Tailgating and Undertaking on Motorways

Andrew Beef

GreeBo wrote: »

In this country we drive on the left and overtake on the right.
Hence slower traffic will be on the left of faster traffic, albeit only while overtaking.
The point is that just because you were overtaking doesn't mean you have the right to stay in the third lane obstructing others.

Failing to follow this means you get people driving in lane 2&3 because there will always be more cars to overtake.

You are missing the point.

The scenario is as follows:

I am in the outside lane travelling at (say) 120kph and overtaking cars in the inside lane which are travelling at (say) 100kph.

The idiot who arrives at my tail travelling at 140kph and flashing his lights is just that, an idiot.

When I’ve finished what’s a perfectly legitimate manoeuvre, I will move back into the inside lane.

It is not reasonable or good driving to expect me to somehow jam on my brakes and slow down to abandon my manoeuvre and re-enter the traffic to facilitate the idiot.

Sean Kinvarra

degsie wrote: »

Autonomous vehicles will solve this.

Thread closed.

degsie wrote: »

Autonomous vehicles will solve this.

Thread closed.

degsie wrote: »

Autonomous vehicles will solve this.

Thread closed.

And I bet you won't get autonomous cars that will slow down to avoid passing an idiot hogging any of the outside lanes! ðŸ˜

Sean Kinvarra

pablo128 wrote: »

trellheim wrote: »

Much of the debate here has been that the rules - i.e. the Road Traffic Act(s) are not clear. Many here argue that they are.


take the Naas DC

If we consider slow,middle,fast lanes ( and thats what I call them) someone who rapidly lane changes to get ahead fast,middle,slow and back to fast just to get a few places ahead will usually cause many drivers to get uneasy at best, and react badly at worst.

Take the above post , someone who nails it in the slow lane to 100 all the way to NAAS they will likely drive past a few cars in the middle lane with a rate of coming beside them quite slowly . Are they the same thing ?

Here's a crazy idea. When you wish to change lane on a motorway, check all of your mirrors before beginning your manoeuvre. Make sure you are not pulling in on top of someone travelling faster than you are.

I know its difficult for some to comprehend this, but bizarrely its actually the law to do this. And the onus is on the lane changer to look out.

Correct.. Its IS the law whether you are moving to left or right lane. If a collision occurs the onus is on you.

GreeBo

Andrew Beef wrote: »

You are missing the point.

The scenario is as follows:

I am in the outside lane travelling at (say) 120kph and overtaking cars in the inside lane which are travelling at (say) 100kph.

The idiot who arrives at my tail travelling at 140kph and flashing his lights is just that, an idiot.

When I’ve finished what’s a perfectly legitimate manoeuvre, I will move back into the inside lane.

It is not reasonable or good driving to expect me to somehow jam on my brakes and slow down to abandon my manoeuvre and re-enter the traffic to facilitate the idiot.

Unless it's a solid group of traffic you should still pull in between them.
Unless you also think that correctly overtaking cars is dangerous?

First Up wrote: »

Because the guy dawdling in Lane 2 has very likely caused a build up of traffic behind him, making it difficult (and dangerous) for someone in Lane 1 to move into that Lane.

Because Lane 3 will already be more congested than it needs to be (because Lane 2 is blocked up) with little room for anyone to join.

Because traffic in Lane 3 will be moving appreciably faster than Lane 2, requiring someone trying to join it to accelerate quickly to try to find a gap.

Because moving back into Lane 2 (having passed the dawdler) and then back into Lane 1 brings you into potential contact with cars that may be changing lanes for whatever reason.

Most motorway accidents occur when cars change lanes.

Huh? How is there a line of traffic in lane 2 if you are in lane 1? Either you have been passing on the left already or the traffic in lane 2 is faster than you.

Accidents happen when people drive incorrectly, changing lanes isn't dangerous.

trellheim wrote: »

slow,middle,fast lanes ( and thats what I call them)

And I stopped reading.

