Driving standards

[TheQ]

7 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

 

It actually says: "They would have been moving within the speed limit."  It's presented as a direct quote from the police spokesperson, so not an interpretation by the reporter.

 

I suspect it would have been more accurate (and would have made more sense) if he'd said that the exercise they were taking part in did not require them to exceed the speed limit.

Of course  you could say.  .. They would say that wouldn't they.. 

[SM42]

On 17/05/2019 at 16:32, alastairq said:

Guilty of presumption there...a continuous white line down the centre of the road will have a sibling to it's right...a line which in fact has no significance to the individual driver. [Be it broken, or  solid..ie, unbroken], For it is the nearest line which affects one. Even when it's neighbour has a separation of  up to 1 metre, filled with diagonal hatched lines....

 

 

The double white centre line affects both sides regardless of whether solid or not on your side as you must not park where they are present. Or have they dumbed that rule down now?

 

Going back to mini roundabouts, several years ago one was installed on a local estate where traffic turned left,  off the main estate road, to go to the local school.

 

This simple T junction on sweeping right curve, now with its roundabout, became a scene of carnage before the paint dried as someone actually went round it. The vehicle waiting to enter the roundabout, adjudged that they were intending to turn left and pulled out.

 

The roundabout is more than just paint though. It is a  circular tarmac bump painted white. If you actually  go round it with no intention of turning left, but instead treating as a roundabout at which you wish to continue straight ahead,  you will often find the car behind has cut across or round the wrong side to overtake and are quit miffed that you are pulling back into their path. It's that bad you sometimes have to move over to make room when coming from the other direction as drivers swerve to the wrong side to go round the right hand side of the inconvenient lump.

The council call it traffic calming.

It doesn't make me calm

 

Andy

[Jol Wilkinson]

On 17/05/2019 at 15:36, Hobby said:

 

I wondered that as well... Loads of them over in Germany, they tend to be used in the same way as we use solid double white lines, don't cross in simple terms (though there will always be exceptions such as turning off into a drive, hence A's comment about "no overtaking")...

What do you do when confronted by a Policeperson riding their horse slowly along a road with double white lines. While fairly twisty, there was sufficient forward view and space  (given the horses speed and mine when following it) to overtake safely?

[Hobby]

I think you will find that one of the exceptions is passing slow moving vehicles/animals:

 

Rule 129

Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.

 

Though if he started to gallop then no!

[Jol Wilkinson]

Having driven around the M25 (A12 to M4) of Friday afternoon and back (M3 to A12) on Sunday evening, I expected to encounter some poor driving. There was a much higher level of undertaking and weaving across lanes (BMW's mainly) tailgating (mainly older Audis' and notably a scruffy Honda Civic) than I have experienced before. The usual poor lane disciple ("the left hand lane is for the poor people, not me") was also evident as well as those not connected with the world around them, cruising along in a world of their own.

[johnarcher]

4 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I think you will find that one of the exceptions is passing slow moving vehicles/animals:

 

Rule 129

Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.

 

Though if he started to gallop then no!

But not, presumably, if to get past you have to do it at such a speed that you panic the horse (and, as a result presumably, the rider).

[Hobby]

Which is why there must be enough distance you can see ahead to be able to make the move safely, like any overtaking move.

Edited May 20, 2019 by Hobby

[Baby Deltic]

What about passing a pedestrian riding a hobby horse on double white lines?

[ejstubbs]

17 hours ago, SM42 said:

 

The double white centre line affects both sides regardless of whether solid or not on your side as you must not park where they are present. Or have they dumbed that rule down now?

 

 

Nope, it's still there in Rule 240.

 

Although it's clearly allowed in the current version of the Highway Code (see Hobby's post above) I do remember being told, many (more than 40) years ago, that it was not permitted to cross a solid white line on your side to enter a road on the right.  This was pointed out to me by a pal at a junction on the A6 in Allestree, where there was no broken line to allow southbound traffic to turn in to Park Lane (by the newsagents we used to nick sweets from - did I just write that?)  Was this ever a rule, or did my pal make it up?  (There's a right turn gap in the "ghost central reservation" there these days.)

