Driving standards

[PhilJ W]

31 minutes ago, RedgateModels said:

 

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 ;)

It depends I expect on the individual car park. My local Tesco's has groups of about ten bays either side with only a single entrance/exit. Not only are some of the end bays a bit wider but they also have an extra couple of feet between the tarmacked area and the boundary that is concreted over.  

[Reorte]

22 minutes ago, alastairq said:

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??

More power means faster acceleration as well as top speed, which is something that can still be used legally. But I take the point, and have never seen the point of a performance car unless you intend to take it to a racetrack.

[alastairq]

23 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

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).

 

I used to have all sorts of links to Highways legislation, TRRL, s etc....

However, those have disappeared with time, but I did ask our LA  Highways Dept such a question years ago....mainly so I knew...

Around here, there are A, B & C classified roads...followed by Unclassified highways.

As I understood things, certain 'standards' were/are laid down, but LAs can exceed those standards if so desired.

For example, one method of finding out whether one was driving on an A road or a B road [of the same width] was, if ''cat's eyes'' reflectors  were present.

The main road through my village is a B road...and is as wide, if not wider inparts, as any A road it crosses...but it is a B road! It has no reflectors down the middle......for most of its many miles, but has some in certain places!  [It is one of the 'best biking' roads listed in MCN]

The minor road outside my house [which actually is a 'major' oute, as it is pretty much the only connection to the next village] is unclassified. [Downgraded from C  some years ago now]    It has no centre road markings....yet is just about wide enough [with care] for two artics to pass..in most places [not all though] it is many miles long, and all the roads it connects to, or which join it, are devoid of centre markings too...for miles and miles...

Except at all the junctions, where a centre marking is provided, along with give-way markings.

 

ANother example not many know about is that, a double solid continuous white line down the centre [We know what its definition is, don't we?]....of the road.....can have the two solid lines separated by hatched road markings [to shift opposing traffic flows further apart]....within its length.....and as long as the overall width of the whole road marking is not more than one metre, that road marking retains the same legal meaning as the usual double solid continuous white line.

However, if the hatched area gets any wider, other boundary white lines have to be considered, depending on the LA's intentions. For Example, if a wider area of hatched lines is desired [for traffic separation purposes, often near junctions], but the LA does not wish traffic to cross into the hatched areas, then they have to install a double solid continuous boundary line. A sort of, 'definitely do not enter' thing! [Unless necessary &safe to do so, etc..always a proviso in the regs]

 The Highway code some 20-odd years ago actually fell foul of a trap of supposition, concerning the hatched road markings[not the chevron road markings]....!

It listed two types....those surrounded by a broken white boundary line...and those surrounded by a solid boundary line!

The former rule allowed entry into the hatched area, ''if necessary, & only if safe to do so''...and the latter ''prohibited entry''....

Thus, one could overtake a cyclist [travelling at less than 10mph..they all do that, don;t they? Hint hint] if within the area of a solid continuous white centre line....by crossing said line....Yet, if said solid centre line became a wider [than one metre] hatched area, with the solid boundary line, one was prohibited from entering the area, so one had to follow the cyclist to the end [or when the centre markings became just a soldi continuous white line, as per normal.

 

This 'change' of rule definition would catch out many of our LGV test candidates where I worked, as such a marking was prominently on one of the test routes [Woodmansey-Dunswell, for those who know the Hull area...Plaxton Bridge bends].....for they could overtake a cyclist on the double solid whites.....but not on the solid white boundary hatched  section in the middle!

 

According to the Highway Code!

 

Until, someone pointed out [to the HC folk, as anyone can do]...that such a road marking had no legislation, or regulation, actually laid down for it!

The hatched road marking surrounded by a single solid white line...and its pre-supposed meaning, had no legal standing at all....it became supposition over many years.

So, the Highway Code had to put out a new issue, with that road marking and its meaning, deleted.

 

Which we see today.

 

ANother outcome was, our Local Authority, and the Highways Agency where they were responsible, had to go around and do a mass re-paint on a lot of the urban routes around Beverley & Hull....Hence the double solid white boundaries for hatched areas that previously had single solid whites, and which they didn't want folk crossing into [for traffic protection purposes]...Swinemoor bypass in Beverley, for example, for those who know the area....

 

All those test-fails for the old rules[the non enforceable ones] weren't rescinded since all our test candidates were trained & tested for free anyway...so they all simply re-took their tests a day or so later, after suitable remedial training.

 

Did you lot know, the double solid centre line, [or its half broken cousin] has to have cat's eye reflectors set between the two white lines, in order to be 'enforceable?'  Worth checking if one gets reported for the offence?  

