legb4rsk

This is the problem in a nutshell.Nobody has any manners or courtesy.A little bit of give & take combined with looking ahead & anticipating any issues would make driving a much more pleasurable & safer experience.Not to mention everyone would proceed at a better pace instead of all the stop/start argy-bargy that goes on today.

^Qwerty^

I like your last paragraph, the real world, well at least the first sentence anyway. In many cases when you see cars coming down the slip road, or in a lot of road situations, you have to think for the other driver as well, as I'm sure some think for me. Coming to a standstill on the bottom of a motorway slip road has to be one of the most undesirable situations that could ever occur on a road in the UK.

What rule (law?) are you breaking if you slightly ease off the gas to open up a gap for somebody to pull in to?

^Qwerty^

Sorry, just seen this. I know what the law is, I'm pointing out that it is not desirable for every scenario. If you take your uniform off and look at situations as a humble person, surely you can see that?

ray54

Your wasting your time Q!!!, this felix fella hasn,t the brains he was born with, let alone common sense.

Using common sense whilst driving, will within reason make you a safer on the road.

Remember once out of uniform, this fella could just be on the road causing mayhem to all and sundry.........

Felix.

Absolutely - but the test of this 'mitigating factor' will be at a hearing or court case.

All I'm suggesting is that exceeding the speed limit just to overtake something would not be a reasonable excuse. If a person pulls out to overtake, but has to exceed the speed limit to avoid a head on crash - it would be seen as not a safe overtake in the first place. So, the best policy would be - where possible, don't exceed it.

"Easing off" on the carriage way shouldn't be a problem, like i said before the problem will be when someone hammers the brakes on - then the person behind them goes into the back of them - or you get a ripple effect of everyone breaking causing a traffic jam. That's why its the responsibility of the person on the slip road - at the end of the day, its still a give way

Felix.

Do you want to add any relevance to this or enter into a logical debate to actually add credence as to why you disagree. Or what you rather the law state?

Or are you just going to carry on being abusive to me - bare in mind you have had a warning already.

^Qwerty^

So in the first instance, if you have to bust a limit to avoid a head on, then it's unsafe to start with. Agreed 100%. I always try to work on the pretext of 'what if', and that might be someone comes around the corner up ahead at 100mph.

What I'm saying is that on a clear road with very few visual obstructions, NSL, you roll up behind a car doing 57/8mph ish. The speed limit says you can safely do 60mph, so you are perfectly entitled to overtake. I have a button on my steering wheel which would limit my speed, so would it be safer to set that to 60mph and thus the overtake manoeuvre would take longer, or is it safer to overtake at 61-70mph and then drop back down to 60mph? I'm not talking about the law here, I know....... what I'm asking is, as a trained professional driver, which is the safer of the two options? This is where the camera's, van's and partnerships fall down, because they just peddle the mantra that if you break the speed limit you're a child killer, when actually it's not always true. Having associated with some quite reasonable trafplod in the past (including my IAM trainer), I think I know the correct answer

Also, back to an earlier question, What rule (law?) are you breaking if you slightly ease off the gas to open up a gap for somebody to pull in to, or did I take what you said too literally in the early quote of, "That's the rule - now i know you will slow a little to let people in in the real world, but in theory this breaks the rule" - and I do understand the difference between easing off to create a gap for somebody to pull in to and slamming on the brakes. No trafplod in their right mind would pull somebody over for doing this (easing off) - what would they stop you for, what could you be charged with?

Cheers
Q

Felix.

The argument will always be that the speed limit has been set at that speed for a safety reason.

Now of course, it will be safer to increase up to 61-70 to overtake than say 100-110 by some loony in a sporty car. But the line has to be drawn at some point and that line is that of the speed limit of the road.

For example overtaking past a school with a speed limit of 20. Would you increase to 40 to get past a car doing 15?

Maybe you took 'the rule' too literally. As you are not supposed to slow down on the motorway to let traffic in. Courtesy would suggest you move over if safe to do so or 'ease off' a little. But braking will inevitably cause problems.

JDM_Stig

iTrader: (3)

that limit was set back when they made a man walk in front of the car with a flag though . . .

^Qwerty^

If the schools around you are anything like the ones around me, then at dropping off and picking up time you'd be lucky to be able to do 5mph never mind 40 and tbh, I think 20 is too fast when there are kids and parents everywhere - and no I wouldn't. I'm talking about rural driving, not built up areas.

neil-h

Must've been a seriously quick bloke

Olddriver

There's a dead straight road on the outskirts on Norwich that has always had a 40 limit and no history of accidents. Nothing about the road has changed but the city council recently changed it to 30 without any great fanfare. Fortunately I knew about the change and was driving down it at 30 last night when I saw two coppers halfway down with a laser gun trying to catch people over the limit. Now convince me that this was anything other than a revenue gathering exercise.

