Safe Speed Forums

I've done some scouting around and noticed a thread or two on "undertaking" on dual carriageways and motorways which seemed to basically say that as long as you don't change lane to do so or do so in an aggressive manner it's not technically breaking the law.

Anyway...was wondering on your thoughts on this little situation that happened today.

Driving on 2 lane DC, in decent conditions for the time of year, in L1. Not much around and then turn a corner and 300 yards or so ahead in L2 is a Corsa, creeping up on lorry in L1, travelling at its limit of around 56mph.

Closing in on both vehicles fast although only doing a touch over 70 myself and still in L1.

Now...having read the threads on here I did something I perhaps wouldn't have done previously and remained in L1, undertook and then calmly pulled out to overtake the lorry with ease (the Corsa still involved in it's "overtaking" bid and now several lengths behind, creeping up on the lorry).

Though process was...do I:
a) remain in L1 and pass (keeping an eye on them pulling back in of course) and continue to make progress calmy and sensibly (IMO)?

or

b) pull out into L2 very early (lorry still quite a distance ahead) and begin a queue behind the Corsa, blocking L2 and leaving L1 clear for a few hundred yards? Possibly causing myself and others frustration and anger.

or

c) pull out behind the Corsa and flash / tailgate to get them to move over, causing frustration and anger?

Most sensible seems a) as I didn't change lane to do so, simply continued as I was doing all along and made good progress. But what do you all think and what would PC plod and buddies think if they saw it?

Honest opinions please, and if I've offended anyone as a "newbie"...sorry!

Hi - and

I'd probably have moved out early and flashed very early being prepared to back off to Numpty Corsa's speed until their overtake was complete if they didn't move over, unless I was on an urgent mission where minutes mattered. In that case, I'd probably have done the same as you - but with VERY careful observation for ANY hint of return to L1 by Numpty and all set to brake or gun it depending on the situation.

I'll answer a question with a question (or three)...

Q1. What escape plan did you have in place for the possible eventuality of the Corsa running out of steam, abandoning his stillborn overtaking manouevre and drifting back to L1 as you were passing him? Was there a reasonably "clean" looking hard shoulder available, should the worst come to the worst?

Q2. What other steps did you take to satisfy yourself that the Corsa wasn't going to do the above? Eg how long had you observed its progress and "lane stability" prior to the "undertake"? Were you reasonably comfortable with the drivers state of alertness and observation?

Q3. Did you take steps to minimise the duration of the undertake? In other words did you ease up to a sensible closing speed and select a gear to give good acceleration should you need it as you passed, or did you just "cruise past" in Fifth?

My preferred option would have been to close up but stay in L1, keeping station a safe distance behind the vehicle in L2 then pulling out behind him once we both close on the lorry. That way all the options are covered and I'm not building up a queue in L2 that would further invite a later vehicle to undertake us both.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Answers to questions...

1) There was a decent-looking "hard shoulder" (wide edge to road rather than an official one) so there was always that option

2) I made the decision based on a few things. The driver remained in that lane for long enough to assume he wasn't going anywhere in a hurry and had an otherwise good lane position in the middle of L2 (ie wasn't swerving around or looking like he was heading into central reservation or drifting back in to L1).

3) As for the move itself, started relatively steadily incase there was a move back into L1, once I was pretty sure that the driver wasn't going to make an immediate swerve back into L1 I added a few MPHs as quick as possible and went past (making sure I didn't stay in the blindspot for any longer than i needed to).

It was a well-considered move, I thought, given the circumstances. There was still a long way to go to the lorry and the Corsa still hadn't passed by the time I had gone out of view. Must have been going 60-65 compared to the lorry's high 50s so it would have taken a while to hang behind.

Ta for your opinions, I don't normally undertake but thought in this occasion it was warranted. Would I have been pulled up for it if it was seen, though. Probably I think but I could see there was no ocifers around. Obviously to do it swiftly there was an increase in speed too that took me over the limit, but this aside what do you think?

Having said all this it is something that annoys me when others do it, but that's when it's done with a queue of traffic in front and someone clearly cuts into L1 to go past a few cars before darting out into a so-called gap again.

