siggy Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 Sorry I just sick of the ****heads muppets charging up or down the slip roads and pulling on to the main carriageway with no space expecting you to swerve or slow when they have no intention of slowing or stopping themselves and then you get the ones that once you stopped swing in earlier and filter in from over the solid painted off area Oh and then you get the ones that all though you'd be polite enough to move over to the right hand lane come off the slip way and straight into the right hand lane even though the highway code states this 233: When you join the motorway you will normally approach it from a road on the left (a slip road) or from an adjoining motorway. You should * give priority to traffic already on the motorway (yes give way) * check the traffic on the motorway and adjust your speed to fit safely into the traffic flow in the left-hand lane * not cross solid white lines that separate lanes * stay on the slip road if it continues as an extra lane on the motorway * remain in the left-hand lane long enough to adjust to the speed of traffic before considering overtaking. What chance, of avoiding prosecution, would I have if I smash into one of them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbarton Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 * check the traffic on the motorway and adjust your speed to fit safely into the traffic flow in the left-hand lane This implies that traffic on the main carriageway has left enough room (gap) for a car joining to get in. I was always told to treat a car on the slip road as actually being in the left lane, so if it is ahead of you hang back to let it in, if it is behind it should nip behind you. Wherever possible I get into the centre lane when approaching a slip road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siggy Posted November 16, 2005 Author Share Posted November 16, 2005 But if you can't move over "dual not three lane road" due to traffic and the vehicle on slip road accellerates and has no intention of stopping which comes under give priority to traffic already on the motorway and check the traffic on the motorway and adjust your speed to fit safely into the traffic flow in the left-hand lane and when I learnt to drive I was told if you can not enter safely be prepared to stop I know there a few legal bods and police that frequent this forum and maybe they'd like to comment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest diesel_jim Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ yeah, i agree. if there is nowhere for me (on the inside lane) to move across, then i won't. i'm not going to risk my ass by "pushing" into the middle lane just so some wan*er can pull out of the slip road. Quite often i've had the "evil eye" from a twit trying to come straight across thinking that they have god given right to do so.... wow, like i'll lose any sleep over it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbarton Posted November 16, 2005 Share Posted November 16, 2005 if there is nowhere for me (on the inside lane) to move across, then i won't. Too true, I usually try to move over at the 1st roadsign indicating the slip road so I'm not in the inside lane when approaching the junction. Plan ahead! If I'm in the inside lane I'm perfectly happy to let a car ahead of me pull in front. Trouble is a lot of road layouts were designed years ago when traffic volumes were a lot lower. Traffic on the slip road has to accelerate to the same speed as the main flow, then it has to brake if it can't get in. I think there has to be give and take, the attidude "This is my bit of road, sod off!" isn't helpful. Perhaps its time for a rethink on the rules, "zippering" seems the logical way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siggy Posted November 16, 2005 Author Share Posted November 16, 2005 My reason for posting this is there is a slip road onto a dual which has an extremely short area to view if it safe to proceed right on a bridge over a 80'(ish) drop into a river or preserved railway other side of bridge is off ramp you have to remain in left lane if you are taking the off ramp but people on the on ramp take up the attitude of I'm not stopping you'll have to and try and force you in to right lane no way you can get back over if you go Accidents all the time. So far I've been lucky but I came close to night happened to a friend he was sat in stationery traffic due to accident further up when vroom screech thwack and he's sitting wrong way on dual in the wrong lane mateys excuse "on a sliproad the car coming on main carriage must yield over"? anyhow matey was fined and pointed but its getting more common Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkieB Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 I have to laugh, you should try driving in LA. For a start, most of the cars are bigger, so driving a Land Rover [well I was driving a Bronco II at the time, similar size to a 90] doesn't necessarily guarantee 'respect' from other road lunatics, particularly the kind driving chevy Blazer crewcab pickups/ similar [rarer in LA than in the Midwest of course — with the engines they've got in them, often driven as sports cars, by people who would quite possibly draw a gun in an argument]. The 'on-ramps', frequently single-lane, generally have hard shoulders both sides; being overtaken [from the hard shoulder of course!] when keeping to the ramp speed limit is par for the course. As