Safe Speed Forums

A very good question, although the way you ask it seems engineered to cast doubt upon whether it is a rule. I would therefore ask you again what the point of your 'case' actually is?

As for your question, I don't have a definitive answer for you, but I am convinced that the total lack of any motorway training in the UK syllabus plays a major part, along with human nature's tendency to 'learn-and-dump' information like the HC that is only formally tested on a single occasion.

Fair point,

My case is that motorway drivers have developed such ingrained L2 and L3 behaviour that is it practically irrelevant that any 'keep left' rule exists.

It is an objective fact that driving rules exist, but it is also an objective fact that certain of these rules are regularly flouted. I am drawing attention to that fact and I haven't read anything in this rather long thread to show that the disparity is being addressed.

It is not enough to get into a 'drivers should do x' - 'drivers don't do x' stand off, for that offers no solutions. Either the rule needs to be changed or drivers motorway behaviour need to be changed.

Your idea of motorway training is a good one, for it looks at the moment that drivers are just doing what they see others do. (Biblical fallacy of the Gadarine swine)

C.

Yes, exactly. But then we wouldn't expect proper attention to detail from any government going from past experiences.

_________________
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.

Possibly irrelevant to those in ignorance of the rule, but that's not an excuse for those who are aware of it to selfishly/complacently/lazily ignore it. Having already identified that motorway-uneducated drivers 'learn' by mimicking others, it is incumbent upon those of us who are aware of the correct practices to be conscientious and rigorous in their execution, as the first step to making a change for the better.

I fully agree that policy must be founded upon what drivers do do rather than what they should do, and that is why it is no longer enough to merely have a passage in the HC and the occasional gantry sign. We need a campaign of education, informing drivers of how they should be behaving on the motorway and why, backed up by a proportionate campaign of enforcement. Unfortunately, it's not an aspect of road safety that can raise vast revenue through automation, nor is solving congestion, that can be profited from, going to bolster the treasury coffers, so we're unlikely to see worthwhile action on the matter from central government.

Robin,

I, for one, would blanche at the thought of surveillance cameras enforcing lane discipline on us. That would be a restriction too far for my libertarian soul. It sounds like the science fiction nightmare THX 1138!

C.

I quite agree, read the sentence again.

Ahem.

Whilst I will not try to say I "simply will not exceed the posted limit" I do certainly try to drive within the limit, and am successful most of the time (I admit occasional blips - I'm only human after all).

I'm also pretty much on message with the "middle lane morons" side of the discussion.

I claim my position as an exception to your rule, thank you.

Andy

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

Sorry for missing you out earlier with my applause ... although I think it WAS actually me who inferred the SA point by saying that forward planning also includes being aware of things behind you (I seem to recall writing that ... I may be mis-remembering).

Anyway, about this campaign of education, backed up by a campaign of enforcement that you mention. I believe the best time to do this would be surrounding a move to increase the motorway speed limits to 80 or 90. A great big ad campaign saying "this is how you are supposed to drive on motorways. We are looking at increasing the limit on the motorway at the moment, but we need to be sure the current roads are being used efficiently etc.".

Then a speed limit rise on a test stretch of the motorway - the M58, perhaps (guess who uses the M58 to get to work ?) or where it all began, the M6 past Preston. Get some trafpol out there, monitoring behaviour, and have "Police, Camera, Alistair Stewart" on for 15 minutes every week night. Viewers can text and phone to vote out the weakest driver.

Then another "aducational" campaign with the results of the test, and whether it was successful or not. If it was, roll out the increased limits. If not ... well, we tried?

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

Firstly, when I lived abroad I never had a problem with traffic passing me in either side. If you can look to your right, in your right wing mirror or over your right shoulder, and make a good judgement as to whether it is safe to overtake then why not on your left? (An undertake)

I have yet to hear a valid argument against this. If they can do it safely in other countries then why not here? It solves the whole problem of middle, or L3, morons.

Make it legal and people will soon get used to it. It will reduce road rage IMO and Mr Angry will keep his arrow in the quiver.

If Sweden can make the whole population swap to driving on the right then surly we can achieve this fig leaf task.


Secondly, I don't have any problem with raising the speed limit on our motorways. In fact I have long been in favour of it, but only if there was regulation of the two second rule! (4 in the wet). Like they do in Germany. We already have morons doing 80 mph with <0.5 second gap!

Driving too close to other traffic is infinitely more dangerous than the actual speed IMHO. It's simple physics - You can give yourself more time if you A) Reduce your speed or B) increase your distance.

