Driving standards

[jcredfer]

2 hours ago, peanuts said:

caption this one ?

 

Honest officer, I was just following the arrow...  when it all came off the rails...

 

 

[alastairq]

1 hour ago, SamThomas said:

the County Council do not always paint lines in the middle of the road to save money (but do by the verges where they get covered on mud or worn away quickly),

 The lack of a centerline road marking denotes an unclassified road...regardless of the width of tarmac.

The rule in that case is, to pass oncoming vehicles, right-side to right-side...There is no 'centre' of the road, since the width of tarmac may vary widely throughout a given distance. This, with the knowledge there is definitely no other road user coming the other way, the entire width of tarmac is yours to use.

Until, that is, a road user comes the other wway, or one comes across another road user.

 

The centre line road marking simply denotes the point beyond which one must consider the need to 'give way' to oncoming traffic, before, or if, part, or all, of one's vehicle is across.

Heck, the centre line, a line dividing the opposing flows of traffic [road users,not just brumm brumms]...and may not even be anywhere near the supposed centre of the carriageway. 

 

To revert back to the new OP's observations, I think the tendency of drivers to be across the center line these days is down to the ever wider cars & vans in use?

That, and the fact that for the average driver, actually being able to 'see' where the left side of the current panzerwagon vehicle actually lies, is difficult. [For them, not for me it seems?}

Thus they allow too much space on their near sides..and presume that, because they are compelled to drive a fat [obese?] vehicle, everyone needs to be considerate and give them far more room than necessary!

They also feel more invulnerable due to the vast acres of [very thin] sheet metal that at one time might be taken up by glass...which isn't seen as being very strong?

[In the same way the non-cognoscenti of the driving world always thought Land Rover Defenders and their ilk were massively robust and strong....whereas in fact they were, and are, quite flimsy.]

Impressions...assumptions...all nowadays govern how drivers behave.

That, and a superficial knowledge of the Highway Code, and a misconception about what they were taught when learning to drive, tainted by self-centred attitudes, now colours what drivers do. Coupled with a total lack of respect for the needs of others, and we have what we see today.

 

I am retired.

I drive for pleasure now.

I avoid big towns & cities like the plague...stinky smelly places they are!

I avoid motorways, if possible....simply because they are so limiting.  They're like fly traps...one cock-up and everyone is stuck, unable to go anywhere.

I like roads where I can find options....even if just pulling off and going for a nice cuppa.

 

I used to instruct 'drivers' for a career.... using Roadcraft as a text book, too, in many instances.

 

I use the Roadcraft principles whenever I go out driving. At whatever speed I happen to be driving at.

Not because it makes me feel 'superior' to the others around me...far from it...I use the principles because they make my drive more enjoyable, and they save me money by not stressing my vehicle out so much...little by little, goes a long way n the end. Like, economical driving styles used to do?

I change my whole driving 'style' according to the type of vehicle I happen to be driving, or where I happen to be driving, as well.

But, these days I mostly ever drive old stuff, and ''CAt B'' stuff to boot.

 

I am acutely aware that I must avoid giving an ''adverse impression'' to other road users by what I do. Not making them think I'm doing something I actually have no intention of doing.

That is important, for it often dictates what they themselves then do.

As any lorry driver will remember from their training?

 

Thus, if a 'take the apex' on any curve, bend or corner I come across, regardless of my actual speed, I make a point of never putting even a small part of my vehicle, over the centre line, on right turns.

Now, I am well aware that if one can 'see' it is clear, there is nothing to prevent one from taking more of the 'other' side of the road...but I don;t, for two reasons.

(1), Ultimately we only know a road ahead, if not fully visible, is 'clear', usually, after the fact.

Looking across a bend with a clear view may seem to reveal nothing coming, but I am aware of the likes of Lotus sevens, etc...which are ruddy low, and can hide behind a weed strewn grass verge. More to the point, I understand about risk assessments, therefore I also understand that ne can never be 100% sure, so by staying to the left of the centre line, I can 'account' for my own imperfections...especially where effective observations are concerned.

(2)  I have always. throughout my bus & lorry driving life, as well as my Instructional life, taken the opportunity to practice clean precise movements or manoeuvers. Thus I practice apexing but keeping to the left of centre lines, so that I am confident I can do so when there is oncoming traffic.