 

Another one I would like to have checked up on concerns traffic lights.

 

Now, in my last job, and over the preceding years, I was always given to understand that, at a traffic light controlled junction, the only traffic light that controls a driver or rider is the one immediately to their left? All the others were simply repeaters, and had no 'legal' standing over traffic...just the left hand one.

Hence, once across the stop line [presumably on the green light?], regardless of what the traffic lights do subsequently, one should continue proceeding, if clear & safe to do so.  [Many don't, thee seethe amber or red light opposite, and think they have to stop where they are....often creating huge blockages in the process, as the other routes change. Mainly  at traffic light junctions here the 'stop' lines are set well back to allow large vehicles to turn freely, where roads are quite narrow?

Road works with temp traffic lights have to ensure the light is 'on the left' of traffic it controls.

 

Yet I have come across a few very new junctions which don't actually have a traffic light to the immediate left of the traffic supposed to be controlled....for whatever reason [cost, placement?} One I use sometime, has two [3 actually] lanes approaching the  lights, one a dedicated left turn lane, with its dedicated traffic light[filter]...the other two, [straight on] which are separated from the left lane at its end by a central reservation triangle....have their own dedicated traffic lights....but not one to the left....theirs is on the right.  Hence someone at the stop line, in the left side, but going straight on [two lanes going straight on], has no controlling traffic light to their left...it's on the right side, on the central reservation!

The left-most traffic light, controlling the left turn filter lane, has a left filter lens.....not a plain lens....so by its type, it is for the left filter lane only.

 

I wonder if I should email our LA roads dept and query their set-up?

[I did that some time ago when I noted that, on a very minor rural road, which had a junction with the 'main line of route' turning through 90 degrees [the other routes being tees, effectively, despite the whole junction looking like a cross roads]....the whole junction was correctly signed, and correctly marked...but one day someone knocked down one of the triangular warning signs, and it was replaced by the normal 'cross roads' sign..sowing the main line of route ass going ahead [rather than to the left, as the original sign showed]  How no other road user noticed, says a lot about driver's awareness of road signs and the HC....Anyway..I pointed out in my email that, if someone presumed they had priority to go straight on, and hit a vehicle coming from the left route, correctly, then the insurance claims could be diverted towards the council for incorrect road signage. [The hitting vehicle effectively, according to the road markings, making a right turn across the vehicle approaching from the left.....despite what the junction geographically looks like.]

The sign was changed within a week..

I suppose the wee council truck drivers thought, we haven't got a left priority sign with us,  but we have a cross roads sign, so that's better than nowt?

 

  This was what was present.

 

 

The above was what it should have been, and was, before demolished by a tractor.

 

Huge difference if anyone had been coming the other way, on the priority route [no 'give way lines' as its the main line of route...] and a driver had simply gone 'straight on'...Both the minor routes have 'give way' lines & signs...

Not a lot of folk know, or realise is, if coming from that left road [main route, intending to take either of the minor routes, then a left signal should be given regardless of which minor route being taken.  I won't post up the sign that the left route has on approach....its similar to the above, but the thick black line goes to the right. Thus, the two minor routes would be 'left  turns'.....Effectively, two side roads, to the left, on a bend, so to speak.

[alastairq]

54 minutes ago, Reorte said:

More power means faster acceleration

 Not completely  true, as much will also depend on overall gearing. Hence, a low geared Morris Minor might hold a Porsche up to around 35 mph?

Then there's, power-to-weight ratios?

Hence an old Alfa Romeo 33 green cloverleaf infection, had a higher power-to-weight ratio than most of the Porsche range, of the time. So said What Car!!

[Jol Wilkinson]

3 hours ago, Reorte said:

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.

Safety regulations create bigger cars (wider doors for occupant protection, etc). Modern lifestyles  create a demand for bigger cars and which motor manufacturer is going to ignore that.  The status/image that the "premium" brands apparently convey is important to many car buyers, as owning a larger, more powerful, highly specified model presumably implies wealth and style. 

[Reorte]

1 minute ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Safety regulations create bigger cars (wider doors for occupant protection, etc). Modern lifestyles  create a demand for bigger cars and which motor manufacturer is going to ignore that.  The status/image that the "premium" brands apparently convey is important to many car buyers, as owning a larger, more powerful, highly specified model presumably implies wealth and style. 

 

Oh, I know why it all happens... Sometimes for good reasons, sometimes not, but nevertheless I still think what I said.

