Safe Speed Forums

On a right hand turn where you have to go into a box to let traffic pass by on the inside, why is there hatching to stop you going into the box until the box is full width?

are you talking about a box junction, or a junction with chevrons leading to a dedicated right turn (the same set up which ever way you approach the junction)

_________________
now retired

I think I mean a box junction (I am better at pictures than descriptions).

keep a look out for the big hand from the sky (an old advert if you are young)

i will be corrected if wrong (someone will put up the highway code explanation) , if the right hand turn is clear you can enter the box junction

_________________
now retired

No, I think you mean hatching to separate lanes either side of a filter lane.

A box junction has a yellow criss-cross pattern like this.


From your description I think you mean white hatchings like these.
It is not illegal to drive over these although the highway code says you should not. They serve only to guide traffic around the refuge, if you are turning right it is perfectly acceptable (though not 100% in keeping with the HC) to drive over the hatching, in my opinion.

The highway code says that if its hatched with a broken white line surrounding it, you shouldn't cross the white line (like Homer said). If its hatched with a solid white border then you should only cross the white line in an emergency, and if its chevrons surrounded by a solid white border then you MUST NOT cross into the chevronned area.

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

Actually the Highway code says:

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/10.htm#109

109: Areas of white diagonal stripes or chevrons painted on the road. These are to separate traffic lanes or to protect traffic turning right.

* If the area is bordered by a broken white line, you should not enter the area unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so.

* If the area is marked with diagonal stripes and bordered by solid white lines, you should not enter it except in an emergency.

* If the area is marked with chevrons and bordered by solid white lines you MUST NOT enter it except in an emergency.

Clearly we are being given the authority to make an informed decision about necessity.

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

Ahhh, the english laguage, how rich and 'interpretable' she is
If I had a quid for every hour I've spent poring over technical regulations trying to decide if the word should is permitting or prohibiting me from doing something I'd have a bag of booty to be sure.

So, in this vein.....



What is the difference between these two then? Looks to me like the only time you can enter either area is in an emergency.

In procedural speak, must is a legal imperative, should is much weaker and has no legal standing (although it may have a corporate one depending on your company. Ours doesn't).

I agree for sure. Thing is, I wonder what the average Joe or Josephine who drive cars on our roads are meant to make of such legalistic distinctions as they make their way about the highways.
I'll wager the distinction would be lost on many if not most.

Perhaps, but if I come across something I don't understand in something that I am meant to know, I find out, either by research or asking. Don't others simply ask their driving instructors?

That's the plan. We're allowed to use the shading, but if we're underskilled we're scared away. Brilliant. Now why can't we do the same trick with speed limits?

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

Hmmm, I'm sure thats not the way its meant to be, thats just the way you see it.
Clearly, the areas in question are not intended to be for general use either by the inexperienced or by those skilled at bending definitions and meanings We're allowed to use the shading in exceptional circumstances, so what constitutes an exceptional curcumstance?
Trying to get on to the motorway before the traffic ahead of you?
Getting around slower moving vehicles?
Or perhaps as an escape route where there is nowhere else to go?

Where the stripes and broken lines are guarding a right turn, if I'm turning right I get on to them as soon as I can to clear the inside lane. I would class that as 'necessary'.
Also, most of the 'space' they allow you to slow and stop for the turn is usually not long enough.

Why? Makes pefect sense to me. Has exactly the desired effect.



But it doesn't say 'exceptional' anywhere does it? You made that up!

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

That's the way it works in real life.


The chevrons between a motorway and the sliproad have legal force hence the MUST NOT.


Sometimes this can be a valid and safe use.


Yes in all cases.

It has the effect you desire. But I'm sure its not written in a purposefully obscure manner to satisfy the Paul Smiths of this world.



OK, it says "should not enter except in an emergency". Except in an emergency, i.e. keep out unless its an emergency. An emergency is an exceptional circumstance which is why I used the word.
The difference between the two clauses in question is now a bit clearer to me...

Keep out except in an emergency, but we can only do you in the second instance, not the first because there is no actual law governing this type of hatching.

But even in that case, . Accordingly, there is a sensible get-out and you would not be prosecuted if the transgression was dealing with, or preventing, danger.

Edit: Changed misqoute from "emergency" to "necessary".

I personally don't see it as obscure. How would you have preferred it be written?

But rarely an emergency (so is not permitted within the highway code) which is why I included....



In which case its covered as an emergency.