you accelerate, on reaching the Freeway speed limit sign, to Freeway speed [at no particularly sluggish rate, with a V6 2.7L] 1-2 sports cars overtake, zipping onto the Freeway over the 'chevronned' area, normally thus blocking the Freeway entry lane, forcing you to slow down to wait for a gap. As for the decent manners to allow people onto the Freeway, trying to create a gap, 'fuggeddit! this is LA! move over a**hole!' is the standard attitude B) :D It does bear restating though that of course the highway code gives no-one the 'right of way', in fact it only says that people should give way. The overriding principle is on [page 1 I think], it says you should give way whenever doing so may avoid an accident. So the answer is, on approaching a dangerous junction such as the one you are referring to, slow down beforehand to a speed that is safer. 40Mph is the minimum on a motorway, a few people hooting [people in fact rarely hoot when you're driving a Land Rover in the slow lane ] shouldn't make a difference, it's your safety at stake, your own right foot on the pedals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niall_CSK Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 I agree with most of the comments so far, I do try to make allowances and keep my own frustrations in check as much as possible, but! I do feel that there is a general attitude amongst many, regardless of vehicle or sex of driver, that someone else will take resoponsibility for the situation and get out of my way. I feel that this sort of inconsiderate attitude, if you can call it that, seems to be becoming endemic in UK society in general, somone else will look out for me / it's not my fault / nobody told me I had to think about the consequences of my actions. Am I just becoming even an even grumpier old man or do others feel the same? P.S. I am currently driving on a small island in Indonesia where the vehicles are mostly wrecks, the roads defy description and there appears to be no law enforcement at all, don't get me started on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02GF74 Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 my driving instructor told me that if someone is in your way, you are entitled to drive into them. that is the law. something to think about. anyway as far as I know, the traffic on the main road does not need to yield to any traffic attempting to jointhe main carriageway, the joining traffic should stop if need be until there is a suitable gap then accelerate to speed, much like what you would do when on the hard shoulder. as for what happens if you tail end someone who pushed in? I would expect/hope that since it is close to the junction it should not be too difficult to prove the incoming traffic pulled in front of you giving you option but to smack into them. my advice is to slow down if you can but do not put yourself at risk by trying to change lanes especially if it involves you having an accident with someone else - the car that caused the accient will be far gone and untraceable and you will lose your no claims unfairly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkieB Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 Not that you would necessarily ever get prosecuted for it, although what your driving instructor told you is dangerous general advice, particularly to new drivers; perhaps s/he was trying to make you a bit more assertive. Honestly the law doesn't recognise the notion 'right of way'. I remember page 1 of the highway code being drummed into us while training to drive a bus, of course when driving a bus there's a bit more to it than simply risking a no claims bonus when the driver in front says 'well I shouldn't have butted in, although you shouldn't have waited until the last millisecond before braking, so it's 50/50 knock-for-knock, there goes your no claims bonus either way.' when RT cases reach court [rarely as insurance companies enjoy saving legal fees], it's very rare for the court not to find at least 20% contributory negligence, stock phrases in a claim's particulars of negligence include 'failing to adjust the vehicle's speed to suit road conditions', 'failing to stop, steer, or otherwise control the vehicle so as to prevent an accident' ie not reacting to a potential hazard before it gets critical is negligent in itself. As they say, it takes 2 to tango! defensive driving is what all drivers of category C/D/C+E/D+E vehicles are trained in, sadly many London bus drivers are pressurised into keeping to timetables rather than remembering that principle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niall_CSK Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 when RT cases reach court [rarely as insurance companies enjoy saving legal fees], it's very rare for the court not to find at least 20% contributory negligence, ....As they say, it takes 2 to tango! defensive driving is what all drivers of category C/D/C+E/D+E vehicles are trained in, sadly many London bus drivers are pressurised into keeping to timetables rather than remembering that principle. Agree, I think the answer to Siggy's question would be as you say, the insurance companies would deal with it knock for knock but he & I both would be left with the feeling that we did not cause the situation so why should we be penalised. Hard to bear when you do try to do the right thing. If it went to court I agree with you they will likely find something that you could have done to avoid even if it was "beware of