First Up

GreeBo wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Because the guy dawdling in Lane 2 has very likely caused a build up of traffic behind him, making it difficult (and dangerous) for someone in Lane 1 to move into that Lane.

Because Lane 3 will already be more congested than it needs to be (because Lane 2 is blocked up) with little room for anyone to join.

Because traffic in Lane 3 will be moving appreciably faster than Lane 2, requiring someone trying to join it to accelerate quickly to try to find a gap.

Because moving back into Lane 2 (having passed the dawdler) and then back into Lane 1 brings you into potential contact with cars that may be changing lanes for whatever reason.

Most motorway accidents occur when cars change lanes.

Huh? How is there a line of traffic in lane 2 if you are in lane 1? Either you have been passing on the left already or the traffic in lane 2 is faster than you.

Yep, maybe I have. So what? If I encounter a dawdler blocking Lane 2 and a queue of 5/10/20 cars behind him, do I slow behind the last of them and block Lane 1 or join the queue in Lane 2 waiting for room in Lane 3?

Either way it is a more dangerous option than maintaining my pace in Lane 1.

Cookie_Monster

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

Turning right (in the US)

of course, thank you!

Sean Kinvarra wrote: »

I've been driving in the States and have never seen a turn left on red sign. Its all in your imagination.

you know exactly what I meant, no need to be a dick about it.

Sean Kinvarra wrote: »

I have also posted a link about overtaking on left being legal on numerous occasions.

Where? Do you mean this:?
https://www.bikerandbike.co.uk/undertaking-is-not-illegal/
nothing more than opinion and UK related anyhow

Sean Kinvarra wrote: »

Maybe you can send me to prove it illegal. But before you go looking for it I'd advise you to read the Introduction and Wording to the UK Highway Code. No point in reading rules if you don't understand them.

why would I read the UK highway code?, it has zero bearing on Irish law

GreeBo

First Up wrote: »

Yep, maybe I have. So what? If I encounter a dawdler blocking Lane 2 and a queue of 5/10/20 cars behind him, do I slow behind the last of them and block Lane 1 or join the queue in Lane 2 waiting for room in Lane 3?

Either way it is a more dangerous option than maintaining my pace in Lane 1.

So your argument for passing on the left is predicated by getting yourself into a bad road position by previously passing on the left?

Has it occurred to you that you wouldn't end up in this position if you just overtook correctly?

Your made up scenarios just don't happen if you drive correctly, there won't be a queue of slower cars blocking you in lane 2 as you will be in lane 3.
If you are merging then either merge ahead or wait and pass correctly.

Overtaking isn't dangerous, if it was it would be illegal.
Passing people in unexpected, illegal ways is however very dangerous.

Stop making up excuses for being a lazy driver and just overtake correctly.

Corkblowin

What about situation I had today?

3 lanes - I'm in the left lane just under the 100km/hr limit (got 3 points last week so conscious of my speed) and will be taking the next exit in about 3 km. Traffic is pretty busy but I've a clear road ahead as seems usual when I drive in this lane.

I come up on a line of cars in the centre lane - all being held up by our braindead dawdler - going about 70km/h - and they are having trouble getting by with the number and speed of the cars in the outside lane.

Do I
(a) join the queue trying to pass the lane hogger, get into outside lane, and cross back 2 more to take my exit?
(b) Slow down to match the speed of the last car in the middle lane queue?
(c) Maintain my speed, pass all the cars in the middle lane, and take my exit.

I chose (c).

wizardman

Corkblowin wrote: »

What about situation I had today?

3 lanes - I'm in the left lane just under the 100km/hr limit (got 3 points last week so conscious of my speed) and will be taking the next exit in about 3 km. Traffic is pretty busy but I've a clear road ahead as seems usual when I drive in this lane.

I come up on a line of cars in the centre lane - all being held up by our braindead dawdler - going about 70km/h - and they are having trouble getting by with the number and speed of the cars in the outside lane.

