.
I think it is safer to overtake on the outside, but I am still cautious of what other drivers might do then (ie I try to be prepared for what they might do), as people change lanes without warning/indication.

I'm trying to find out what you think/know is the reason it is considered/ known to be dangerous?
I routinely come across people on the motorway when it's quiet and busy in lane 3 going slow. When it's quiet there could be no-one around us as i approach them, if I'm in lane 1, why would I slow to pull in behind them to try and overtake, its much simpler and safer for me to keep going, we have a seperation of a lane, it isn't always that quiet or simple but it has happened.

If you know whats dangerous about it, I'd just like you to say as the ROTR dont give an explanation why not or why it is a requirement.
If there is a valid reason that is so obvious its staring people in the face that we dont see it, then surely it should be made very clear, instead of Its just not allowed, the reason to not undertake has to stand up to criticism, if it cant then it is not applicable and needs to be changed.

Personally, I think people aren't going to expect a driver on their inside, but its a multilane road, they should, they should expect the unexpected and should not change lane unless they know it to be clear.
But really that would be better dealt with by improved driver education instead of a blanket ban on something (undertaking) to compensate for something else (poor driver awareness/education about not staying in the outermost lanes after passing), its just that driver education isn't the easy or cheap option, the easy option is just have a blanket ban on undertaking.

People should be capable of driving on a motorway where vehicles are all around them. It wouldn't be acceptable to say undertaking should be allowed at any speed, but at low relative (similar) speeds I think it should be allowed as no matter how much is spent on driver education, people will still hog the outermost lanes.

So, why do you know about it that is dangerous?
I'm open to opinion or fact that I haven't considered.

Zubeneschamali

Merch wrote: »

So, why do you know about it that is dangerous?

It's dangerous because it is illegal and therefore unexpected. Anyone doing illegal and unexpected things on the road is more dangerous than someone doing legal and normal things.

However, the big problem with American style undertaking is the you end up with all lanes travelling at the same speed (the speed of the slowest drivers), with people trying to make progress having to weave between them.

This would be Bad, so passing on the left should remain illegal, and only be used in exceptional circumstances like that muppet driving a Japanese crapbox in the right hand lane from Dublin to Galway at 100 kph last Monday.

djimi

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's dangerous because it is illegal and therefore unexpected. Anyone doing illegal and unexpected things on the road is more dangerous than someone doing legal and normal things.

Nothing should ever be unexpected when it comes to driving. Just because a car "shouldnt" be coming up their inside doesnt mean that I can pull in without looking. I really dont understand why a car changing lanes into the path/side of another car makes puts the other car at fault; the accident happened becuase the person changing lanes didnt check that the lane was clear to move into, end of story.

Merch

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's dangerous because it is illegal and therefore unexpected. Anyone doing illegal and unexpected things on the road is more dangerous than someone doing legal and normal things.

However, the big problem with American style undertaking is the you end up with all lanes travelling at the same speed (the speed of the slowest drivers), with people trying to make progress having to weave between them.

This would be Bad, so passing on the left should remain illegal, and only be used in exceptional circumstances like that muppet driving a Japanese crapbox in the right hand lane from Dublin to Galway at 100 kph last Monday.

If thats the only reason, then i dont find that a good enough reason, there has to be more than that. If its unexpected because its illegal then it should be made legal, at least on motorways, I think the rules are generally simple and straightforward, simply allowing undertaking on motorways allowable then means people should expect it. (Drivers should expect unexpected things then people would be prepared, thats coming across road conditions/circumstances and hazards and dealing with them appropriately).
I suggest it should be that primarily people should be expected to overtake (ie make an attempt to do that) where thats not possible undertaking should be allowed at a similar speed (ie not zooming past at a significantly greater speed).

Regarding the example above, I dont feel that people driving in the righthand lane is exceptional, people seem to do it as a rule, so its poor driver education thats the problem.

As far as im aware, only certain states in the US allow undertaking, ie where there are large multilane highways, the reason being it is not safe to have people weaving back and forward repeatedly to pass people moving slower in multiple lanes, it certainly must have an energy saving (reduction in mileage over the course of say a year with so many cars, tyre wear etc) but it has to be safer in that environment. Mostly I dont think those reasons apply here simply as we dont have the size and coverage of motorways.

I still think it is as safe for me to pass on the inside if Im coming from afar and if a car hasnt moved into lane 1 or 2 then they are oblivous to me (ie to whats going on around them) so shouldnt be on a motorway anyway.