[Nick C]

2 hours ago, alastairq said:

Now, in my last job, and over the preceding years, I was always given to understand that, at a traffic light controlled junction, the only traffic light that controls a driver or rider is the one immediately to their left? All the others were simply repeaters, and had no 'legal' standing over traffic...just the left hand one.

Hence, once across the stop line [presumably on the green light?], regardless of what the traffic lights do subsequently, one should continue proceeding, if clear & safe to do so.  [Many don't, thee seethe amber or red light opposite, and think they have to stop where they are....often creating huge blockages in the process, as the other routes change. Mainly  at traffic light junctions here the 'stop' lines are set well back to allow large vehicles to turn freely, where roads are quite narrow?

Road works with temp traffic lights have to ensure the light is 'on the left' of traffic it controls.

 

Yet I have come across a few very new junctions which don't actually have a traffic light to the immediate left of the traffic supposed to be controlled....for whatever reason [cost, placement?} One I use sometime, has two [3 actually] lanes approaching the  lights, one a dedicated left turn lane, with its dedicated traffic light[filter]...the other two, [straight on] which are separated from the left lane at its end by a central reservation triangle....have their own dedicated traffic lights....but not one to the left....theirs is on the right.  Hence someone at the stop line, in the left side, but going straight on [two lanes going straight on], has no controlling traffic light to their left...it's on the right side, on the central reservation!

The left-most traffic light, controlling the left turn filter lane, has a left filter lens.....not a plain lens....so by its type, it is for the left filter lane only as present.

 

The highway code merely states that "RED means ‘Stop’. Wait behind the stop line on the carriageway" - it doesn't specify that there is a particular set of lights that is the 'official' one. 

 

It does lead to some awkward situations though, where you see people who clearly aren't sure how to react - like here for example - there's often a queue backs up from the next set of lights, meaning that a car can be in the position of the red car waiting for the box junction to clear, when the lights change - as far as the law is concerned, they've crossed the line, but if the traffic from the left starts going, it wouldn't be safe for them to go. In practice, of course, half the drivers ignore the box junction anyway...

[Reorte]

20 minutes ago, Nick C said:

It does lead to some awkward situations though, where you see people who clearly aren't sure how to react - like here for example - there's often a queue backs up from the next set of lights, meaning that a car can be in the position of the red car waiting for the box junction to clear, when the lights change - as far as the law is concerned, they've crossed the line, but if the traffic from the left starts going, it wouldn't be safe for them to go. In practice, of course, half the drivers ignore the box junction anyway...

More often I find in that situation is I've stopped there, the lights change, and there's still no room to advance because of cars stopped in the box junction who shouldn't have done so, with traffic from the right starting to do the same (it's "can enter the box junction if turning right if your are blocked by oncoming traffic, not traffic backing up from where you want to turn in to). So it's usually impossible to move until the traffic from the right has sorted itself out anyway.

 

On the subject of lights and repeaters I wasn't aware of any rule applying to the left only (not that I'm claiming any expertise here!) But they do apply to the stop line, not once  you've crossed it. Where we go in for ever more traffic light heads at junctions I do like the genuine repeaters I've seen in France, mounted on the post closer to eye level, so easier to see when you're stopped right by the light. Well, I call them repeaters, I assume they've got the same legal force as the main set.

Edited May 23, 2022 by Reorte

[alastairq]

3 hours ago, Nick C said:

it doesn't specify that there is a particular set of lights that is the 'official' one. 

Unfortunately the Highway Code is silent on a lot of the 'finer points' of road traffic regulations, , Regulations dealing with signage, markings, etc. As it should be, in order to be intelligible to the masses.

 

2 hours ago, Reorte said:

Well, I call them repeaters, I assume they've got the same legal force as the main set.

Which is why no doubt they are referred to as 'repeaters?

Doubtless the TRRLs [or whatever  title they go under these days?] are online....They will be where the sizes and regulations governing the positioning, etc of road signs & markings, which, of course, have to be correct on order to carry the weight of the Law behind them.

[SamThomas]

4 hours ago, Nick C said:

The highway code merely states that "RED means ‘Stop’. Wait behind the stop line on the carriageway" - it doesn't specify that there is a particular set of lights that is the 'official' one.

I'm pretty certain that each junction will have a "primary traffic signal" & this one must be operational to enforce red light infringements.

 

I'm also pretty certain that the that the HC is just that - a code, not actually a code book, although it's recommendants are often used when deciding a point of law.

[Compound2632]

40 minutes ago, SamThomas said:

I'm also pretty certain that the that the HC is just that - a code, not actually a code book, although it's recommendants are often used when deciding a point of law.

