New fixed penalty, introduced from July. Also tailgaters. And mobile phone users penalty increases from £60 to £100 too.
No mention of it being done by camera (as I think they do in Germany?) so you'll fall foul of it only if a policeman is out and about, sees you, and has time to pull you over.
And of course, if you want to argue you can take it to Court, as now.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22770064
|
>> mobile phone users penalty increases from £60 to £100 too.
£60 and 3 points wasn't enough to deter people from making non handsfree phone calls, so I can't see rasing it to £100 will make much difference (if any).
Confiscation of the phone along with a hefty fine 'might' though.
|
>> Confiscation of the phone along with a hefty fine 'might' though.
>>
Yep.
They do it here - phone taken away, and you can fetch it 24 hrs later from the local traffic department. In person.
The inconvenience far outweighs the monetary fine.
|
I drive about 40 miles a day on the motorway 5 days a week, plus another 60-70 most weekends, and I genuinely cannot remember when I last saw any traffic police.
Lovely idea which I fully support, but who is going to enforce it?
|
>> I drive about 40 miles a day on the motorway 5 days a week, plus
>> another 60-70 most weekends, and I genuinely cannot remember when I last saw any traffic
>> police.
>>
I drove from Chester to Heathrow and back again yesterday didn't see any Police at all.
Traffic was fairly quiet (mid morning departure from Chester and early evening leaving Heathrow) but was held up on several occasions by MLMs with people going past in lane 3 at only marginally faster speeds.
|
>> I drive about 40 miles a day on the motorway 5 days a week, plus
>> another 60-70 most weekends, and I genuinely cannot remember when I last saw any traffic
>> police.
>>
>> Lovely idea which I fully support, but who is going to enforce it?
>>
Drove from Staffs to Hook and back yesterday, none apart one on the A46 Jn overbridge shortly followed by three going south together with blues on, shortly after they (presume the same three) went past me going north (blues on, A4 sheet in rear window TP1,etc). These three then started slowing traffic and then four (one unmarked (Dark A4) and three marked went through up the hard shoulder. Shortly after they passed the first three disapeared. Cynical view is that someone important didn't want delaying at the M40/M42 junction but traffic was flowing well.
Like buses, can't find one then they all appear together.
|
"Drove from Staffs to Hook and back yesterday, none apart one on the A46 Jn overbridge shortly followed by three going south together with blues on, shortly after they (presume the same three) went past me going north (blues on, A4 sheet in rear window TP1,etc). These three then started slowing traffic and then four (one unmarked (Dark A4) and three marked went through up the hard shoulder. Shortly after they passed the first three disapeared. Cynical view is that someone important didn't want delaying at the M40/M42 junction but traffic was flowing well."
TPAC training.
|
|
I am sure cameras will come for both phones and lanes / tailgating. Just have to get really close so the camera can't see the number plate. :-)
|
>> I am sure cameras will come for both phones and lanes / tailgating.
So how does the "I see you on your phone" camera work? How does it click your face with the phone stuck to your lug hole from the other 10,000 cars that pass that spot on the M25 that morning?
|
>> >> I am sure cameras will come for both phones and lanes / tailgating.
>>
>> So how does the "I see you on your phone" camera work? How does it
>> click your face with the phone stuck to your lug hole from the other 10,000
>> cars that pass that spot on the M25 that morning?
>>
A small percentage will make a profit, sorry, cover the cost of the system.
|
>> A small percentage will make a profit, sorry, cover the cost of the system.
Yes but how does it physically work?
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 5 Jun 13 at 13:59
|
>> Yes but how does it physically work?
>>
I don't know, but facial recognition software exists and I am sure some IT geek can make it figure out a lump on the side of a head and read a number plate. You already have to declare who a driver is for certain offences, and the potential for generating income will make it attractive for someone to come up with a system. Dispute the offence and you are identified and the phone records are checked. Even 1% of your 10,000 a day in one location would make a few quid.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 5 Jun 13 at 13:36
|
>> >> Yes but how does it physically work?
>> >>
>>
>> I don't know, but facial recognition software exists and I am sure some IT geek
>> can make it figure out a lump on the side of a head
From 10,000 cars an hour? through a reflective windscreen? Nah - no chance.
|
>> From 10,000 cars an hour? through a reflective windscreen? Nah - no chance.
>>
Kit I was using 20 years ago could do that from miles away while ticking over, you need to update your knowledge. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 5 Jun 13 at 16:02
|
You were not visually identifying and processing thousands of images an hour to the extent that a computer could identify a mobile phone pressed to the side of a head.