Sounds fair enough then!

Sometimes it is the asking of the questions that is more important than the actual answers, and that is what my previous post was perhaps trying to illustrate.

In the circumstances you describe I think it was a fair decision.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

When undertaking in this situation, there are a few potential hazards to be aware of.

As well as watching for the Corsa pulling back into L1 (possibly unaware of your presence), you also need to watch for the him suddenly accelerating as you move alongside (this can happen due to a change in road incline or the driver may just do it out of spite)

You also need to watch for the lorry slowing down. There may be a slow moving vehicle or congestion ahead of the lorry in L1 that the Corsa driver can see, but you can't.

There is also the possibility that Corsa boy may have "backed off" on purpose in anticipation of the lorry pulling out into L2 to overtake something even slower in L1. In this case, your undertake/overtake manouver could force the lorry into a panic brake. Not good.

Unless you can clearly see the road ahead, I think it's better to pull into L2 behind the Corsa (keeping a safe distance) and assess the situation from there. If he is indeed just "dawdling", I don't think a flash of your lights is going to annoy him as much as dropping it into third and blasting past him on the inside...

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken

Surely there is option (d), which is to not overtake?

I'm curious to know what you think you gained by your action, rather than waiting for the Corsa to complete his overtake. How many seconds do you believe that you saved with your decision? And what did you do with those seconds when you arrived at your destination?

My instincts tell me that the undertake / overtake move described in the first post wasn't the best choice. JT's route to assessment is a good one - eliminate sources of danger systematically, and if they are all eliminated, then do it. But...

If the two vehicles were so far apart that each move was individual (i.e. one minute you plan to undertake a dawdling L2 driver and five minutes later you overtake a heavy) then the description of the scenario would have been completely different. The fact that the description and the driving plan included the undertake / overtake sets a couple of alarm bells ringing.

Obviously if the gap between the L2 vehicle and the L1 heavy was 'small' then swerving through it would be immediately reckless. You would be vulnerable to either vehicle changing speed and making a small gap smaller, and perhaps worse, as you close up towards the rear of the HGV your vision would degrade.

So the right answer changes with the size of the gap. In fact if you define it as a 'gap' then it's probably better not to use it. I have a 'golden rule' that warns aginst some moves like these:

never accelerate through a closing gap

The trouble with closing gaps is that they close! And sometimes they can close faster than expected.

Another problem is that the move could be seen as aggressive. Suppose the L2 hog decides that you're being aggressive and starts to accelerate by way of a response. Now the gap is closing, you're not passing the L2 vehicle and you're rushing up towards the heavy. I wouldn't like to be here...

And freddieflintoff2005

If you're asking the questions, and listening to the answers, you're on the right track.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

On balance that is likely to be my plan too. Lower overall risk. Not impatient or aggressive, and in the real world very little time lost.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

When I first passed my test, BiB in Cumbria / Lancs used to pull drivers who lane hogged in this manner, using "Driving without consideration for other road users" as the offence.
The criteria was if you had not passed anyone/thing in half a mile or thirty seconds, and were holding up another vehicle, you qualified.
If you were ALONGSIDE a vehicle within the thirty seconds/half a mile, you were OK, if not, £30 fine - magistrates nearly ALWAYS convicted as far as I remember.
I always thought this seemed quite fair - of course it did rely on the BiB being there in the first place.

Any thoughts on this - it still seems like a reasonable expectation to me?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Actually, that brings up a point of logic that I'd never considered in my first answer, and I think it may explain why this situation rings alarm bells:

If the gap is closing, then it is unwise to accelerate into it, for all the reasons given previously.

But if the gap is constant, or is even growing, this vastly increases the chances that the driver will suddenly become aware that he isn't making any progress on the vehicle in front and is out in L2 for no reason whatsoever, at which point he may well feel a bit sheepish and leap back into L1 pronto, without checking for the undertaking vehicle that he won't expect to be there. Furthermore, the fact that he's been out there drifting along without gaining on the vehicle in front makes it seem highly likely that he's been "daydreaming" and won't have spotted your approach at all.