Do I
(a) join the queue trying to pass the lane hogger, get into outside lane, and cross back 2 more to take my exit?
(b) Slow down to match the speed of the last car in the middle lane queue?
(c) Maintain my speed, pass all the cars in the middle lane, and take my exit.

I chose (c).

C is also what id do

GreeBo

I choose to park on double yellows, break red lights, drive at 150 and drive while sloshed.
Why? Because I'm a lazy bugger and do what suits me, to hell with anyone else.

Corkblowin

GreeBo wrote: »

I choose to park on double yellows, break red lights, drive at 150 and drive while sloshed.
Why? Because I'm a lazy bugger and do what suits me, to hell with anyone else.

Thats not an argument - just a rant. What would you do?

I don't see how the guys in the middle or outside lane would have been better off by my manoeuvring in and out when I was getting off again in a few km. I may only have lost a minute by slowing down to 70 - but really????

GreeBo

Corkblowin wrote: »

Thats not an argument - just a rant. What would you do?

I don't see how the guys in the middle or outside lane would have been better off by my manoeuvring in and out when I was getting off again in a few km. I may only have lost a minute by slowing down to 70 - but really????

Arguing about 4 lane changes is equally a rant.

What about the guy in lane 2 who also decides passing on the left is ok and pulls over on top of you?

For the sake of a minute you will break the law and endanger yourself and others - but really? 60 seconds?

liamog

Driving down the N7 towards Dublin today.
We may as well just completely close lane 1.

If a driver was to follow the rule of no overtaking on the left they'd be constantly in and out of lane 2 and 3 to maintain the 100km/h speed limit. Meanwhile lane 1 is empty for incredibly long stretches.

When a car moves from lane 3 back to lane 2, the following car in lane 2 often slows down temporarily to maintain a safe distance.
Anybody driving in lane 1 at a constant speed would have to slow down to avoid passing the now slowing car in lane 2.
So now the person driving in lane 1 has to spend time monitoring the speed of traffic in lanes 2 and 3 to anticipate the potential risk of them maintaining their current speed in a clear lane.

I'd suggest the safest way for all to drive would be to follow the rule passing on the left is allowed, moving to the left lane to pass on the left is not.
It's the difference between passing on the left, and undertaking.

Corkblowin

GreeBo wrote: »

Arguing about 4 lane changes is equally a rant.

What about the guy in lane 2 who also decides passing on the left is ok and pulls over on top of you?

For the sake of a minute you will break the law and endanger yourself and others - but really? 60 seconds?

I wasn't ranting.....just commenting that the level of traffic and speed meant I probably wouldn't have been able to get out and back in time to make my exit.....and yeah I could have slowed down.....but anyway.

Happy New Year to all and safe motoring in 2018.

Sean Kinvarra

wizardman wrote: »

Corkblowin wrote: »

What about situation I had today?

3 lanes - I'm in the left lane just under the 100km/hr limit (got 3 points last week so conscious of my speed) and will be taking the next exit in about 3 km. Traffic is pretty busy but I've a clear road ahead as seems usual when I drive in this lane.

I come up on a line of cars in the centre lane - all being held up by our braindead dawdler - going about 70km/h - and they are having trouble getting by with the number and speed of the cars in the outside lane.

Do I
(a) join the queue trying to pass the lane hogger, get into outside lane, and cross back 2 more to take my exit?
(b) Slow down to match the speed of the last car in the middle lane queue?
(c) Maintain my speed, pass all the cars in the middle lane, and take my exit.

I chose (c).

C is also what id do

C is what I and those who know the law on passing on left. Its also the same in UK.

*https://www.bikerandbike.co.uk/undertaking-is-not-illegal/*

GreeBo

liamog wrote: »

Driving down the N7 towards Dublin today.
We may as well just completely close lane 1.

If a driver was to follow the rule of no overtaking on the left they'd be constantly in and out of lane 2 and 3 to maintain the 100km/h speed limit. Meanwhile lane 1 is empty for incredibly long stretches.