idiots". IAM kept bashing into my head read the road ahead, look for possible problems, it's the single most important thing that has modified the way I drive anywhere in the world and has kept me out of a lot of scrapes. I bang on at the missus for sitting what I consider to be too close to the vehicle in front, her retort is invariably "If I sit back someone shoves in front & I feel as though I am going backwards", I am left without an argument. I think you are right too about commercial pressures too, white vans included, although I do get pi$$ed of when one passes me doing in excess of 90, I stop at the next services, take a leak, have a coffee & fag, fuel up and get on my merry way only to be passed by them 5 minutes later doing over 90 again, explain that one to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siggy Posted November 17, 2005 Author Share Posted November 17, 2005 I think you are right too about commercial pressures too, white vans included, although I do get pi$$ed of when one passes me doing in excess of 90, I stop at the next services, take a leak, have a coffee & fag, fuel up and get on my merry way only to be passed by them 5 minutes later doing over 90 again, explain that one to me. they're breeding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbarton Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 explain that one to me. They're running a whole fleet of identical vans on one registration number Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niall_CSK Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 they're breeding Thought that 's what free condoms were for, to prevent more white van men They're running a whole fleet of identical vans on one registration number Now that wouldn't surprise me. I saw the van parked up in the services, I'll be honest I peaked through the back windows to see what could bee so urgent to risk life & limb, empty, and I am sure it was the same guy driving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffbeaumont Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 I bang on at the missus for sitting what I consider to be too close to the vehicle in front, her retort is invariably "If I sit back someone shoves in front & I feel as though I am going backwards", I am left without an argument. When I did advanced driver training (also with the IAM) I was taught that you sometimes needed to drive closer than you would normally in order to discourage people from pushing in front, the object being to minimise overall risk as when people pull in front they almost invariably massively compromise your braking distance. I've always found it hard to put into practice, though, as people will still push into a gap that's a tenth of the distance you should have left... I've noticed I get a lot more of it (especially off the motorway) in the escort than I do in the Rangie. I actually reckon that's the biggest contributor to the Rangie being the safer car - simply the fact that people don't usually pull out in front of it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbocharger Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 I was taught that you sometimes needed to drive closer than you would normally in order to discourage people from pushing in front, the object being to minimise overall risk as when people pull in front they almost invariably massively compromise your braking distance. It's interesting that the IAM have reached that stage. As Markie said, bus drivers are taught that if someone pulls in, drop back. Yes, you're going backwards in traffic but you're safe (and paid by the hour remember, not the mile). At the end of it all, if I'm driving to work my boss is flexible over 10 mins. If I'm driving in work, my time's paid. If I'm driving out of work, my time's my own and that's when I might think about being more aggressive. None of this applies if someone's trying to wind me up though, even though that shouldn't bug me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffbeaumont Posted November 17, 2005 Share Posted November 17, 2005 It's interesting that the IAM have reached that stage. As Markie said, bus drivers are taught that if someone pulls in, drop back. Yes, you're going backwards in traffic but you're safe (and paid by the hour remember, not the mile). If someone pulls in, you drop back. The argument was that in heavy motorway traffic you might be safer to leave less braking distance than normal if as a result of that the distance you had wasn't compromised by other drivers pulling into it (you drop back, but for a short time you're pretty much helpless if the driver who just pulled in front of you has to stand on his brakes). Like I said, I've never found it works in practice, as most drivers will pull into any gap they can physically fit their vehicle into. I don't think it's ever been official IAM advice, either - it was an observation by either my instructor or examiner (can't remember which). Hmm - looking back at my last post, "I was taught to" is probably overstating the case. This should probably stand as a correction! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niall_CSK Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 drivers will pull into any gap they can physically fit their vehicle into. Where they "think" they can fit. My experience suggests the ones that do this do not have great judgement in the first instance, comes back to someone else will take responsibility for my actions, again. get a lot more of it (especially off the motorway) in the escort than I do in the Rangie Irony is that the Rangie with ABS will probably stop quicker than the Escort, I am not casting aspertions about your engine Geoff, in case that reads difrerently from my intention Feel a rant coming on, Baby on Board signs are a favourite hate of mine, don't hate kids but I think this is a PC way of saying "my baby is more important than my paying attention to the world around me so I could do stupid things stay away from me". Sounds more like displaced guilt, don't blame me, blame the baby. Rant off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbarton Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Baby on Board signs I thought they were to alert emergency services that there is a baby somewhere in the wreckage or surrounding area in the event of an accident. This would of course rely on the driver only displaying the sign appropiately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diff Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I thought they were supposed to be a curteous reminder to the driver behind to not drive too close because if they rear ended the car there was a risk the baby would be harmed(much more easily harmed from whiplash etc than an adult). I thought the thinking was that no one would want to harm a baby, so they would think more about how close they were to the car carrying the baby. Emergency service information sounds plausible too. Bit like carrying hazardous chemicals Never used one myself. Regards, Diff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niall_CSK Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 hazardous chemicals Never used one myself. Regards, Diff Hazardous Waste behind the wheel, never used one either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siggy Posted November 18, 2005 Author Share Posted November 18, 2005 I have two BoB's one on each motor I drive the same whether he's in the car/landy or not I adher to the speed limit, I break at the right distance I try to give the trafic police no reason to pull me (unless of defect light etc which will be fair cop) Those signs in the back make no diference to aggressive drivers there still up your **** and pushing flashing driving like complete ****s..............because thats how they drive I saw another one today as I'm driving little un to nursery matey decided a ten foot gap was good enough between the two cars in front. Of course driving a landy I can see over the roof and know whats coming so I break early (reading the road) still for the driver of the car in front of me, second car, it must have been the wrong time of the month as he decided to accelerate and almost **** the prat.............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffbeaumont Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 Irony is that the Rangie with ABS will probably stop quicker than the Escort, Considerably quicker - especially as the escort has tired shocks and cheap and nasty tires. I reckon in most conditions the Rangie would stop in around half the distance the escort would. I'm reluctant to spend money on it, but I think I might have to do something about the shocks - where's a good place to get cheap Ford parts? Google's no use - far too many chav shops selling bolt on bling and 'performance' accessories Feel a rant coming on, Baby on Board signs are a favourite hate of mine, don't hate kids but I think this is a PC way of saying "my baby is more important than my paying attention to the world around me so I could do stupid things stay away from me". Sounds more like displaced guilt, don't blame me, blame the baby. Rant off Norman Harper wrote a great bit about them in the Press & Journal* a few years ago - distilled down, he'd been driving (up the A96 by Huntly, IIRC) and the woman behind had been sitting right on his back bumper trying to bully him into speeding. After several miles there was a clear stretch and she overtook and disappeared into the distance. In the back of her car was a sign...'keep back, baby on board'... I think they're more a way of saying 'no matter how irresponsibly I drive, you must treat me like the most valuable person in the world... Of course, if everyone cared about other driver and their own safety, we'd hardly ever have crashes. * - regional newspaper covering the northern half of Scotland, for those who've never ventured up there. Norman Harper is a regular columnist known for witty (and very accurate) social commentary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LR90 Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I thought they were supposed to be a curteous reminder to the driver behind to not drive too close because if they rear ended the car there was a risk the baby would be harmed(much more easily harmed from whiplash etc than an adult). I thought the thinking was that no one would want to harm a baby, so they would think more about how close they were to the car carrying the baby. Emergency service information sounds plausible too. Bit like carrying hazardous chemicals Never used one myself. Regards, Diff I think a brighly painted nato hitch may be more effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffbeaumont Posted November 18, 2005 Share Posted November 18, 2005 I think a brighly painted nato hitch may be more effective. If you're lucky the nice shiny car behind will provide the paint on the nato hitch...right Fi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.