Stop exaggerating, the technology to do that wasn't available 20 years ago. Even to the yanks who made you lot look like captain pugwash and the crew of the black pig!
|
>> Stop exaggerating, the technology to do that wasn't available 20 years ago. Even to the
>> yanks who made you lot look like captain pugwash and the crew of the black
>> pig!
>>
Oh how little you know. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 5 Jun 13 at 16:28
|
So tell me how this wonderful software will identify a phone at the ear, the other ear, held in front of the mouth, held away from the head, under long hair, covered by a hand, etc. etc.
The 10,000 cars an hour isn't the issue. Getting it right in a number of different scenarios would be.
And the software didn't exist 20 years ago. And it doesn't exist now. Which is not to say that it won't in future.
|
>> >> From 10,000 cars an hour? through a reflective windscreen? Nah - no chance.
>> >>
>>
>> Kit I was using 20 years ago could do that from miles away while ticking
>> over, you need to update your knowledge. :-)
>>
Data collection and processing seems to have moved on a bit in the 20odd years since I used it.
news.sky.com/story/1100095/verizon-phone-records-monitored-by-us-govt
|
The suggestion that this will somehow change things with the police swooping down to arrest tailgaters, phone users, and people jump out at junctions is clearly far too optimistic. As many have pointed out, they don't bother now, so I can't see them suddenly changing their approach.
I wouldn't mind seeing cameras for tailgaters though, a pet hate of mine.
I found myself being very aggressively tailgated a couple of days back, by some guy in a dumper truck. Lots of fist waving, shouting and honking, and driving about a foot behind me, and all because I was doing 20 mph.
If he hadn't been so fixated on tailgating me, he might have spotted that it was a 20 zone.
I couldn't even pull over and let the idiot pass, due to the narrowness of the road.
|
Prosecution might be difficult for middle lane hogging though.
Defining middle lane hogging in terms of law is not easy.
|
I think a better option is to provide fixed limit for each lane which all traffic must obey (condition permitting).
Like 50 MPH for lane 1, 60 MPH for lane 2, 70 MPH for lane 3 and so on. If you want to go slower/faster, just move to appropriate lane.
It will help all traffic moving better.
Last edited by: movilogo on Wed 5 Jun 13 at 12:35
|
>>I think a better option is to provide fixed limit for each lane which all traffic must obey
They have this in Brazil and it doesn't work very well. Imagine 120kph limit in outside lane, 100 in middle and 80 in slow. Car travelling in fast lane at 110kph. He can't move over without slowing down, which he won't do. You can't undertake him etc. etc.
|
>> Prosecution might be difficult for middle lane hogging though.
>>
>> Defining middle lane hogging in terms of law is not easy.
A lot of them seem a bit hard to define.
Not giving way at a junction and causing another vehicle to take evasive action, is probably pretty clear cut, but being in the wrong lane in roundabout and pushing into a queue, seems like a bit of a minefield.
I can think of at least one large roundabout near me, where I often see people in the wrong lane and having to "push in" to get in the correct lane.
Sometimes they will be doing it to gain an advantage, but I'm sure that very often it is because they are caught out by lanes switching to turn off lanes, or because they get blocked into the wrong lane, or various other legitimate reasons.
As for pushing in, well they genuinely have to be a bit "assertive", or it would turn into a scene from European Vacation..."looks kids, Big Ben, Parliament..."
www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAgX6qlJEMc
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Wed 5 Jun 13 at 12:43
|
|
In Nottingham, the SPECS cameras on the A6514 are due to be replaced over the next 2 years with ones which are "The new generation of camera which can be used to enforce additional types of moving traffic offences". I assume from this that the technology exists for other offences (apart from speeding and buslane) to be detected, it just needs device approval and legal framework.
|
|
The way to do away with lane hogging is to allow undertaking.
|
>> The way to do away with lane hogging is to allow undertaking.
>>
Works well in the US but everyone is driving at more or less the same speed.
I honestly think it would be a disaster here with wide boys weaving across all 3 lanes at 100MPH+
|
|
I sometimes find fairly long strings of closely packed cars moving at 60-65 mph in the slow lane of a motorway. If I am moving faster than this I think it is safer to stay in the centre than to keep dodging in and out of the strings as gaps appear. If anyone wants to break the speed limit and overtake me into the fast lane they can do so. It is not up to me to try to control the speed of other drivers and it is a bad idea to keep an impatient driver in check, but can I then be accused of hogging the centre lane?
|
>> can I then be accused of hogging the centre lane?