Edited May 20, 2019 by ejstubbs

[dvdlcs]

This is (or was?) the case in Queensland, Australia.

 

If there is a solid centre line in the road, then no right turns whether into a side road or your (someone elses) driveway. If you lived on such a road then you could only enter and exit the driveway to your house by turning left.

[caradoc]

Not the most heinous of road crimes, but it was noticeable when down in Oxford for the weekend how few motorists let a bus pull away from a stop, continuing to overtake whether the bus was indicating, moving slowly away, or when entering a hatched area was necessary to get in front of the bus.

 

[ejstubbs]

This annoys me, too, both when I'm on the bus and when I'm in the car.  It's as if these people have never grasped the fact that the bus will stop again sooner or later - in town, usually sooner, giving them plenty of opportunity to get past within the next two or three minutes.  For every person who pushes past the bus, the bus has to wait longer and thus delays the vehicles which were behind the pusher-past longer as well.  (The abbreviation "MGIF" is often applied to people who just have to overtake a bus, bike, dustbin lorry or such like at all costs - to themselves, or others - as soon as they encounter one.)

 

Although I do also take exception to bus drivers who bang their right turn indicator on when I'm already alongside them and then take off like a rocket before I've finished my within-the-speed-limit pass.  I can understand indicating as soon as they're ready to go, in the hope that some will obey Rule 223, but if I am already in the process of executing a legitimate pass then they've really no business trying to harrass me.

Edited May 21, 2019 by ejstubbs

[johnarcher]

On 20/05/2019 at 09:41, Hobby said:

Which is why there must be enough distance you can see ahead to be able to make the move safely, like any overtaking move.

Remembering that you need a good deal more distance to pass a horse than a cycle, if you do it slowly enough.

[Enterprisingwestern]

8 hours ago, johnarcher said:

Remembering that you need a good deal more distance to pass a horse than a cycle, if you do it slowly enough.

 

, and a bigger toilet.

 

Mike.

[johnarcher]

48 minutes ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

, and a bigger toilet.

 

Mike.

Well, if somebody reckons they could "eat a horse" I suppose eventually .......

[Baby Deltic]

Meanwhile, just when you think you've heard all the excuses for crashing:

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-who-swerved-avoid-octopus-16223117

Edited May 31, 2019 by Baby Deltic

[PhilJ W]

5 hours ago, Baby Deltic said:

Meanwhile, just when you think you've heard all the excuses for crashing:

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-who-swerved-avoid-octopus-16223117

High on illegal substances.

[Baby Deltic]

3 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

High on illegal substances.

 

Yes, I believe he'd taken a cocktail (seafood?) of drugs. 

 

'He told officers: “It got a bit bumpy for a while. I swerved to avoid an octopus” and “it is pretty bad out there having to dodge all that whitebait”...... 

 

Officers said they found no evidence of an octopus on the road.'

 

Classic! 

Edited May 31, 2019 by Baby Deltic

[kevinlms]

19 hours ago, Baby Deltic said:

 

Yes, I believe he'd taken a cocktail (seafood?) of drugs. 

 

'He told officers: “It got a bit bumpy for a while. I swerved to avoid an octopus” and “it is pretty bad out there having to dodge all that whitebait”...... 

 

Officers said they found no evidence of an octopus on the road.'

 

Classic! 

Correct, they were Squids and Kippers!

[45156]

Yesterday I saw just about the worst instance od bad/dangerous driving that I've seen in all my 50 years of driving yesterday, and I'm still not quite believing what I saw.

 

It is Appleby Fair this coming week and traditionally, the travellers make their way to the event by horse drawn caravan (though these days for much of the time, many of the caravans are carried on a flat bed behind a horse box for much of the journey and the travellers just do a small bit of horse drawn travelling).