 

However, I also know that the 'apex' on abend or corner or curve, is not the 'be-all-&-end-all that many who have bothered to undergo the various 'advanced' training courses available, think it is..

[It doesn't apply or work for a lorry or bus,  for example...On a bend or curve or corner in a long, wide  vehicle, one focuses one's observations on very different points, of the vehicle, and the carriageway!]

The important part of the apex cornering process is, the road position and point of entry....and the road position and point of exit, of the curve. The apex is but a small part, of the middle bit, and shows how far inside the curve one can go..the entry positions and intended exit position are what enhances the stability of one's vehicle.

We do it with our model railways.....we called it 'easements' into a curve, and out of a curve.

yet, go and watch how the majority of [car] drivers actually get it all wrong, and stay very tight to the centre line, [or kerb for left turns]....on their exits..keeping it all far too tight.

No wonder folk have so many problems with the likes of track rods and dampers failing..they stress them out far too much, and all because they misunderstand what they have read, or been taught at some point.

With driver training, like all training..one can lead a horse to water, etc etc...

[ejstubbs]

2 hours ago, alastairq said:

To revert back to the new OP's observations, I think the tendency of drivers to be across the center line these days is down to the ever wider cars & vans in use?

That, and the fact that for the average driver, actually being able to 'see' where the left side of the current panzerwagon vehicle actually lies, is difficult. [For them, not for me it seems?}

Thus they allow too much space on their near sides..and presume that, because they are compelled to drive a fat [obese?] vehicle, everyone needs to be considerate and give them far more room than necessary!

 

This, a thousand times over.  The number of times I encounter people "stuck" behind e.g. a bus at a bus stop busy unloading and boarding passengers, simply because they think they need vastly more width of road than they actually do, is uncountable.

 

2 hours ago, alastairq said:

I use the Roadcraft principles whenever I go out driving.

 

...

 

Thus, if a 'take the apex' on any curve, bend or corner I come across, regardless of my actual speed, I make a point of never putting even a small part of my vehicle, over the centre line, on right turns.

 

I believe the IAM use the term "offsiding" for 'straightening' the line through a corner by crossing the centre line to use the full width of the road.  On another forum I frequent one of their number asserted that it was the recommended approach in Roadcraft.  I was able to assure him that this is not the case, based on the current edition which sits on my bookshelf, and AFAIK never has been the case (based on the 1970s edition which also sits on my bookshelf).  Someone else claimed that the IAM advocate something similar when turning right off a main road, by cutting across the throat of the junction on the side of traffic approaching along the side road.  If true, this would be yet another reason why I am not a fan of the IAM.

[alastairq]

1 hour ago, ejstubbs said:

 

This, a thousand times over.  The number of times I encounter people "stuck" behind e.g. a bus at a bus stop busy unloading and boarding passengers, simply because they think they need vastly more width of road than they actually do, is uncountable.

 

 

I believe the IAM use the term "offsiding" for 'straightening' the line through a corner by crossing the centre line to use the full width of the road.  On another forum I frequent one of their number asserted that it was the recommended approach in Roadcraft.  I was able to assure him that this is not the case, based on the current edition which sits on my bookshelf, and AFAIK never has been the case (based on the 1970s edition which also sits on my bookshelf).  Someone else claimed that the IAM advocate something similar when turning right off a main road, by cutting across the throat of the junction on the side of traffic approaching along the side road.  If true, this would be yet another reason why I am not a fan of the IAM.

 

I have never undertaken an IAM or RoSPA advanced driving course.  I have never felt the desire to do so. The only association I have with RoSPA concerns holding numerous 'safe driving' certificates...a load of codz if ever there was! The secret of these 'safe driving' awards was understanding what the insurance assessors needed to know in order to never have  a claim made against me!  IE, how to give the correct [no lies, in other words, neither any vagaries!]...information on the report forms that they required.  A throw-away camera used to be an invaluable tool as well, when they became cheap enough.

 

The problem with the sort of 'casual' training these advanced courses offer is that, even though one can 'meet the required standard,' there can be huge misconceptions surrounding what has actually been taught.