Felix.

But the principle will be the same on any road - what would the limit be to overtake someone? And at what point would it be classed as an unsafe speed. This is why they set the limit to the road and if you need to go above the limit to overtake, then perhaps you should not consider the overtake in the first place.

Felix.

And how do you know that there wasn't a specific reason to change the limit of the road? How do you know there hasn't been reported accidents or reported near misses or local resident writing to the council with issues over the speed of the road.

If they changed the speed limit of the road, then there must have been signs up. Therefore the road users will know its 30 zone - hardly a revenue gathering exercise.

ray54

Exactly!...........No matter how they want to dress it up as, (for your own & others safety bu**sh*t), in most cases/ its plane to see by most motorists, that when/if we make a mistake or get caught out like the above scenario, its up to plod to be around at the time, be it in vans or laser guns and bring in the cash..

It's all about MONEY. it's the plod job to police it!!!!! always has been/ always will be....talk about license to print money!

ray54

How would it be if we all stuck to the speed limit on every road in country? Would we grind to a halt? or would it be utopia?

With no accidents, no plods on speed, redundancies i guess.......i,am willing if you are!!!!!!



Just for a while of course, till they sell all the safety vans...

andy97

iTrader: (1)

Since my last 2 vehicles which came with adaptive cruise control, driving is alot more relaxing. Set the cruise to just below speed limit, if vehicles in front are travelling faster they pull away or if slower my car keeps a safe distance from the rear.

I can now cover the brake for upcoming hazard spots whilst maintaining a speed and distance from the vehicle in front.

No delay to shift mind process from speed to slowing, its like having a copilot doing some of the basic functions whilst i can concentrate more on hazard dangers.

^Qwerty^

Because I'm entitled to go at a faster speed down the road than the person in front of me, therefore to get past them, I should do so in the safest possible manner, and yes, I know, I take the risk by doing so that I might get ping'd by some binary illogical speed enforcement van or camera, but I can live with that. 3 points is better than a head on crash. At least you've said its safer to do what I do, although now you're suggesting I don't overtake at all. But then why not reduce the NSL to 50, 40, 30....

Another angle is that if somebody is sat around 50 in a NSL, and nobody overtakes, then you end up with a long line of traffic. Not everybody has the patience of a saint and thus people will start busting dangerous moves to get past, so you're creating a far more dangerous situation by being a sheep, and I'd rather not be in that place.

andy97

iTrader: (1)

The bold word really says it all about today's self entitled drivers.

Actually you and me are under license and on the understanding we drive and use the highways with care and attention to the rules and limits set down. If you break the rules you should lose your license or vehicle taken off the road.

Btw 50 isn't slow on a 60, lots of vehicles are legally limited to 50 mph as this speed is for safety.

This will bite more and make drivers a little more careful. Driver will be fined 175% of weekly earnings from last year

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-charge-crash/

^Qwerty^

It's not about being smug or entitled in the manner which I think you mean. The speed limit for the majority of my drive to/from work is 60/NSL. They are not busy roads, most of it is rural and it is perfectly safe to overtake slower moving vehicles if you want to. The point I was making is that it is 'safer' to complete the overtake by breaking the speed limit for reasons already explained. Like you, sometimes, in fact, for the majority of my drives I'm happy to dawdle home and I myself might set the cruise to 50-55mph and just chill, but sometimes I want to get home.

And I do think 50 is slow in a 60, but that's a difference of opinion. On one stretch of my drive home, it really feels like you could get out and walk faster.

The Trooper 1815

iTrader: (31)

I suggest some of those commenting about "revenue makers" spend time on the continent, particularly in German. They have no car tax to fund their roads but we know how good they are. My trips from Calais to Monaco via the Ring, and the Stelvio Pass and Lake Como were a joy, I have done it a few time now and even further east.

The accident incident on Autobahns is less, even on unrestricted section, but when you get one it's spectacular. But that being said I found driving in Germany a great experience because drivers appreciate driving. I would dread getting off the ferry and having to put up with the utter stupidity, disregard and generally poor driving of UK residents.

In Germany they hide speed cameras in wheelie bins, the backs of estate cars as well as on gantries/posts/hand helds. You get fined on the spot and woe to you if you have no dosh. Off to the cash point you go or come back for your car when you have cash. You very rarely see a poorly maintained or rough looking car with a German plate.

The Germans appreciate the car, what it does and what it is for. I genuinely do not think the current "entitled" attitude in the UK is the same.

Felix.

If its about money, then they would just increase your tax.