 

The Highway Code is very clear that when it uses the words MUST or MUST NOT it is stating the law. Where it uses SHOULD or SHOULD NOT, it is giving guidance. However, failing to follow that guidance would count against one if one was in court.

[stewartingram]

Point for discussion?

re the earlier comments about cars growing in size, and parking spaces remaining the same....if (and in simple terms, and not referring to any present legal rules), you have a lorry, it (and its load) must conform to maximum dimensions for normal use. Anything larger becomes an "abnormal load", which then has to adhere to specific regulations when it moves. For instance, they used to have to contact the Police for permission to travel a specific route; often this would involve a Police escort. (I know that nowadays that rule has changed, either in the regs, or by Police cutbacks meaning they just give permission under certain conditions anyway).

Anyway getting back to oversized cars. What if....there was a maximum size for the car? (for instance, so that it fits those parking spaces).And if it was larger, it became an "abnormal load", with those restrictions that implies....?

Edited May 23, 2022 by stewartingram

[PhilJ W]

6 hours ago, Nick C said:

 

The highway code merely states that "RED means ‘Stop’. Wait behind the stop line on the carriageway" - it doesn't specify that there is a particular set of lights that is the 'official' one. 

 

It does lead to some awkward situations though, where you see people who clearly aren't sure how to react - like here for example - there's often a queue backs up from the next set of lights, meaning that a car can be in the position of the red car waiting for the box junction to clear, when the lights change - as far as the law is concerned, they've crossed the line, but if the traffic from the left starts going, it wouldn't be safe for them to go. In practice, of course, half the drivers ignore the box junction anyway...

Actually the amber means stop if it is safe to do so. 

[Jonboy]

1 hour ago, stewartingram said:

Anyway getting back to oversized cars. What if....there was a maximum size for the car? (for instance, so that it fits those parking spaces).And if it was larger, it became an "abnormal load", with those restrictions that implies....?

I have often thought that anything over 2000kg should be classed as commercial for speed limits etc on environmental and safety grounds….

[Sidecar Racer]

15 hours 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.

 

 

Edited May 23, 2022 by Sidecar Racer

[kevinlms]

6 hours ago, SamThomas said:

I'm pretty certain that each junction will have a "primary traffic signal" & this one must be operational to enforce red light infringements.

 

I'm also pretty certain that the that the HC is just that - a code, not actually a code book, although it's recommendants are often used when deciding a point of law.

Are you suggesting that if a particular lamp is out, then it is not possible to enforce red light offences? Sounds like madness to me.

 

I have noticed that in Britain, unlike Australia, you often don't have lights on the other side of the controlled intersection.

We have a full set almost universally (I'm saying that, just in case someone comes along and proves me wrong!).

[alastairq]

6 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Are you suggesting that if a particular lamp is out, then it is not possible to enforce red light offences? Sounds like madness to me.

If a traffic light has failed, the junction becomes a 'give way to everything' junction.

Much like the regulations governing blue light drivers when facing a red traffic light.

[alastairq]

12 hours ago, stewartingram said:

Point for discussion?

re the earlier comments about cars growing in size, and parking spaces remaining the same....if (and in simple terms, and not referring to any present legal rules), you have a lorry, it (and its load) must conform to maximum dimensions for normal use. Anything larger becomes an "abnormal load", which then has to adhere to specific regulations when it moves. For instance, they used to have to contact the Police for permission to travel a specific route; often this would involve a Police escort. (I know that nowadays that rule has changed, either in the regs, or by Police cutbacks meaning they just give permission under certain conditions anyway).

 

https://www.croneri.co.uk/compliance/navigate-road-haulage

 

The above for reference.

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/503103/Aide_Memoire_updated_Sep_2015.pdf

 

Brief, but not exhaustive, outline of the rules...

 

Incidentally, regarding speed limits, the  STGO CAT 2 used to have a motorway speed limit if 40 mph. This applying to an LGV which, to all intents & purposes [when approaching from behind] might  not look any different to any other LGV. 

[Source, I used to instruct on military LGVs which could have a combined loaded weight of near 55 tonnes...STGO Cat 2....Thus STGO rules were part of the course. That was a while back though, but still very much this century]

 

 

[alastairq]

12 hours ago, stewartingram said:

Anyway getting back to oversized cars. What if....there was a maximum size for the car? (for instance, so that it fits those parking spaces).And if it was larger, it became an "abnormal load", with those restrictions that implies....?

 Do you mean, something similar to Japan's Kei rules? [which I have always thought should apply to any Metropolitan area in the UK, which has traffic volume issues?]

 

Going one stage further, I have also thought that pedestrians with oversized backsides should also have to wear patches on their behinds, small rectangles, reflective, red & amber diagonal stripes.....If over  yet another width, then a [wide load] sign at the rear should be worn?