It's a matter of commonsense rambo. It's perfectly all right to stay in the middle lane when overtaking a long string of slower vehicles in the slow lane. Beyond the string of cars and lorries, you can go back into the slow lane if there's a long gap before the next slow car.
How busy you need to be to stay out of the way depends to a large extent on traffic volume. There isn't much point in weaving in and out when there's nothing coming up fast behind you.
'Middle lane hogs' though are natural mimsers who just pootle down the middle lane under all circumstances, from empty road to eager-beaver commuter rush-hour stuff, in a thoughtless, self-important way. They need to be pulled by old bill, dragged out of their cars and given a kicking on the hard shoulder in front of everyone. That would learn the carphounds.
|
I saw a classic example once. Mimsing along the centre lane of a quiet motorway at a tad shy of 70. I came up towards him in lane 1 going rather more rapidly with a few cars following me at similar speeds.
Rather than undertaking, I went for the very pointed sweep across behind him all the way to lane 3 and then back across his bows to 1.
Looking back in the mirror, I laughed so hard I nearly lost control. An intermittant snake of vehicles was doing exactly what I'd done, with Mr CLOG furiously hooting and flashing at each of them.
|
If you are driving at 70mph in the middle lane you are not holding anybody up.
Somebody might overtake you at 80mph in the outside lane and go back in the middle lane and drive at 75mph.Depending on weather and conditions can't see any harm.
|
Good points A.C.Sometimes driving to slow can cause more harm.
|
This article seems to suggest that the main problem is people in the left lane trying to overtake, and being unable to do so due to traffic in the middle lane.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22784983
It also states that some believe that flow is reduced by 30%, but then suggests that this may be a very big overestimate.
I have to question whether middle lane "hogging" is really a problem. Whatever the system is meant to be, the actual system depends upon how the majority of people perceive it to be, and how they act.
I think that most people perceive that the left lane is the "slow" lane, used by slow moving traffic, or people joining or leaving the motorway, that the middle lane is the lane to use most of the time, and that the right lane is the overtaking lane. Some might also perceive the right lane as the "fast" lane and stay in it until they see somebody wanting to overtake.
That to me seems to be the real system, and I don't see much wrong with it, if most people act on that basis.
The problem suggested by the BBC article would seem to be people trying to adhere to what the system is meant to be (by staying the left lane until needing to overtake), not what it really is.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Wed 5 Jun 13 at 15:05
|
>> would seem to be people trying to adhere to what the system is meant to be (by staying the left lane until needing to overtake), not what it really is.
That's a good point actually SS. But the problem may still be caused by middle lane hogs who don't lift off for a couple of seconds to allow someone trapped in the slow lane to come out. Like all driving it's a matter of give and take, with some people so hopelessly slow and obtuse about giving way or making brisk use of opportunities that they succeed in slowing everything down and annoying other drivers.
|
I was always told, a good law is one you can enforce. Stands to reason that you follow it up and do. So from that point of view, it's a bad law.
I can see it being a useful adjunct to existing law, but I foresee very few prosecutions and those that are could well get tested in court as unlike speeding, where most cases are backed up by a technical aid, ie the radar gun,VASCAR etc this one is soley another human being's judgement. Agreed the vast majority of traffic cops are fair, but it still makes me a bit uneasy.
|
>> vast majority of traffic cops are fair, but it still makes me a bit uneasy.
I agree Sp. The fine is neither here nor there. There simply need to be more traffic police with a mandate to pull people and tick them off for stupid or selfish obstructive driving. And the whole system for teaching people to drive, perhaps the highway code itself, needs a thorough overhaul.
What I mean is that it should be made clear to people that they can get away with a bit of clumsy stupidity when they have L plates, but once they've passed the test they had better shape up, or else. All too many continue driving as if blind drunk and half-witted for the rest of their lives.
I believe the police themselves, or the intelligent ones anyway, welcome the recent slackening of emphasis on technical speeding. Exceeding the limit can sometimes be good driving - when overtaking on a two-lane blacktop for example - and traffic police know this. But cameras don't and you can still get into trouble for it.
|
>> This article seems to suggest that the main problem is people in the left lane
>> trying to overtake, and being unable to do so due to traffic in the middle
>> lane.
>>
..and that's one of the main reasons that people give for sitting in the middle lane - they're frightened that they'll get blocked in.
I must say it's very frustrating if I'm breezing along with cruise set at 75 (so probably a shade over 70 in reality) that time and time again MLM will draw up next to me as I'm approching a truck and then they just sit there next to me.
I have to slow down, go into lane 3 to go around both them and the truck, then pull back into lane 1, resume cruise, and then...well you know what happens next!
|
>> The way to do away with lane hogging is to allow undertaking.