When a car moves from lane 3 back to lane 2, the following car in lane 2 often slows down temporarily to maintain a safe distance.
Anybody driving in lane 1 at a constant speed would have to slow down to avoid passing the now slowing car in lane 2.
So now the person driving in lane 1 has to spend time monitoring the speed of traffic in lanes 2 and 3 to anticipate the potential risk of them maintaining their current speed in a clear lane.

I'd suggest the safest way for all to drive would be to follow the rule passing on the left is allowed, moving to the left lane to pass on the left is not.
It's the difference between passing on the left, and undertaking.

There is no difference, other than the one made up by lazy drivers.

I honestly cannot comprehend how you don't see that ignoring the ROTR is what's causing this problem and ignoring it more isn't gong to help.

You are asking for rolling 3 lane road blocks with your approach and worse, it will be legal so nothing can be done to stop it.

Just obey and have police enforce the current rules and the road works for everyone, it really is that simple.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

liamog

GreeBo wrote: »

There is no difference, other than the one made up by lazy drivers.

I honestly cannot comprehend how you don't see that ignoring the ROTR is what's causing this problem and ignoring it more isn't gong to help.

You are asking for rolling 3 lane road blocks with your approach and worse, it will be legal so nothing can be done to stop it.

Just obey and have police enforce the current rules and the road works for everyone, it really is that simple.

No that's asking for driving lanes to be used to capacity and is the opposite of a rolling road block.

The literal interpretation of the law forces all drivers to never exceed the speed of the car in the outermost lane at any point in time. Which by extension means on a busy road, you need to be monitoring closely the speed of the traffic at a 70 degree angle from your direction of travel.

I'd rather drivers were paying more attention to their driving lane and traffic on their left hand side.

Safety wise there is a huge difference between two cars travelling alongside side at approx. the same speed with some minor back and forth between the two compared to a car randomly appearing within your blind spot.

degsie

What scares me the most is that I share the road with some posters here!

Sean Kinvarra

wizardman wrote: »

Corkblowin wrote: »

What about situation I had today?

3 lanes - I'm in the left lane just under the 100km/hr limit (got 3 points last week so conscious of my speed) and will be taking the next exit in about 3 km. Traffic is pretty busy but I've a clear road ahead as seems usual when I drive in this lane.

I come up on a line of cars in the centre lane - all being held up by our braindead dawdler - going about 70km/h - and they are having trouble getting by with the number and speed of the cars in the outside lane.

Do I
(a) join the queue trying to pass the lane hogger, get into outside lane, and cross back 2 more to take my exit?
(b) Slow down to match the speed of the last car in the middle lane queue?
(c) Maintain my speed, pass all the cars in the middle lane, and take my exit.

I chose (c).

C is also what id do

C is legal and almost identical to law on overtaking on left
SI No 182/2997. RTA. (Traffic and Parking)

(5) A driver may only overtake on the left

( b ) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to turn left at the next road junction and has signalled this intention.

Can the expert who thinks its illegal tell me how would taking the next left make a manoeuvre that has been previously executed dangerous,

pablo128

GreeBo wrote: »

Arguing about 4 lane changes is equally a rant.

What about the guy in lane 2 who also decides passing on the left is ok and pulls over on top of you?

For the sake of a minute you will break the law and endanger yourself and others - but really? 60 seconds?

It has already been explained to you that the onus is on the person changing lanes to look out.

"Well judge I didn't expect the other car to be there" won't be enough in court I'm afraid.

Irish Steve

SI 332 of 2012 updates some of the earlier SI's and RTA's that are being quoted.

(ii) by substituting for sub-article (5) the following:


“(5)(a) A driver (other than a pedal cyclist) may only overtake on the left—


(i) where the driver of the vehicle about to be overtaken has signalled an intention to turn to the right and the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to go straight ahead or turn to the left,


(ii) where the driver of the overtaking vehicle intends, after overtaking, to turn to the left at the next road junction and has signalled this intention, or


(iii) in slow-moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver’s right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle,

Andrew Beef

GreeBo wrote: »

Unless it's a solid group of traffic you should still pull in between them.
Unless you also think that correctly overtaking cars is dangerous?