So anyway, yesterday on the A683, there were FIVE horse drawn vehicles nose to tail - 3 caravans and 2 trotting cars, doing about 3mph - and not allowing any space at all between them.  There was, as you might imagine, a fair queue behind them, and most were being tolerant of this even though they were being fairly inconsiderate.  Not so the driver of a Skoda who on an A road within a 30mph speed limit, and facing a 90 degree left hand bend (totally blind) came from behind the queue doing about 50, totally unable to see if there was any oncoming traffic, and turned left round the 90 degree bend on the wrong side of the road - he (of course) got away with it, but I shudder to think what would have happened had there been any oncoing traffic at all.

 

 

[Baby Deltic]

8 hours ago, 45156 said:

Yesterday I saw just about the worst instance od bad/dangerous driving that I've seen in all my 50 years of driving yesterday, and I'm still not quite believing what I saw.

 

It is Appleby Fair this coming week and traditionally, the travellers make their way to the event by horse drawn caravan (though these days for much of the time, many of the caravans are carried on a flat bed behind a horse box for much of the journey and the travellers just do a small bit of horse drawn travelling).

So anyway, yesterday on the A683, there were FIVE horse drawn vehicles nose to tail - 3 caravans and 2 trotting cars, doing about 3mph - and not allowing any space at all between them.  There was, as you might imagine, a fair queue behind them, and most were being tolerant of this even though they were being fairly inconsiderate.  Not so the driver of a Skoda who on an A road within a 30mph speed limit, and facing a 90 degree left hand bend (totally blind) came from behind the queue doing about 50, totally unable to see if there was any oncoming traffic, and turned left round the 90 degree bend on the wrong side of the road - he (of course) got away with it, but I shudder to think what would have happened had there been any oncoing traffic at all.

 

 

What makes this truly shocking is the fact it was a Skoda driver. Had it been an Audi or BMW driver doing such a dangerous manoeuvre it would have been far more understandable.

[peanuts]

5 hours ago, Baby Deltic said:

What makes this truly shocking is the fact it was a Skoda driver. Had it been an Audi or BMW driver doing such a dangerous manoeuvre it would have been far more understandable.

the audi /bmw trope went long ago nowadys its ANY large german saloon or product of the vag group will be driven poorly and agressivley usualy by mr/mrs entitled with a get out of my way attitude 

[TheQ]

On 21/05/2019 at 12:46, ejstubbs said:

This annoys me, too, both when I'm on the bus and when I'm in the car.  It's as if these people have never grasped the fact that the bus will stop again sooner or later - in town, usually sooner, giving them plenty of opportunity to get past within the next two or three minutes.  

 

 

 

The problem round here and in the many narrow streets on Norwich,  is when the next time the bus stops there is no opportunity to over take.  There are no laybys for the buses.  When  bus stops it blocks the lane it's in.  So if you see a rare gap in the on coming traffic you go for it.  As you'll be stuck behind the bus every time it stops .

[caradoc]

37 minutes ago, TheQ said:

The problem round here and in the many narrow streets on Norwich,  is when the next time the bus stops there is no opportunity to over take.  There are no laybys for the buses.  When  bus stops it blocks the lane it's in.  So if you see a rare gap in the on coming traffic you go for it.  As you'll be stuck behind the bus every time it stops .

 

Which is fine when the bus is loading or unloading, the former often taking some time due to OMO, but in Oxford vehicles continued to overtake the bus when it was indicating and moving off; The bus has to get away eventually !

 

[polybear]

7 hours ago, Baby Deltic said:

What makes this truly shocking is the fact it was a Skoda driver. Had it been an Audi or BMW driver doing such a dangerous manoeuvre it would have been far more understandable.

 

Skoda are owned by the Volkswagen Group, as are Audi.  So perhaps the Skoda driver has ambitions to become an Audi driver when (if) he grows up