And if its all about generating money from speeding - how come speeding offences take up about 1% of the police's work?

Felix.

What I'm suggesting is that if you pull out to overtake someone within the speed limit - then you think you will have a head on crash with an approaching car - its probably best that you pull back in as it is an unsafe overtake maneuver. Similarly, if you pull out and then then think that you can exceed the speed limit in order to pull back in time before the head on crash, its not a safe maneuver. You should be able to plan and execute an overtake without exceeding the speed limit safely. We do this on our driving courses and make progress through the traffic without breaking the speed limits.

If everyone is sat at 50 - the increase journey time will be a matter of minutes for everyone in the queue. The problems occurs when people nip out for an overtake which isn't there and put their foot down to make it and end up crashing (at a higher speed than the roads limit). Patience is the key - wait for the opportunity, plan ahead.

What would you prefer the law to be then on speeding and its enforcement? You can speed so long as you're overtaking - then where do you draw the line?

^Qwerty^

I've never said the law is wrong, I said that the binary enforcement of speed limits is not necessarily the safest option and you agreed earlier that it was safer to overtake and drop back down to the limit than not. I also accept that if I get caught, then I take it on the chin.

But why do you suggest that I might pull out to overtake somebody when I'm going to have an head on crash with an approaching vehicle? And then you say, "if you pull out and then think that you can exceed the speed limit in order to pull back in time before the head on crash, its not a safe manoeuvre" Who said anything about a head on crash, why would I overtake if there was any risk of a head on crash? Why do you think I've invested time and money in learning road craft? Just because I might not tow the party line doesn't mean I want to kill myself or anyone else.

It's simply this. I roll up behind a car doing 50-55, the road is clear ahead, I overtake, which may see me doing 61-70 before I pull back in and slow back down. I don't tend to consult with my speed whilst carrying out such a move, because it's better to be watching the road. That's it. Simple. If that makes me some kind of monster in some people's eyes, then so be it, but I suspect a lot of people do exactly the same as me.

As much as I've quite enjoyed this, we just seem to be going round and round in circles, but at least we've not degenerated in to personal insults, which I thank you. I massively enjoyed my time riding with the instructor, who got me prep'd for my tests, he was a realist who has to date, equipped me with skills that hopefully stop me having an accident. I'd love to do more on a continuous basis, but sadly time won't currently allow.

Here's hoping for a good weekend where I can put my feet up over looking Rutland Water and have a beer or two

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Of course it's about cash, it's a huge revenue stream, Google the figures Felix.

Over in France they started later than us with speed cameras. Sixteen years ago there were two between Calais and my property in the Limousin. Now there are WELL OVER 100.

And they are sneaky...in wheelie bins, in the rear of an apparently broken down car on the hard shoulder, hidden behind the plastic bollards at motorway exits, even some now mounted in private cars with a copper riding shotgun on the camera, etc etc.

And when people in France started to question the proliferation of cameras, they were told "look at how the death rate in accidents has dropped since we started with them."

NOW, however, it has emerged that the rate of drop is EXACTLY the same as it has been since around 1970...better tyres, seat belt law, better junctions, better suspension, MoT's, airbags, side impact bars etc etc etc....but the French government are giving ALL the credit to the cameras...while raking in €millions per year.;rolleyes:

Latest scam? They are going to lower the national speed limit from 90 kph (about 56mph) to 80kph...50mph!!!! And their roads are far better and less busy than ours!

There's already a backlash with speed cameras being attacked.....

Felix.

If its about generating cash, how come speeding only takes up about 1% of what we do?

Felix.

You said this in post 108 "....3 points is better than a head on crash...."

And I'm not saying you're a monster, I'm saying that if its a speed restricted road then you can't justify going above the limit just to overtake. If you feel that you are a capable driver and can do so - that's fine, just accept that you take a chance of hitting a camera when you do.

Here's to a good weekend too - and I think we both must be too intelligent to feel the need to drop to petty insults like others do on here.

ray54

Well there you go then ....now you can be as one with your, non polluting, save the planet, perfect for getting from a to b, car of the future!.
Or maybe you could just get a taxi, then you can have a kip and have wonderful dreams of the "cotton wool" wrapped world of the future

Me..... I kind of like being human or even a (human being) and not going the robotic/automated route!
Funny enough wife has the same attitude on life as me, would you believe she even prefers me than her ***** could be she just likes the basic functions.......

dpb

tmi ?

Andy i trust youll be pulling to the inner lane at this regulated speed / no cars in front

andy97

iTrader: (1)

I have never been a middle or outside hogger. Just pull out to next lane when I needed to pass. These days, I rarely drive more than 30miles from home. I let the wife drive on long journeys.