As a one-time Licence Acquisition Instructor [primarily Cat C & C+E, other categories now & then too]... sitting in on the Examiners'   test-candidate debriefs, then hearing the students' versions , of 'why they 'failed' their tests showed me how seriously  adrift a student's conceptions of what led to their failures could be.  ''That driver's wrong-doing affected the outcome of my test because I failed to do this that or the other beforehand''...never reared its head.

 Assessing the driving standards of qualified drivers also demonstrated how much even 'professional' drivers can have failed to comprehend why things went awry in the first place.

Folk struggled to realise it wasn't about what someone else did 'wrong', but about how we as a driver or rider, failed to cope with that error. Plus, 'coping' should ideally have been a comfortable, almost relaxed affair....not some drastic hyper-reaction..the sort where one needed to wear one's underpants outside one's trousers!

I think the first thing an intending 'advanced' driver needed to learn was, how to actually 'learn' from their experiences as a driver.

No-one ever learnt the real lessons from an event, if they are convinced the blame lay with another.

 

We all like to 'blame' someone else for whatever went wrong in  our lives.

If one is convinced 'blame' lies elsewhere, what in reality, does one learn from that experience?

 

 

[Enterprisingwestern]

7 hours ago, peanuts said:

caption this one ?

 

Look mum, I can fly.

 

Mike.

[Nick C]

7 hours ago, alastairq said:

To revert back to the new OP's observations, I think the tendency of drivers to be across the center line these days is down to the ever wider cars & vans in use?

That, and the fact that for the average driver, actually being able to 'see' where the left side of the current panzerwagon vehicle actually lies, is difficult. [For them, not for me it seems?}

Thus they allow too much space on their near sides..and presume that, because they are compelled to drive a fat [obese?] vehicle, everyone needs to be considerate and give them far more room than necessary!

 

This seems to be more and more frequent, especially on country lanes - then they seem to expect me, in my relatively small 2wd Astra, to go up onto the verge, when they've got a clear foot of tarmac between their big 4wd SUV and their side...

 

4 hours ago, ejstubbs said:

Someone else claimed that the IAM advocate something similar when turning right off a main road, by cutting across the throat of the junction on the side of traffic approaching along the side road.  If true, this would be yet another reason why I am not a fan of the IAM.

Certainly not the case when I did the course a couple of years ago - quite the opposite in fact.

[stewartingram]

15 hours ago, Nick C said:

 

This seems to be more and more frequent, especially on country lanes - then they seem to expect me, in my relatively small 2wd Astra, to go up onto the verge, when they've got a clear foot of tarmac between their big 4wd SUV and their side...

 

 

Easy answer to that then - don't!

Make them ."struggle" past whilst you wait....

[PhilJ W]

43 minutes ago, stewartingram said:

Easy answer to that then - don't!

Make them ."struggle" past whilst you wait....

Most of those sort of drivers then try to force their way through knowing that you do not want to risk damaging your car. I didn't worry too much about that when I practiced 'bangernomics' as I didn't care how many scrapes and dents the car had. 

[woodenhead]

On 21/05/2022 at 10:33, peanuts said:

caption this one ?

Well I didn't want South to London or North to Birmingham, so I picked East and drove straight on officer.

[alastairq]

SAt nav went ''erm, errr, cough cough...''

[alastairq]

1 hour ago, stewartingram said:

Easy answer to that then - don't!

Make them ."struggle" past whilst you wait....

 Just what I do a lot of the time....especially if they're showing no signs whatsoever of being willing to do their bit on their verge.

I also tend to do that when folk push through narrow gaps, despite being on 'my' side of the centre line, and where I have room to go through without having to cross that center line. I will wait for them, on my side of the road, but I tend to position myself close enough to the end of their obstruction to compel them to undergo a slalom manoeuver... Naughty, I know, but not being inconsiderate..I don't 'block' them, giving them enough room to pass, but they have to slow to complete the manoeuver...or else clobber my front corner....[OOOh, I can just feel a claim coming on...to finance my next, new-to-me, wheels?]

I could have been really mean and given them just enough room to manoeuver past, if I were driving their car!  :)  :)

On the whole I'm quite tolerant of their iniquities.

[chris p bacon]

Being someone who drives a larger 4x4* I find it funny that they get singled out,  when the reality in these parts are drivers in smaller vehicles who drive aggressively and seem to need more of the road width.