Speed = Distance/Time. Is Germany the only country which understands this any more...

_________________
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.

BigTone,

Excellent point. I have no problems with being undertaken, although it scares the wife a little.

C.

Though I don't know nearly enough about German driving culture to provide this argument, if there was one, I suspect it would come from there, right or wrong.

My limited experience there (loved it) leads me to believe that a higher level of cooperation between all road users is what allows them to use such gas-guzzling speeds with no real safety penalty.

Most of my driving experience is Amerikan. Given that experience:
1) the faster the entire local population wants to drive, the more likely the faster of them want to drive furthest away from the lane adjacent to the on / off ramp lane
2) usually, the slowest drivers don't want to be in that lane either
3) the further apart the on / off ramps, the more people you'll find in the lane closest to the on / off ramps
4) wherever a temporary extra lane that appears for on / off ramps exists, brakewaves are smaller and less frequent; there are also a statistically significant number of Right Lane Morons
5) if there are four or more lanes FOR EVERYBODY, and enough a)merging skill or b) distance between drivers, I'd expect traffic to be generally better behaved - traffic jams start later and end earlier - until the population changes its geographic distributions.

We count lanes from left to right. Here, L1 is our fastlane, and the highest numbered lane is the lane no one wants to be in, unless a temporary lane shows up for on / off ramp merging.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

maybe, but you will exceed slightly so I'm guessing you would go to say 75ish to expediate an overtake.

Can anyone say 'over analyse?'

_________________
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.

Why yes, yes I can ...

'Middle lane morons' seek to simplify their interaction with their environment, and to lower the amount of information they must respond to. By placing themselves in what they see as the position of least resistance, they have the ability to say that they are not interfering with entries and exits.

They compel those who wish to pass to make any of these choices, singly or in combination:
A) passenger-side passing /undertaking
B) driving above the posted 'limit'
C) give up the pass and become part of the herd

In doing so, they are preemptively rejecting the majority of their responsibility to the social compact, and from time to time, possibly safety as well, by reducing the number of options for those around them.
They are one of the unadmitted stimuli that precipitates predatory driving; though since they are never 'at fault', they would be loathe to change thier behavior in a more socially amicable fashion.

Making undertaking legal or socially acceptable would merely give these lane hogs an excuse to use more lanes, creating rolling chicanes which would:
1) increase the likelihood of accidents - which would of course never be blamed on any of the members of said rolling chicanes
2) make lane changing seem statistically more dangerous than it would be in a more socially responsible setting
3) lead to more MLM breeding
4) even if none of the above occur, traffic jams would tend to begin earlier / more often, and last longer
5) in the long run, the driving education standard would be encouraged to sink lower

(What allows the two lane parkways in Long Island to be so efficient, is the lane discipline shared equally between those who look in their rearview mirrors, and those who give the slower traffic ahead a chance to indicate which side they prefer to be passed on. Much more often than not, they prefer to be passed on their driverside.
However, almost no one dares attempt a pass anywhere near the merging area, where the onramp is immediately followed by the offramp, with the merging area shared between the two. Here, EVERYONE instinctively changes lanes away from the merging area and the lane adjacent, unless they are getting off the parkway.)

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Rush,

By pulling into L1 every time someone comes up behind you in L2, you are just making space for others to be MLMs. Far better that drivers who wish to make haste on a motorway be prepared to interact with their environment and actually make some overtaking manoevres.

C.

This is getting bloody ridiculous, talk about blind stubborness
If there is room in L1 for you to move into if someone comes up behind you, then you should be there in the first place.
Thats is what the HC says. That is what common sense says. That is what will help other drivers progress. It is just the stubborn bloody-mindedness of the typically anal British that people can convince themselves they are right even when they are obviously wrong.

_________________
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.

Rigpig,

As noted before, I regularly see lines of vehicles travelling in L2 and even L3, when there is room for at least some of them in L1.

To describe these drivers as 'stubborn bloody mindedness and typically anal British people' seems unrealistic as we have a variety of nationalities of drivers in this country, and we also see this driving behaviour in other countries.

People just seem to go with the flow, as far as I can see.

C.

In which case being prepared to exceed the speed limit is required as that after all would be going with the flow would it not?

_________________
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

So you'd be happy to accept that their behavior classifies them as 'stubborn, bloody-minded, and typically anal' then I take it.

Dear Heavens, I agree wholeheartedly with Rigpig! Especially about the 'why move over into L1? You should already be in L1' comment.

Just because lots of people can't wrap their brains round keeping left unless overtaking doesn't make it correct.