Safe Speed Forums

Asking for a definition is probably a bit unfair as it is so contextual, as is the whole speed argument, which is probably where the disagreements start.

Rather than starting at opposite ends, e.g. mlms and hand wavers is there a middle ( ) ground we can agree on.

Lets try -

Overtakes should have a minimum speed differential of 5mph

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

[quote="toltec
Asking for a definition is probably a bit unfair as it is so contextual, as is the whole speed argument, which is probably where the disagreements start.

Rather than starting at opposite ends, e.g. mlms and hand wavers is there a middle ( ) ground we can agree on.

Lets try -

Overtakes should have a minimum speed differential of 5mph[/quote]

And let's sit down and look at the practicalities of an overtake (eg L1 -L2-L1).WRT timeing ,and if it's proper and practical to expect someone driving a bit faster to move over (unless caught up by someone faster ) with a short time differential in L1 .

e.g - minimum distance at the point of lane change / minimum indicating distance / add in some thinking time to allow for baulking by a car L2/ overtaking time/minimum distance in front before indicating / minimum indicate time /etc


Just my two pence worth - open to suggestions on anything I've missed

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

Minimum distance - two seconds?

There is a speed differential to allow for but then again the driver should be on 'maximum alert' so reaction time should be good.

Minimum indicating distance - five seconds?

From what I understand it can take around three seconds for another driver to realise you are indicating.

Add a few seconds to those minimums depending on the situation.

Overtaking time - ??

Very situation dependent, I like to spend as little time as possible level with other vehicles particularly trucks etc. Passing speed would usually be something between 5 - 20mph I think. One other point is that I tend to try and ensure that I pass before the other vehicle is going to need to pull out to do an overtake itself, if I cannot I will hold back and let them out first.

Indicate to pull back in -

If there is no vehicle catching me then I will get well clear of the vehicle I have overtaken and slide across without indicating. If there is a vehicle catching me and there is sufficient room for me to pull back to the left then I will indicate as I get level with or just past the overtaken vehicle and pull over when there is a gap of at least a second depending on the situation.

Edit - Realised when I got home that I had mixed time and distance as a function of time. The indicating duration will only close the distance, as measured in seconds of travel, proportionally to speed differential. So lets say you need to allow for at least 3 seconds of indicating before you pull out.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Yeah your right but, personally I don’t believe it’s that difficult to understand the philosophy (got it right that time) of overtaking and keeping left after the manoeuvre has been completed. This doesn’t just happen with MLM’s it also happens with L3M’s.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Ummmm nope, I just read it and it doesn't invite any comments about the driver behind, only what the driver in L2 should do ... and the topic title is "Middle lane hoggers" not "bulling drivers"



Don't see a thing in there asking about the behaviour of the following driver. The only questions I see there are "why should I pull over" and "Wouldn't this be encouraging".

I do believe my comments still stand. I'm not trying to be awkward or anything, but I really would like to know if you were in fact inferring that the majority of the people on this forum condone agressive driving when another driver behaves in a way that they find annoying. I'm not bothered one way or the other what the answer is, and no it's not any kind of trick question .. I'd just like to know.

But you never explained why he was in L2. Was it safe for him to have been in L1? If so, why was he not there? Was L3 clear for the "flasher" to overtake him anyway?



The impression I am beginning to get is that you designed the OP in order to try to provoke people on this site to condone the "flasher"'s behaviour. This may well be unintentional on your part, and if this is indeed the case then I apologise, but to be honest your recent posts do point this way.

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian

Yokel,

Interesting. Yes, I was curious to see whether posters felt that a person driving in L2 at 70mph should be forced out of that lane by another driver flashing their lights and gesticulating from behind.

The driver in L2 may or may not be there appropriately, but I am not sure that it is up to another driver to make that decision, unless they are traffic police of course.

Also, it is interesting to note that the concern over driving in L2 inappropriately has taken precedence over the safety of flashing your lights and gesticulating at other motorists at 70mph on a motorway. Some people might think that this is more dangerous than using a mobile phone, for example, not least because of the anger element.

C.

_________________
More rules and regulations please! (Not)

You're falling into the same trap again Cooler, something along the lines of 'two wrongs make a right'.

Noone is condoning agressive behavior on the roads, however, the MLM could have avoided the entire situation by selecting the correct lane. It's not about who's more in the right, but everyone trying to do the right thing.

Still arguing here for over/under taking like other countries

Fish do it in the sea, birds do it in the sky.

Do us humans have a seven second memory or a bird brain?

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

I can go with philosophy Dixie, spirit or goal would also work I think.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Yokel,

I think you have missed my point. The driver in L2 may well be there appropriately, as part of an overtaking manoevre or because of the spacing and density of slow moving traffic in L1.

It is not up to a middle lane hogger coming up behind them to make that decision for them. I use the term 'middle lane hogger' appropriately if L3 is available for overtaking and the bully driver is not prepared to use it, preferring to try to barge through in L2.

C.

_________________
More rules and regulations please! (Not)

You will not find anyone here that will argue with that. What I (and most here) will argue with is the amount of people who drive in the ML all day and not blink an eye as to what is going on around them.

This thread is now going round in circles, and personally I can’t get my head around what your intentions are.

As Yokel has pointed out:-

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Dixie,

I think it is a mistake to assume that people driving in L2 are not paying attention to other road users. There would need to be more evidence than just a lane position.