So in either circumstance (ie that there is a "gap" between the two vehicles rather than coming across them a fair distance apart) I'd regard the undertake as posing an unacceptable risk, versus the alternate strategies available at that time.

As an aside, what a great first post Mr Flintoff!.

This is one of many, many scenarios that have been brought up on here where previously I might have subconsciously dealt with it without really justifying my actions to myself. But talking through it like this equips me with a mental checklist, a positive strategy, and a clear justification for my actions the next time it arises. I presume I'm not alone in noticing this, and wonder how many other posters have felt this benefit too.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

I think I gained a clear road ahead of me, which in my opinion is always a good thing even if you do leave a good distance between you and the car in front anyway. If I had pulled in behind the Corsa, or remained behind it in L1 I feel that I would have had to a) keep an eye on the two vehicles in front of me and b) watch out for anyone coming up behind and getting frustrated / flashing / undertaking when the gap had closed...which brings me onto:



I know this, and whilst the gap was closing, it was still large (10 car lengths) and closing very slowly. I undertook, was still a safe distance behind the lorry and had time to check mirrors and blindspot (in case the Corsa was speeding up now) and then move out safely. There was no weaving, I was prepared to slow down and could "abort" if the Corsa reacted and it was all very calm...which I suppose is my point really because during the move I undertook and broke the speed limit but don't consider what I did to be dangerous whereas I frequently see tailgating, people pulling out of junctions and sitting in the middle of the road till someone lets them out / crashes into them / swerves around them, weaving into the middle of the road, driving with one light out (common in winter) etc... which aren't speed related but are so much more dangerous. Which is what this site is about. Isn't it?



Good point, and the one that has been suggested which I possibly didn't think about enough.

Thanks for your ideas, and I appreciate your opinions.

Sorry, think I need to practice the quote function more! or use preview...



And it was...

Sorry if that last post was confusing, but I'm sure you can work it out!

You can edit or delete your own posts using the buttons to the top right of the message: 'edit' for edit and 'X' for delete.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

So you can! Thanks...

Why do you think it is about time?

It is about making smooth progress for ones self and others on the road.

By undertaking, Freddy will have saved fuel compared with slowing then accelerating.

Fredy created a gap behind the Corsa, which would not have been there had he adopted the queueing mentality. This gap will have been a benefit to someone else. If only to the Corsa driver.

It's not just about selfishness and getting there faster.

I'm sorry, but that does not compute.

At 70mph, a 2 second gap is (2*70*1.46667) 205 feet or (/14.5) 14 car lengths. Given that you needed a safe gap to the heavy (14 car lengths) and a safe gap from the Corsa (2*50*1.46667 / 14.5 = 10 car lengths), the minimum gap should have been 25 car lengths (having added 1 for your vehicle). And that's without allowing for the lane change time.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Just seen Paul's "does not compute" post.

I've not done the maths, but on the odd occasion (perhaps half a dozen times in 30 plus years) I have performed this manouevre, it's invariably only involved cars, not HGVs. Visibility has always been better therefore (I have already appraised the situation way beyond the lead car in lane 1 as I close the gap). In most cases, the gaps get tighter than I expected (though not unsafely thanks to the extra visibility). This stems from the need to slow and speed up again (as described above) to complete the manouevre in safety. I daresay were I to do it as a policy (I won't btw), I'd factor this slow/speed up into the equation. In fact I may already have done the factoring because I do it less frequently these days (last time was probably five years ago) as I judge it to be too ... confrontational thanks to the reduced clearances.

what would I do?

I tend to put up with numties for a mile or so. then when there is loads of room undertake them or let another driver intimidate them.

There are only about three cars on the market that can't make 80mph on demand. There fore a slow driver in lane 2 is someone who is not observing the conditions

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I've done this when one truck doing 56 pulled out into L2 about 200 yards behind another truck doing 55, when I was another 300 yards back doing 90.

Didn't even consider the morals, just undertook, to the overtaking truck's apparent disapproval.

I think I was 500 yds beyond them before they drew level with each other.