As for motorhome owners, there are few that use, or even know what a 'passing place' is for, presuming their size will be able to push others out of the way. 

 

* 2W drive here is for the foolhardy or those that don't wish to use the roads for 4 months of the year, even the snowplough couldn't get through for 3 days last year. 

[Nick C]

4 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

Being someone who drives a larger 4x4* I find it funny that they get singled out,  when the reality in these parts are drivers in smaller vehicles who drive aggressively and seem to need more of the road width.

As for motorhome owners, there are few that use, or even know what a 'passing place' is for, presuming their size will be able to push others out of the way. 

 

* 2W drive here is for the foolhardy or those that don't wish to use the roads for 4 months of the year, even the snowplough couldn't get through for 3 days last year. 

It's not the people in proper 4x4s that are the problem (at least not round here) - it's the ones in expensive SUVs - Range Rovers in particular. 

[chris p bacon]

21 minutes ago, Nick C said:

It's not the people in proper 4x4s that are the problem (at least not round here) - it's the ones in expensive SUVs - Range Rovers in particular. 

 

🤣 That'll be the 4x4 I have.

 

The only dealership around here that sells much are Land Rover, They must account for 2-3 out of 5 vehicles in the village. I stuck with my saloon car for quite a while, but the first winter changed that. I looked at various 4x4's but speaking to many locals it became clear that there were only a couple of options that can actually cope with the poor and (very) variable weather here and the RR/Discovery/Land Rover came out well.

[Nick C]

6 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

 

🤣 That'll be the 4x4 I have.

 

The only dealership around here that sells much are Land Rover, They must account for 2-3 out of 5 vehicles in the village. I stuck with my saloon car for quite a while, but the first winter changed that. I looked at various 4x4's but speaking to many locals it became clear that there were only a couple of options that can actually cope with the poor and (very) variable weather here and the RR/Discovery/Land Rover came out well.

But then you bought it because you need it, not as a status symbol! Here in the south east, most of them never see those kind of conditions, and if they did the drivers wouldn't know how to deal with them...

[PhilJ W]

36 minutes ago, Nick C said:

But then you bought it because you need it, not as a status symbol! Here in the south east, most of them never see those kind of conditions, and if they did the drivers wouldn't know how to deal with them...

Last year I visited Tinkers Park for a transport/model railway event. It had poured down all day on the Saturday and as we went there on the Sunday it was still raining. The 'car park' was an open field that had turned into a quagmire. They actually had a tractor towing cars out of the mud including many 4X4's. However I managed to drive my small front wheel drive only city car out without too much fuss. (And without too much any high revs and wheelspin).

Edited May 22, 2022 by PhilJ W

[Enterprisingwestern]

9 hours ago, Nick C said:

But then you bought it because you need it, not as a status symbol! Here in the south east, most of them never see those kind of conditions, and if they did the drivers wouldn't know how to deal with them...

 

Now now, be fair, some of the speed bumps can be fairly mountainous, and have you seen the state of supermarket car parks?

 

Mike.

[Jol Wilkinson]

1 hour ago, Enterprisingwestern said:

 

Now now, be fair, some of the speed bumps can be fairly mountainous, and have you seen the state of supermarket car parks?

 

Mike.

Not many speed bumps in car parks around here, but some car park "designers" haven't worked out the size of an ordinary modern car, let alone an estate or  SUV .  The worst examples are the car park behind the former GER station building at Felixstowe and Sainsburys/BM Homestore in Ipswich.  Tesco at Martlesham Heath is much better and more spacious, but then the "weekend cottage" owners from Woodbridge tend to use that so RR's Audi Q7s etc. have to be accommodated. Even then some large SUV drivers readily use two spaces.

[TheQ]

Round here in coastal Norfolk where some villages have over 50% second homers there is a noticeable increase in those that have no clue how to use country lanes at weekends and in the summer. Many will pass a passing place, even though you've already past the last one your way.

 

They really don't want to use all the road their side, even in a little micra or the like, though my ancient battered landrover with bull  bar tends to give them the hint that I'm not going into the ditch my side..

[Reorte]

On 21/05/2022 at 13:24, alastairq said:

 The lack of a centerline road marking denotes an unclassified road...regardless of the width of tarmac.