To challenge certain opinions.



The OP was based on an example from my own driving. I remember it quite clearly. I was driving northwards on the M5 just South of Gloucester.
The motorway was pretty busy, with lorries strung out along L1. There was some traffic in L2 (including me) and I was maybe 100 yds behind the car in front. L3 was clear.

A bronze merc (I think) came right up behind me and did the flashy rude fingers thing. I didn't respond immediately and the driver then gesticulated with both hands for me to pull over to the left. I speeded up, pulled out into the clear L3 and left him behind. I didn't see him again, but as I left him I saw him in the rearview waving his fists.

I remember thinking he was a nutter. That's pretty much what I can remember. I also remember thinking that he would have to do that all over again with the car that had been in front of me etc etc, which is more reason to suspect his state of mind.

C.

PS - One concern about the OP example is that I stated that the driver in L2 was doing 70mph. I won't say on a public forum that I personally broke the NSL, so in my real life experience I must have been driving more slowly. I just wanted to make the point that if I had been doing 70mph, the driver behind would have had to break the speed limit in order force me out of his way.

_________________
More rules and regulations please! (Not)

First of all there wasn’t that much to go on in your opening OP, it simply asked the question why you should pull over for someone flashing there lights and gesticulating in your rearview mirror and, whether you would be encouraging that driver to break the law. Now the story has changed.

Why are you making the point that the driver would have had to break the speed limit in order to force you out of the way? Personally I don’t believe it’s relevant. If a person wants to break the law by driving over the posted speed limit, do you feel it is your responsibility to do something about it?

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

I have to ask, are you a little bit slow? How many times do you need it reiterating that being in L2 does not make one a MLM. Being in L2 when L1 is clear does.

Are you capable of understanding this, or shall I draw a diagram?

That's probably something to do with the title you gave the thread.

You keep coming back to the fact that if L3 is clear, a driver in L2 closing on another vehicle should simply move to L3. Well, duh.

However the reason MLMs are reviled by so many motorists is that L3 is often the busiest lane, as a large proportion of the traffic has gone as far to the right as they can in order to overtake slower vehicles. As traffic density increases, L3 is the first to become saturated, leading to waves of braking and eventually congestion.

Ergo the best way of increasing the vehicle flow on a given stretch of motorway that has not reached saturation would be to increase utilisation of the lanes other than L3.

Now, let's try and put some numbers on it in an example (guess who had trouble dropping off last night ):

3 lane motorway.

L1 is occupied by lorries doing 56mph, at 500 yard intervals
L2 is occupied by cars doing 70mph at 250 yard intervals
L3 is occupied by cars doing 85mph at 30 yard intervals

For the purposes of this example these speeds are the maximum speeds at which each vehicle is prepared to travel.

Car A doing 75mph approaches the rear of car B doing 70mph in L2.

Scenario 1. Car B passes a truck in L1, smoothly pulls in to L1, still at 70, until approaching another truck when he returns to L2, during which Car A has passed him, still at 75. No-one has to change speed.

Scenario 2. Car B continues in L2 at 70, ignoring gaps in L1. Car A brakes to 70mph while waiting for a gap in L3, finally gets out, causing all following vehicles in L3 to brake in practice to rather below 70. A braking wave travels back through L3. Car A accelerates to 75 (though feels under pressure to drive faster), gets past Car B and returns to L2. By the time he has to pass the next car in L3, normal flow has more or less been restored. Car A and all the occupants of L3 have to change speed.

Thoughts, please, everyone.

Yes he does. And in the next sentence he will state that L2 cruising makes for a smoother drive by cutting down the number of lane changes, something he is perfectly happy to enfiorce on other drivers. And yet he can't see the dichotomy he has created for himself.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Johnnytheboy activated my inner nerd and I fired up MSExcel.

Working from 500 yards with 56, 70 and 75 mph as the vehicle speeds.

If car B pulls into L1 leaving a two second gap to the lorry (based on 56mph lorry speed) and needs to pull back into L2 when it has a two second gap to the leading lorry (based on cars 70mph) it will be in L1 for 55 seconds. This is based the time it will take the car to cover the rolling 377 yard gap between the lorries at a speed differential of 14mph.

Car A is two seconds behind car B and must be two seconds in front of Car A before car A needs to pull back into L2. Car A then must cover the rolling 377 yard gap plus four seconds at 70mph or 514 yards at a speed differential of 19mph, oddly enough this will take just over 55 seconds.

So car A can complete an overtake without car B having to slow down!

This does not allow for car A accelerating from 70 to 75 however this should not take very long and if car B signals its intention to pull into L1 in plenty of time car A can begin accelerating as car B pulls out of the way.

Assuming you did not calculate or measure the numbers you proposed Johnny that was a very good estimated example.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

It was better than counting sheep, but no, I didn't put much thought in to the numbers, it was more from repeated experience sadly.

As for your comment about allowing for accelerating from 70-75, I see what you're saying, though in my scenario 1 car A doesn't slow down to 70. You can see what an idealised situation this is

Dixie,

I would not say that the story has changed. There is a difference between my thought experiment as OP and the real incident I have just recounted. The real incident would be 'the story' as it is a narrative of events and the thought experiment is just that - a hypothetical. They are not both the story.



Because it interests me.



Haha! If a person wants to drive in the middle lane of a motorway do you feel it is your responsibility to do something about it?

C.

_________________
More rules and regulations please! (Not)