Huh? How is there a line of traffic in lane 2 if you are in lane 1? Either you have been passing on the left already or the traffic in lane 2 is faster than you.

Accidents happen when people drive incorrectly, changing lanes isn't dangerous.


And I stopped reading.

So whilst I’m overtaking cars in the inside lane and travelling at 20kph more than they are, and someone comes up behind me, I should abandon my manoeuvre and force my way back into the slower traffic?

That’s the type of madness and bad driving that causes accidents; also interesting that the villains tend to be driving bangers.

First Up

GreeBo wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

Yep, maybe I have. So what? If I encounter a dawdler blocking Lane 2 and a queue of 5/10/20 cars behind him, do I slow behind the last of them and block Lane 1 or join the queue in Lane 2 waiting for room in Lane 3?

Either way it is a more dangerous option than maintaining my pace in Lane 1.

So your argument for passing on the left is predicated by getting yourself into a bad road position by previously passing on the left?

No, I am in both the correct and best road position because Lane 1 is open for me to maintain my desired (legal) speed. If I need to use Lane 3, then I'll join it correctly. (You see I know how to drive AND how to use motorways.)

It seems that in your world, the pace of both Lanes 1 and 2 is dictated by that of the slowest driver in Lane 2 and everyone else should accept that and take their chances jumping into Lane 3.

I choose the safer, sensible option.

GreeBo

liamog wrote: »

No that's asking for driving lanes to be used to capacity and is the opposite of a rolling road block.

The literal interpretation of the law forces all drivers to never exceed the speed of the car in the outermost lane at any point in time. Which by extension means on a busy road, you need to be monitoring closely the speed of the traffic at a 70 degree angle from your direction of travel.

I'd rather drivers were paying more attention to their driving lane and traffic on their left hand side.

Safety wise there is a huge difference between two cars travelling alongside side at approx. the same speed with some minor back and forth between the two compared to a car randomly appearing within your blind spot.

It's by definition a rolling road block, why are you assuming that all three lanes wrong have cars driving at 60kph?
Where have all these slow drivers you use to excuse your illegal overtakes suddenly gone?

If everyone drivers correctly you don't need to watch 3 lanes, it's selfish people like yourself causing the issue.

GreeBo

First Up wrote: »

No, I am in both the correct and best road position because Lane 1 is open for me to maintain my desired (legal) speed. If I need to use Lane 3, then I'll join it correctly. (You see I know how to drive AND how to use motorways.)

It seems that in your world, the pace of both Lanes 1 and 2 is dictated by that of the slowest driver in Lane 2 and everyone else should accept that and take their chances jumping into Lane 3.

I choose the safer, sensible option.

My world is the one that follows the statutes as quoted many times.

You choose to drive in a way that suits yourself and ignores the laws. Don't try to dress it up any other way. It's selfish driving and no different than the moron hogging the middle lane.

First Up

GreeBo wrote: »

First Up wrote: »

No, I am in both the correct and best road position because Lane 1 is open for me to maintain my desired (legal) speed. If I need to use Lane 3, then I'll join it correctly. (You see I know how to drive AND how to use motorways.)

It seems that in your world, the pace of both Lanes 1 and 2 is dictated by that of the slowest driver in Lane 2 and everyone else should accept that and take their chances jumping into Lane 3.

I choose the safer, sensible option.

My world is the one that follows the statutes as quoted many times.

You choose to drive in a way that suits yourself and ignores the laws. Don't try to dress it up any other way. It's selfish driving and no different than the moron hogging the middle lane.

A driver's first responsibility is to deal with a situation in the safest and quickest way possible. There are times when this means maintaining a position and pace in Lane 1, instead of complicating matters for cars in two other lanes. Its a judgement call and I'm prepared to use mine.