>>
Have to disagree, my experience of driving regularly in a country where undertaking is allowed is that it makes driving more stressful. On multi-lane freeways you end up with 3 lanes of traffic moving at exactly the same speed (dead on the speed limit which is the same for all vehicles) and the odd bogan zipping in and out irritating everyone, lane hogging is the defacto behaviour. On urban dual carriageways you have to concentrate so much harder - think of it being more like driving on a racing circuit in a race, and I expect it actually has a detrimental effect on traffic flow.
|
>> www.teletrafficuk.com/products-concept-ii.htm
>>
>> First used in Dorset in 2012.
>>
>> Pat
>>
I wonder how long it will be until that is automated and / or linked to a control room.
|
>> I wonder how long it will be until that is automated and / or linked
>> to a control room.
>>
Having now read the user manual, the data can be downloaded to automatic FPN issue equipment.
|
I am almost sure one of our drivers had a fixed penalty for talking on the phone some months ago....snapped on camera and photo and notification by post, but I can't think who it was.
I will ask when I get to work today.
Pat
|
>>
>> I will ask when I get to work today.
>>
>> Pat
>>
It's 08.56! For goodness sake!
What have you been doing all morning?
It's too late now, half the day has gone....
|
I've been up since 3.10am and I won't finish before 7.30pm!
Pat
|
|
A £100 fine is peanuts. I can't see that deterring middle lane hoggers.
|
>> A £100 fine is peanuts. I can't see that deterring middle lane hoggers.
£100 and three points.
|
I'd be more in favour of having people pay to attend an afternoon's course, like they have for minor speeding transgressions, than getting a fine an points. First offence, lestways. The people who hog the middle lane need educating in order to prevent them from doing it again. If they do it again, then get heavy. £1000 fine for example, or immediate suspension.
Of course, everyone should also have motorway training as part of obtaining a driving licence in the first place, but that gee gee has long since bolted the stables.
|
I was travelling home today at the end of our week long MX5 tour when I heard the debate on the Jeremy Vine wireless programme.
Hilarious.
One chap on anti-CLOG side of the argument said he wasn't being sexist, but it was usually women who lane hog. Vine pulled him up, whereupon he corrected himself and conceded it was actually women or "orientals" who did it...
A surprising number of people were prepared to say that they see nothing wrong with using lane 2 as a default. Safer than changing lanes, out of the way of lorries, overtaking lane free for people who want to go faster etc. The best one was someone who claimed to have had a "blowout" and did a 720 degree spin which, had they not been in lane 2, would likely have put them off the road or into the barrier.
I was one a 4 lane section of the M1 by then, and well placed to observe that the CLOG will use mainly lane 3 of 4, making up to two lanes redundant.
They need, in Raikonnen-speak, a punch in the face to make them understand.
Nobody made the obvious point that on average, fewer lanes will be required if they are all used.
|
And in the small print:
Graduated fixed penalties (mainly for commercial goods and passenger carrying vehicles and including offences like drivers’ hours and overloading) and financial deposits (for drivers without a satisfactory UK address) will also increase:
•a £30 non-endorsable fine will rise to £50
•a £60 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £100
•a £120 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £200
•a £200 endorsable and non-endorsable fine will rise to £300
This is what is not publicised today, but it answers the question of who will be enforcing it upon us...VOSA.
At the moment VOSA can't prosecute for a 'moving' offence but I see that changing shortly!
When it does, car drivers beware.
Pat
|
One guy on the TV said police are judge and jury and they have too much power.
You have to share the road with all types :-(
|
|
Another few rules and regulations, largely unenforceable, to add the many that we already have.
|
|
I haven't read all about this properly yet but 'on the spot fine' is a bit of spin. It doesn't take away the right to trial. Think I'm right in saying that this extends conditional fixed penalty notice offences to include careless driving, plus a few others. 'Middle lane hogging' is suggested as a potential careless offence but even that's questionable. 'Without due care and attention or reasonable consideration etc...' A somewhat subjective matter and I'm not at all convinced that the CPS would prosecute careless for middle lane driving just because there was vacant space in lane 1. I'd suggest that there would need to be some other attendant circumstance to persuade the CPS. You have to remember that they have several criteria to meet before they'll prosecute anything one of which includes realistic prospect of conviction. Plus of course they need to consider the cost of a prosecution and their own success rate. Regardless of who issues the ticket (VOSA included Pat) you can ask for a hearing. That way the reporting officer will need to produce evidence. I've said it before but if everyone in receipt of such a ticket asked for a hearing the courts wouldn't be able to cope, let alone the admin back-up putting the papers together...and I don't see any more cops on the horizon! Many forces have been piut in a position where they've either reduced their traffic depts or redeployed them. More spin for using them elsewhere. Couple that with the statistical safety of our motorways and it's easy to see the attraction in reducing patrols. As for: ''Dispute the offence and you are identified and the phone records are checked'' from a post further up, No chance. A directed surveillance authority would be needed and motoring offences come nowhere near the threshold.