Does that make me a lardarseist?

[SamThomas]

7 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Are you suggesting that if a particular lamp is out, then it is not possible to enforce red light offences? Sounds like madness to me.

I know a couple of HGV drivers that have had red-light PCN.s cancelled ofter they have asked for absolute proof that the primary stop light was actually working so there must be something in it.

 

The problem HGV drivers face is that there is a lot of vehicle after the front wheels that can trigger these cameras.

[Nick C]

57 minutes ago, alastairq said:

 Do you mean, something similar to Japan's Kei rules? [which I have always thought should apply to any Metropolitan area in the UK, which has traffic volume issues?]

 

Going one stage further, I have also thought that pedestrians with oversized backsides should also have to wear patches on their behinds, small rectangles, reflective, red & amber diagonal stripes.....If over  yet another width, then a [wide load] sign at the rear should be worn?

Does that make me a lardarseist?

 

 

[Nick C]

14 hours ago, SamThomas said:

I'm pretty certain that each junction will have a "primary traffic signal" & this one must be operational to enforce red light infringements.

 

7 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Are you suggesting that if a particular lamp is out, then it is not possible to enforce red light offences? Sounds like madness to me.

 

23 minutes ago, SamThomas said:

I know a couple of HGV drivers that have had red-light PCN.s cancelled ofter they have asked for absolute proof that the primary stop light was actually working so there must be something in it.

 

Found it - Schedule 14 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made):

Quote

 

Primary and secondary signals

31.—(1) In this Part a reference to traffic light signals, or to a signal of a particular colour forming part of traffic light signals, is, where secondary signals as well as primary signals have been placed, a reference to the light signals displayed by both the primary and secondary signals or, as the case may be, by the primary signals operating without the secondary signals or by the secondary signals operating without the primary signals.

(2) “Primary signals” means traffic light signals provided for at item 1, 2, 3 or 4 of the Part 2 sign table and—

(a)where a stop line is also placed, sited beyond that line and near one end or both ends of the line; or

(b)where there is no stop line, sited at either edge or both edges of the carriageway or part of the carriageway which is in use by traffic approaching and controlled by the sign; and

(3) “Secondary signals” means traffic light signals provided for at item 1, 2, 3 or 4 of the Part 2 sign table which are sited facing traffic approaching from the direction of the primary signals but sited beyond those signals as viewed from the direction of travel of such traffic.

 

 

I read this as meaning that 'primary' and 'secondary' are referring to the position of the signals, not their importance - paragraph 1 allowing for secondary signals operating without primary ones. It states later in the document that at least two sets of signals must be provided, of which at least one must be primary - but it doesn't suggest that any particular set must be illuminated in order to be enforcable.

 

[SamThomas]

Thanks for the link Nick - I knew I had seen it somewhere.

 

I think the "get out of jail free" card was played for the simple reason that all signage ect must be working ciorrectly or they are not 100% legal.

Which is why some facists (sorry, CEO's) also take images of signage when they take images of your car prior to issuing a PCN.

[Michael Hodgson]

1 hour ago, alastairq said:

 

Going one stage further, I have also thought that pedestrians with oversized backsides should also have to wear patches on their behinds, small rectangles, reflective, red & amber diagonal stripes.....If over  yet another width, then a [wide load] sign at the rear should be worn?

Does that make me a lardarseist?

I hear that Anika Rice is going to be back on TV again.  For the benefit of those to young to remember, her programmmes consisted mainly of climbing backwards out of a small helicopter (Does my bum look big in this?)

[Michael Hodgson]

27 minutes ago, Nick C said:

 

 

 

Found it - Schedule 14 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/14/made):

 

I read this as meaning that 'primary' and 'secondary' are referring to the position of the signals, not their importance - paragraph 1 allowing for secondary signals operating without primary ones. It states later in the document that at least two sets of signals must be provided, of which at least one must be primary - but it doesn't suggest that any particular set must be illuminated in order to be enforcable.

 

There used to be quite a lot of little details in the law, which has been revised from time to time.  In the good old days traffic lights had to be on black & white striped posts, No Waiting signs on black and yellow striped posts, and if the post was a single plain colour you could get off.  I think there had to be metal studs in the road too, but that might only have been Belisha crossings.  If traffic lights had the wrong timings (too long or not long enough on amber for example) that meant they weren't traffic lights within the meaning of the Act.  You could have been done for driving with due care & attention instead, but once you'd got off on a technicality, under the double jeopardy rules, it was then too late to charge you with that.