Safe Speed Forums

Not if there's a women doing 20mph in the lane in front of you.

Highway Code Stormin, if the person behind is too close you should slow down so you (and the person behind you) have more time to react to a situation ahead.

I will not tolerate people tailgating me in any situation, glad to say most don't.

Well, if you want to drive behind another vehicle that you can't see around and assume its not tailgating a vehicle in front, or approaching a sitution without slowing down when it really should that's up to you.

It would be very silly though.

I'd leave more space in a situation like that.

It’s worse than that, it's b****y dangerous!


Or course no-one would deserve it, but they would have earned it.


Even if there was oil/derv deposited on the carriageway?

See that's my issue, its not dangerous per se, it represents a hazard for other motorists, and may even catch out somebody you behaves in a dangerous way, i.e. approachs the slow/stationary vehicle way too fast, way too late.



OK, if you're closing on somebody at speed and you put your foot on the brake and hit an oil slick then yes, circumstances outside of your control and all that.

That's why her actions did indeed pose danger, great danger!
She created danger to those where the situation is out of their control.

Of course, no-one ever overtakes you and pulls into the your lane ahead of you.

The point I'm making is these situations DO happen-even if it's for a few seconds before you've backed off to give enough room (I'm sure you wouldn't slam your brakes on for them when 2 or 3 seconds away as that would be dangerous).

Unfortunately the best that the best driver can do is to mitigate the danger caused to him by the morons surrounding him. This means that at some point you will be in a situation where you're forced to react to a situation. If that situation suddenly changes, you're suddenly having to react in an emergency.

If you disagree then I'm sure a day in a truck's passenger seat would change your mind.... I have so many potential near misses a day from cars and bikes being driven like complete idiots that I can't count them-and they don't even know that they are only alive because I've taken evasive action before they even realise they are driving into situation beyond their control.

In fact, I very much doubt they ever realise they were seconds from being scraped up like a pizza.

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

I don't , the people you are talking about are the very people I'm talking about, people who drive without care or consideration for others, that includes people who drive at 10moh on a motorway AND people who are driving in such a way that they would inevitably crash when faced with such a situation.

Oh for heaven's sake weepej, is there nothing you won't twist round?

The safest thing for a woman (note that woman is the singular of women) doing 20mph on a motorway to do is speed up to at least 55, so at least she's doing the same speed as the lorries. That's a lot safer for everyone else around her.


Is that clear enough?

Oh for goodness sake, NOBODY is suggesting that she DESERVES to be in an accident!!

You still don't seem to get the point that its extremely difficult to judge closing speed of an object that is directly ahead of you until its relatively close by either... You can tell it's moving slower, but not HOW MUCH slower, which is why travelling so much slower than the surrounding traffic is dangerous.

Personally I would take up Nos's offer and go out in a truck for a day. It really is an eye opener.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

This debate is all a bit out of proportion - on both sides - and, imo, some salient points have been missed.

1. Of course driving at 10mph on a multi-lane road where other traffic is moving at up to 70-80 is 'dangerous'. For the purposes of speed differentials, there is relatively little difference between 10mph and stationary. So the level of danger caused is not really that much different to stopping vehicle in the middle of the carriageway for no good reason.

2. Coming across a stationary (or 'as near to stationary as makes little difference') vehicle in the road ahead when travelling at free-flowing motorway speed is an exceptional event - so exceptional that even the best drivers might be caught out. However, the fundamental safe speed rule applies and we should be able to stop in the distance we can see to be clear and can reasonably expect will remain clear. If vision ahead of the vehicle immediately in fron of us is obscured because of its size, we need to increase following distance or take other action to obtain that vision. So of course a following driver who piles into a vehicle ahead at 10mph is also at fault - no less than he would be if the vehicle was stationary.

3. This case is exceptional. Vehicles that drive on flee-flowing motorways at 10mph are very, very rare. I don't think we can draw general conclusions by reference to the facts of exceptionally rare events.

And as I've already pointed out, it would be completely impractical for everyone to leave enough space for that all the time, and besides, why the hell should they? I don't even think you do. Everyone is entitled to expect not to find someone driving at 10mph in free-flowing motorway traffic. You have to have certain expectations of other drivers to do the right thing on a basic level, otherwise you'd never go anywhere in case someone came careering at you on your side of the road.

I'd be surprised if you did drive actually, and if you do then you're surely extremely nervous, since TBH you seem to have an irrational fear of "speed", and that's far from helpful for your safety and everyone else's.