I would dearly love the RSA and Gardai to properly address lane hogging. In the meantime, I'll deal with it in the safest way I see in each case.

GarIT

When I get onto a motorway I get up to the speed limit in the left lane and turn on cruise control. If someone is going slower than me in the overtaking lane when the left lane is clear enough for me to be doing the speed limit that's their problem, not mine. If I don't have anybody to overtake in front of me I don't change lanes.

Has anyone ever used their horn on a motorway, I did for the first time last week when I got stuck behind a classic Mercedes, black plates with silver lettering not sure of the year, doing 60km/h in the middle lane and couldn't overtake on either side as those lanes were moving too fast to change into.

Andrew Beef

Overtaking or undertaking implies a manoeuvre; say I’m driving along an empty three lane motorway and I’m in the 1st/left/inside lane. I’m travelling at 100kph. A come across a single car in the 3rd/right/outside lane and it’s travelling at 80kph. Per the rules, what should I do? I know what I would do, and that’s keep going as I am; I just wonder whether that constitutes “overtaking” or “undertaking” as no manoeuvre or lane change has taken place?

iwillhtfu

Andrew Beef wrote: »

Overtaking or undertaking implies a manoeuvre; say I’m driving along an empty three lane motorway and I’m in the 1st/left/inside lane. I’m travelling at 100kph. A come across a single car in the 3rd/right/outside lane and it’s travelling at 80kph. Per the rules, what should I do? I know what I would do, and that’s keep going as I am; I just wonder whether that constitutes “overtaking” or “undertaking” as no manoeuvre or lane change has taken place?

That's not undertaking some one. I would have thought that coming up behind said car doing 80 in the same lane the moving to the middle lane and back to the outside lane once passed is undertaking.

If you were to come upon the car and move to the inside lane and not return to the outside lane once passed I would call normal driving. The car in the outside lane being in the wrong lane and not returning to the inside lane.

Obviously there are conditions to the above. Distance to next car etc.

GarIT

iwillhtfu wrote: »

That's not undertaking some one. I would have thought that coming up behind said car doing 80 in the same lane the moving to the middle lane and back to the outside lane once passed is undertaking.

This has already been discussed in this thread but it's probably lost somewhere in the middle now. Under and overtaking refers to who is going faster not going around to the left or right.

To undertake someone you need to be going slower than the car behind you behind, move out of their way to let them pass and then move back in behind them.

If you were behind someone and then got in front of them you have overtaken them no matter which side you went around them on.

Car99

GarIT wrote: »

This has already been discussed in this thread but it's probably lost somewhere in the middle now. Under and overtaking refers to who is going faster not going around to the left or right.

To undertake someone you need to be going slower than the car behind you behind, move out of their way to let them pass and then move back in behind them.

If you were behind someone and then got in front of them you have overtaken them no matter which side you went around them on.

Never heard that explanation before as i undetstand it undertaking refers to the practice of overtaking a slower vehicle on a road using the lane that is kerb side of the vehicle being passed.

Dakota Dan

GarIT wrote: »

Has anyone ever used their horn on a motorway, I did for the first time last week when I got stuck behind a classic Mercedes, black plates with silver lettering not sure of the year, doing 60km/h in the middle lane and couldn't overtake on either side as those lanes were moving too fast to change into.

If you couldn't move lane where were you expecting the driver in front to go?

GarIT

Dakota Dan wrote: »

If you couldn't move lane where were you expecting the driver in front to go?

I expected him to speed up and/or react appropriately to causing a hazard. If the car was only capable of 60km/h he shouldn't have been on the motorway, never mind the middle lane. If the car was capable of more he should speed up. If something went wrong and the car was no longer capable of motorway speeds he is a hazard and should have his hazard lights on.

GarIT

Car99 wrote: »

Never heard that explanation before as i undetstand it undertaking refers to the practice of overtaking a slower vehicle on a road using the lane that is kerb side of the vehicle being passed.