I think undertaking on a motorway should not be illegal, people do far worse things, but if drivers dont expect the unexpected and as such aren't prepared for it or what to do, not expecting either dangerous conditions or drivers and illegal or just plain stupid stuff then they should not be on the roads because that stuff is happening all the time, in that context undertaking isn't serious.
I think it should be undertaking is allowed on motorways (possibly not dual carriageways as there may be slow moving traffic coming onto the road) but only if its clear that a driver blocking a lane will not move, not to zoom past at 150kph.

Guy:Incognito

mathepac wrote: »

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I see ... you dont actually answer any posts, you just spout rubbish while quoting them.

None of what you said is an answer to what I posted.

I'll even teach you how. Try making actual point, showing how your right and what the actual way to do something is. You know, like th eway others are.

I'm under no obligation to answer your questions or any one else's.

I've made the same point repeatedly - "undertaking is illegal and dangerous". If you understand that my work here is done, if you don't then I'm very much afraid you never will.

Thought as much. Loads of words but never actually saying anything. That sums up any of your posts I've read

Guy:Incognito

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

It's dangerous because it is illegal and therefore unexpected. Anyone doing illegal and unexpected things on the road is more dangerous than someone doing legal and normal things.

But the person being undertaken isn't doing legal and normal things. They are in the wrong lane , under the speed limit not overtaking anyone. When you merge on to the m50, 9 times out of 10 you'll find yourself with a car beside you in the middle lane. Exactly the same as if you had driven up beside them. Surely hey are expecting that?

Zubeneschamali

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

But the person being undertaken isn't doing legal and normal things.

Everyone agrees that right-lane hogging is wrong. That is not the question. Is passing them illegal? Yes. Do people get done for it? Yes (not often, but I don't often get done for speeding, either).

I don't think should be illegal because it's dangerous today, I think it should be illegal because a free-for-all in all lanes would be slower, and making progress would be then be more dangerous.

The US situation is different because they have exits leaving the freeway on both sides, they have car pool lanes, and they have six lanes in each direction. Any one of these makes keep right, pass left a mess, and they have all three.

They also have drivers who will all uniformly break the limit in free moving traffic: you'll have three lanes all doing 65-70 mph from Los Angeles to San Diego, for example. Here, we'd have 3 lanes doing 70 kph, held up by grannies in Tiidas, nuns in Micras and hippies in Leafs.

irelandrover

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think should be illegal because it's dangerous today, I think it should be illegal because a free-for-all in all lanes would be slower, and making progress would be then be more dangerous.

How is it slower? As it is now if the person is in the right hand lane travelling at 80 then everyone has to travel that speed.
If undertaking was allowed then you could pick whatever lane was faster.

Zubeneschamali

irelandrover wrote: »

How is it slower? As it is now if the person is in the right hand lane travelling at 80 then everyone has to travel that speed. If undertaking was allowed then you could pick whatever lane was faster.

If people can pass either side, slow drivers will drive in all 3 lanes. Soon all 3 lanes will be travelling at the same speed. You'll see this happen in the States.

They do this a bit now, but most complaints here are about the M50, which isn't a real motorway, it's a congested urban ring road.

On the open motorway, Dublin to Cork, say, right lane hoggers get a steady stream of people braking inches behind them, flashing, weaving, and then ripping by on their left while giving them the finger. It generally intimidates them to pull in within a few miles.

Walnutsink

If you are in the outside lane and there is someone behind you, you shouldn't be there, simple!

Anan1

Walnutsink wrote: »

If you are in the outside lane and there is someone behind you, you shouldn't be there, simple!

Not quite - you might be overtaking something yourself.

Connavar

Anan1 wrote: »

Walnutsink wrote: »

If you are in the outside lane and there is someone behind you, you shouldn't be there, simple!

Not quite - you might be overtaking something yourself.

Or allowing traffic to merge

dr.fuzzenstein

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If people can pass either side, slow drivers will drive in all 3 lanes. Soon all 3 lanes will be travelling at the same speed. You'll see this happen in the States.

They do this a bit now, but most complaints here are about the M50, which isn't a real motorway, it's a congested urban ring road.

On the open motorway, Dublin to Cork, say, right lane hoggers get a steady stream of people braking inches behind them, flashing, weaving, and then ripping by on their left while giving them the finger. It generally intimidates them to pull in within a few miles.

Hahaha, the system works!:D

mathepac

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Thought as much. Loads of words but never actually saying anything. That sums up any of your posts I've read

So put me on your 'ignore list', don't read my posts or don't respond to them - it'll give you more time in your day to make useless, negative, trolling and aggressive contributions elsewhere.

You appear to be strangely fascinated by my contributions - have you had that checked?