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)

Ah! I see where you're coming from and I think we're all arguing the same point to a certain degree here.

Yes, I agree with what you've just said. However,what I'm saying is circumstances around us are not always in our control and other motorists (while we can influence what they do) are quite likely to contribute to an accident without actually experiencing an impact. If we were able to instantly compensate for situations ahead we'd be able to change lanes in a millisecond and go from 60-0 or 0-60 instantly. We'd also have 0 seconds reaction time. Obviously that's not feasable therefore we're going to have periods of a few seconds at a time where we're adjusting our speed and/or road position.

You leave a 4 second gap, someone pulls in 10 feet ahead of you and there's a period of time as you slow/change lanes/overtake/take appropriate action where you're not in a situation you want to be in-and you didn't put yourself there. It happens to me many times daily in an artic. In a car you don't have the luxury of being able to see 1/2 a mile ahead over the top of everything.

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

Compliments Nos4R2 on that (as a driver myself HGV 1 for over 35 years) I was trying to get the same point across to "weepej" as you did, that in the majority of cases where you are put in the position of "Tailgating" it is through no fault of YOUR DRIVING as time & time again how often do you leave a reasonable gap behind the vehicle in front to allow for unforeseen circumstances (known as forward planning) and what happens some idiot decides that the gap is for them to fill and "not your escape route or braking gap if the unthinkable happens" ?

How often do you have to brake in a day because some idiot has decided to take your braking distance from you by doing this?

How many times in a day do you hold back for this very reason to find that some idiot fills the gap then decides to turn left or right a few yards up the road and you then become the vehicle holding everyone up because this clown has made you stop because you can,t go round them?

Bearing in mind that in a truck you are a lot higher up than car drivers so have a far better view of what is happening up ahead so you try and plan for things like this.

Maybe some poor unfirtunate soul would like to have "weepej" as a pasenger for a day and let him see the other side of what goes on with heavy vehicles as no matter how much you can plan or see you can only react to what is in your vision (as "in gear") posted and no one can plan for a driver doing 10mph on a m/way.

Is "weepej" so astute that he / she can gauge a vehicles speed from their speed of 60 or 70mph to the approaching vehicle to be 10mph in such a short space of time from say a distance of less than 1/2 mile or so?

_________________
"There But For The Grace of God Go I"

"He Who Ain,t Made Mistakes Ain,t Made Anything"

Spannernut

And if they can, they must have some kind of super-human ability...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Cheers

Cheers

It'd be a better question to ask how many times DON'T I have to back off as it's more often than not. I'd say around 8/10 people overtaking me pull in so close as to be a danger to themselves if I don't back off. Car drivers don't seem to understand that we NEED the 2 second gap as a MINIMUM-and in wet weather you need to double that and then some. Too many! It's regular enough that I expect it of everyone and a bonus when they don't.

Doubt it-but it's one of those things you have to see to understand. It's a question of loom vs trigonometry. Judging speed by loom is a lot harder than watching angles change. I can judge the speed of other vehicles far better in the truck than in a car-and significantly better in my 4x4 than in a car.


Incidentally, I didn't offer to have anyone as a passenger. Company and insurance won't allow it.

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

Then the drivers you are sharing the roads with are not the "monsters" that your cycling chums make them out to be


Paul has a very good piece on his main forum about dealing with the persistent tail-gater und they have been discussed umpteen times in the fora too.


It all about COAST with the creation of S und T as result of the COA parts.

If the person clearly want to get past me.. I just assist his overtake by creating a gap und road position for him or her to do so safely.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Here's a good example of what stormin and I are saying:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fe7w46nywzs

It's just as likely that the car that gets hit has just cut in too close in front of the truck, seen the brake lights and slammed on the brakes as the explanation the commentator offers of 'the truck was following far too close'.

_________________
Smokebelching,CO2 making,child murdering planet raping,granny mugging,politically incorrect globally warming (or is it climate changing now it's getting colder?)thug.
That's what the government want you to believe of me. If they get back in I'm emigrating.

But you would be slowing down to her speed .. if she in a queue .. or just behaving like a right numpty muppet of the truly dangerous type.

If the latter. I would be on the HANDS -FREE und dialling the contact number for the local RPU which I have stored on this device und report her und suggest they come escort her off und then prosecute her for placing herself und others in such danger.


The standard of this lady placed everyone at risk. Slow moving cars are prohibited for good reason.

Besides - a driver ist supposed to drive to the reqiuired standard with due consideration to others und traffic conditions. She was doing neither so her conviction und ban are sound outcomes.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!