In reality overtaking is a real word that means to pass someone in any direction. Undertaking is a made up word with no defined meaning. If you want to assume undertaking has the opposite meaning to overtaking it should be the opposite of overtaking and not mean overtaking but only when you are overtaking on the inside. Overtaking on the inside is by definition overtaking.

Dakota Dan

GarIT wrote: »

I expected him to speed up and/or react appropriately to causing a hazard. If the car was only capable of 60km/h he shouldn't have been on the motorway, never mind the middle lane. If the car was capable of more he should speed up. If something went wrong and the car was no longer capable of motorway speeds he is a hazard and should have his hazard lights on.

To drive on a motorway your vechicle must be capable of doing 50 kph but it doesn't mean it's a minimum speed limit.

Dakota Dan

GarIT wrote: »

In reality overtaking is a real word that means to pass someone in any direction. Undertaking is a made up word with no defined meaning. If you want to assume undertaking has the opposite meaning to overtaking it should be the opposite of overtaking and not mean overtaking but only when you are overtaking on the inside. Overtaking on the inside is by definition overtaking.

Overtaking is passing a vechicle on the outside undertaking is passing a vechicle on the inside.

Seanmk1

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Overtaking is passing a vechicle on the outside undertaking is passing a vechicle on the inside.

From the Oxford English Dictionary:

undertaking2
noun
mass nounBritish

The action of catching up with and passing another vehicle while travelling on the inside.
‘the Highway Code discourages undertaking on motorways’

TheChizler

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Overtaking is passing a vechicle on the outside undertaking is passing a vechicle on the inside.

The word is made up so it can mean whatever you want it to mean. Logically I agree with GarIT, but most people do use the above definition. I just say overtake on the left.

K.Flyer

GreeBo wrote: »

There is no difference, other than the one made up by lazy drivers.

I honestly cannot comprehend how you don't see that ignoring the ROTR is what's causing this problem and ignoring it more isn't gong to help.

You are asking for rolling 3 lane road blocks with your approach and worse, it will be legal so nothing can be done to stop it.

Just obey and have police enforce the current rules and the road works for everyone, it really is that simple.

So what would you suggest someone should do in the scenario I quite often come across late at night driving on the M50.
I'm holding a steady (legal) speed in Lane 1 and I catch up with a tool sitting in Lane 3 moving slower than me. There is no other traffic and god knows how long they've been there.
To be honest, I am not going to get myself wound up over these type of drivers anymore.
I am not going to move two lanes over, only to sit behind them until he or she gets the message, because obviously they have no clue anyway, and then to move back to lane 1 if they get out of the way.
I will stay put and keep going in Lane 1, passing him with caution, but staying where I am and leaving him or her behind me and their ineptitude towards motorway driving.

Sean Kinvarra

K.Flyer wrote: »

GreeBo wrote: »

There is no difference, other than the one made up by lazy drivers.

I honestly cannot comprehend how you don't see that ignoring the ROTR is what's causing this problem and ignoring it more isn't gong to help.

You are asking for rolling 3 lane road blocks with your approach and worse, it will be legal so nothing can be done to stop it.

Just obey and have police enforce the current rules and the road works for everyone, it really is that simple.

So what would you suggest someone should do in the scenario I quite often come across late at night driving on the M50.
I'm holding a steady (legal) speed in Lane 1 and I catch up with a tool sitting in Lane 3 moving slower than me. There is no other traffic and god knows how long they've been there.
To be honest, I am not going to get myself wound up over these type of drivers anymore.
I am not going to move two lanes over, only to sit behind them until he or she gets the message, because obviously they have no clue anyway, and then to move back to lane 1 if they get out of the way.
I will stay put and keep going in Lane 1, passing him with caution, but staying where I am and leaving him or her behind me and their ineptitude towards motorway driving.

If we has a carriageway with 50 lanes and a hogger in lane 50 doing 60kmh you would still have Mr Expert telling us its dangerous and illegal (Must Not) to go pass the hogger from lane one!