 

Whilst I think it's unlikely that there'll be any classified roads minor enough to not get centre markings (assuming it's wide enough in the first place) is this an actual rule? There are plenty of busy unclassified roads with centre markings; generally the only ones wide enough for them that don't seem to get them are in estates (which of course won't be classified).

[PhilJ W]

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Not many speed bumps in car parks around here, but some car park "designers" haven't worked out the size of an ordinary modern car, let alone an estate or  SUV .  The worst examples are the car park behind the former GER station building at Felixstowe and Sainsburys/BM Homestore in Ipswich.  Tesco at Martlesham Heath is much better and more spacious, but then the "weekend cottage" owners from Woodbridge tend to use that so RR's Audi Q7s etc. have to be accommodated. Even then some large SUV drivers readily use two spaces.

In my local Tesco's the trolley bays are placed in a parking bay in the middle of a row of parking bays. I avoid the bays either side of the trolley bays because if you want to open your doors you have to use part of the adjacent bay as the parking spaces are so small. I always use and end bay if one is available and reverse/forward park so that no one can block my drivers door. I was told that supermarket parking bays were designed to fit a normal family sized car, in about 1957 (Ford Prefect, Standard Pennant etc.) and haven't been upgraded since.

[RedgateModels]

1 minute ago, PhilJ W said:

In my local Tesco's the trolley bays are placed in a parking bay in the middle of a row of parking bays. I avoid the bays either side of the trolley bays because if you want to open your doors you have to use part of the adjacent bay as the parking spaces are so small. I always use and end bay if one is available and reverse/forward park so that no one can block my drivers door. I was told that supermarket parking bays were designed to fit a normal family sized car, in about 1957 (Ford Prefect, Standard Pennant etc.) and haven't been upgraded since.

 

An I use the ones next to the trolley bays if I can, as I can park and it's one less car next to mine to cause dents in my bodywork ;)

[kevinlms]

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Not many speed bumps in car parks around here, but some car park "designers" haven't worked out the size of an ordinary modern car, let alone an estate or  SUV .  The worst examples are the car park behind the former GER station building at Felixstowe and Sainsburys/BM Homestore in Ipswich.  Tesco at Martlesham Heath is much better and more spacious, but then the "weekend cottage" owners from Woodbridge tend to use that so RR's Audi Q7s etc. have to be accommodated. Even then some large SUV drivers readily use two spaces.

Sometimes you see car parks with the lines so badly marked out, that they are worse than useless. 

One near me has 4 spaces marked out and a half space, between the concrete edging. 

The 4 spaces are so narrow that you cannot park a standard vehicle between the lines without the panels overhanging both white lines, if you have parked centrally. So effectively it becomes a 3 car space,  so the parking is worse by trying to increase the spaces available. 

If I  can, I park over the half spot, which seems the best option. 

[Reorte]

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Not many speed bumps in car parks around here, but some car park "designers" haven't worked out the size of an ordinary modern car, let alone an estate or  SUV . 

I'm the type of person who looks at that as car designers making cars too big for the environment they're supposed to operate in, rather than it being down to the world to change to fit oversized cars.

[alastairq]

I believe there is a ''standard'' size car parking space designers [and contractors?] work to? Something to do with planning rules, perhaps?

 

My daily is a''4x4''...[First generation Suzuki grand Vitara, or when the price of doyzel falls, it'll be a near 30 year old Daihatsu 4Trak...]

 

I very rarely actually use the 4wd option. both spend 99.5 % of their lives in 2wd.

Neither are actually bulky in footprint. Although, being quite 'blocky'  to look at, they appear to be 'large'....I suppose?

Originally obtained for their abilities to tow a small car trailer, this function has almost ceased over the past couple of years or so, as the old income has become more depleted each month.

However, I find the Suzuki, especially, to be very much easier for the old , no longer very flexible, bones to get in & out of. [Doesn't work for me in a LandRover, unless of the military sort...too much bling on civvy landrovers, that gets in the way of my legs.]

 

The Suzy was cheap. It has a chassis which appeals to me. [Rather than being a  chassis-less car with 4wd]

It's reasonably ecumenical with petrol.....although I really don't need 2 litres and the potential of nearly 130bhp! My wallet says I don't travel much more than the indicated 60 mph anyway [optimistic, I have noted]....Revs mean more to my wallet than mph's...