Andrew Beef

If a Garda saw that happening (i.e. car in 1st lane just carrying on and passing a car in the 3rd lane), I am convinced that the Garda would stop the car in the 3rd lane.

Car99

Andrew Beef wrote: »

If a Garda saw that happening (i.e. car in 1st lane just carrying on and passing a car in the 3rd lane), I am convinced that the Garda would stop the car in the 3rd lane.

I'm convinced Garda wouldnt give two fcuks about either and go on about his business

Dravokivich

Corkblowin wrote: »

What about situation I had today?

3 lanes - I'm in the left lane just under the 100km/hr limit (got 3 points last week so conscious of my speed) and will be taking the next exit in about 3 km. Traffic is pretty busy but I've a clear road ahead as seems usual when I drive in this lane.

I come up on a line of cars in the centre lane - all being held up by our braindead dawdler - going about 70km/h - and they are having trouble getting by with the number and speed of the cars in the outside lane.

Do I
(a) join the queue trying to pass the lane hogger, get into outside lane, and cross back 2 more to take my exit?
(b) Slow down to match the speed of the last car in the middle lane queue?
(c) Maintain my speed, pass all the cars in the middle lane, and take my exit.

I chose (c).

You are meant to do b.

frozenfrozen

if you intend on taking the next exit then signal and carry on

liamog

GreeBo wrote: »

It's by definition a rolling road block, why are you assuming that all three lanes wrong have cars driving at 60kph?
Where have all these slow drivers you use to excuse your illegal overtakes suddenly gone?

If everyone drivers correctly you don't need to watch 3 lanes, it's selfish people like yourself causing the issue.

You're the one condemning all the lanes of traffic to the slowest driver in the outermost lane and creating a rolling roadblock caused by the outermost lane driver if everyone follows the no passing on the left rule ever.

In a real world scenario where people are driving in lanes 1 and 2 at approx. the same speed there will be some back and forth due to merging and normal lane changes. This is perfectly safe driving and is not likely to cause accidents.

I don't disagree with you that people should be in the left lane where it is free. But we're not talking about a hypothetical situation where the single rule of the road that is broken is passing on the left. We're discussing real world experience where bad drivers stay in lane 2.

liamog

Andrew Beef wrote: »

If a Garda saw that happening (i.e. car in 1st lane just carrying on and passing a car in the 3rd lane), I am convinced that the Garda would stop the car in the 3rd lane.

I've seen the car 3rd lane pulled over, I've never heard of someone being pulled for travelling in lane 1 and passing a car in lane 3.

Andrew Beef

liamog wrote: »

I've seen the car 3rd lane pulled over, I've never heard of someone being pulled for travelling in lane 1 and passing a car in lane 3.

That’s my point...I can’t envisage a scenario where Lane 1 Driver gets done.

Sean Kinvarra

TheChizler wrote: »

Dakota Dan wrote: »

Overtaking is passing a vechicle on the outside undertaking is passing a vechicle on the inside.

The word is made up so it can mean whatever you want it to mean. Logically I agree with GarIT, but most people do use the above definition. I just say overtake on the left.

Overtaking on the left, undertaking, passing on left, passing on nearside, they all mean the same.

Seth Brundle

Dravokivich wrote: »

Corkblowin wrote: »

What about situation I had today?

3 lanes - I'm in the left lane just under the 100km/hr limit (got 3 points last week so conscious of my speed) and will be taking the next exit in about 3 km. Traffic is pretty busy but I've a clear road ahead as seems usual when I drive in this lane.

I come up on a line of cars in the centre lane - all being held up by our braindead dawdler - going about 70km/h - and they are having trouble getting by with the number and speed of the cars in the outside lane.

Do I
(a) join the queue trying to pass the lane hogger, get into outside lane, and cross back 2 more to take my exit?
(b) Slow down to match the speed of the last car in the middle lane queue?
(c) Maintain my speed, pass all the cars in the middle lane, and take my exit.

I chose (c).

You are meant to do b.

Where are you getting this from?