 

Unlike a  lot of drivers in 4x4s, I also taught off-road driving procedures to the military, so I do know what to do. That is not a reason for me to have a 4x4 these days, however. [Neither was being  an 'Advanced' driver a reason to be driving  a very fast car! ]

 

Oddly, the last FWD car I owned,  a turn of the century Ford Fiesta zetec, I found to be..errrrr, not very appealing, from my driving viewpoint!

 

The ability of any vehicle to keep moving, either on wet grass, mud or snow, is more down the the tyres [and  a lack of bhp too]...than to anything else.

 

If one doesn't have the appropriate tyres for the [expected?] conditions, then one is onto a loser.

 

Being a titewad pensioner who needs wheels [I actually have yet to apply for my bus pass....looked at the bumph and the  kwapp they wanted to know, and said sodditt.....Haven't got a local bus anyway!!]......the Suzy runs the every cheapest Chinese [or Burmese?] tyres I can buy....ordinary, summer only, road tyres. So I don't expect it to have much of an 'off road' or 'snow' performance at all. [30-odd pension quids a wheel] They do the job, and I wouldn't know the difference if I'd fitted a set of 130 quid tyres....aside from not going anywhere for a long while since I wouldn't have had any pension left for petrol!

However, when I have found a 'need' for using the 4wd option, being on a grass verge [or driving up the slope of my back garden?] because the 2wd has spun up....engaging 4wd gets me moving enough , so that 2wd can be re-engaged quickly enough.  

Nice thing about the Suzy [its an old one] is that the body seems to be surrounded by plastic trim sheets...so supermarket car door injuries are non existent..or, not noticeable!

It lacks ground clearance, however [My Dellow has a lot more!] due to the small tyres on the 16 inch wheels...front & rear [poor approach & departure angles]..so when  it comes across a snow drift, snow builds up too much under the front.

It's purely OAP transport, so I wouldn't dream of going down the lift-kit route..it's not worth messing about with...just doing what's needed to get a few more years [or, weeks?] out of it.

Still, at least I haven't gone the route of driving a 140mph-capable supercar. Which is as much a waste, in my eyes, as having a Chelsea tractor in the middle of a city, seeing as this country has speed limits?

I mean, in the same vein a saying, what's the  point of a 4x4 in a town environment, so I say, what's the point in having a car capable of 90 mph when such a speed is unlawful on any UK roads...so all that power and performance is largely there for show.

All a bit pointless over and above a certain limit?

 

For example, another , to me, ''pointless'' thing is, having an engine which produces ''200-odd bhp'' is quite pointless  because, at 30 mph that engine is probably making around 40 bhp....and at 60 mph  in top gear, its making maybe 70 bhp or so....the power ''quoted'' only being made at a certain, fairly high, rev point....A point at which 200 bhp is going to prove an embarrassment, on the UK's public roads?

A Reliant Robin travelling at 60 mph is going at exactly the same speed as a Porsche 911 doing 60 mph!

Really, all the 'rest'' is rather pointless, when considering driving from A to B?

Is it braggin' rights?

Is it a ''look at me'' thing?

[Porsche 911? A very expensive method of acquiring back ache, in my view]

 

Anyone remember, in the USA, the, almost blanket, 55 mph speed limit?

When a certain famous motorcycle manufacturer fitted speedos [instruments, not underpants]....that were blank after 60 mph? The reason being, anything over 55 was unlawful anyway, so the rider didn't need to know how much faster they were travelling?

 

Or, are we to assume that anybody buying a car capable of speeds well in excess of the lawful speed limits [there, not for them, but to allow everybody else to cope with them?}......with huge amounts of BHPeees, 'on tap', so to speak...actually have every intention of flouting the Law at any opportunity?

If not, otherwise...then, why??

 

 

[I have other driving oddities when we look hard at them...for example, drivers scootling down unlit motorways at 70-plus mph at night......using dip beam headlights? I mean, how far can a driver reasonably be expected to see on dip beams? If fine for 70mph, why do we have main beam headlights?  If not, why do we drive so fast at night?  I know the reasons,etc etc, but that still doesn't get rid of the original thoughts.]