|
>> traffic departments being reduced
>> statistical safety of our motorways
So ghastly dangerous mimsing will become the norm and we will all have to waddle anxiously along when there's much traffic? Sad but not a big shock alas.
|
Whats different, its always been in a traffic officers discretion to nick someone for due care for idiocy.
Its a handy rise in fines to create a bit more income and i expect most sheep like people will roll over and accept the judgement of the officer at the time.
What i expect at some point in the future is privatised traffic monitoring, plastic traffic cops in plastic cars to compliment the plastic beat cops, record report and kerching out goes the bill.
|
>> What i expect at some point in the future is privatised traffic monitoring, plastic traffic
>> cops in plastic cars to compliment the plastic beat cops, record report and kerching out
>> goes the bill.
>>
Highways Agency wombles upgraded to plastic traffic cops?
|
|
Yes, all seems likely. ACPO recently voted to increase powers of PCSO's and the police reform act allows Chief Constables to accredit 'partners' (anyone) with low level powers. The progression isn't too hard to figure out.
|
>> ghastly dangerous mimsing will become the norm
Woodster (and fc and Wp): I meant to say ghastly dangerous institutionalised mimsing, but omitted the key word in the heat of the moment. Damn!
|
|
What happens on managed motorways where the signs say "avoid changing lanes"?
|
|
I've never seen a changing lane, but I'd avoid it....
|
>> What happens on managed motorways where the signs say "avoid changing lanes"?
>>
There's a section on the M4, near Bridend I think, where it says "Stay in lane". There is no notice cancelling it, so in theory that apparently means stay in lane all the way to Carmarthen.
|
>> I meant to say ghastly dangerous institutionalised mimsing, ..........
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mimsing
|
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mimsing
I'm amazed there hasn't been an outcry about the advert alongside, "Meet Muslim Singles!"
|
>>
>> New fixed penalty, introduced from July. Also tailgaters. And mobile phone users penalty increases from
>> £60 to £100 too.
>>
>> No mention of it being done by camera (as I think they do in Germany?)
>> so you'll fall foul of it only if a policeman is out and about, sees
>> you, and has time to pull you over.
>>
>> And of course, if you want to argue you can take it to Court, as
>> now.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22770064
>>
Long term game for the Government is road charging. Short-term win is stick cameras on roads every half mile and catch all these bad people oh, and would you just look at that, we have the infrastructure in place for road charging...
Driving in the UK last week I saw road signs "Don't Hog the Middle Lane" on the Motorways. It appears to be getting through, they've all shifted one lane to the right.
Last edited by: gmac on Sat 8 Jun 13 at 22:45
|
Announcement at work tother day on Intranet re middle lane hogging. It's a proposal, nothing created in Statute yet.
Using existing legislation they would have to make 'Driving without consideration for other road users' a Fixed Penalty Offence which at present it isn't. Could maybe be classed as 'Unecessary Obstruction' which is.
Last edited by: Fullchat on Sat 8 Jun 13 at 23:10
|
This driver made the mistake of remaining in the outside lane, and also twice brake testing the car behind - oops!
Warning contains lots of swearing
youtu.be/M5dL4DPm-DE
ps, since when did Chubby Brown start driving lorries?
|
>> ps, since when did Chubby Brown start driving lorries?
>>
Cheers VxFan, that has cheered me up no end. The Mr Tourettes is alive and well...and driving lorries.
He wasn't wrong though, was he.
|
>> The Mr Tourettes
Reminds me of myself actually.
Someone was suggesting that smoking a single cigarette shortens your life by 11 minutes. For some of us, being obstructed by a mimser is just as bad and life-shortening if not more so.
|
At least you understand why I'm not easily offended now:)
Pat
|
|
That lorry driver would be shown into the ladies end at Upton Park, Bit too well spoken for the North Bank.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 10 Jun 13 at 16:46
|
>> Long term game for the Government
Long term? Government? That's a new one on me.
Last edited by: Alanović on Mon 10 Jun 13 at 12:04
|
Long term = any time after this term.
I layman's terms you'll be paying road pricing before you get a referendum on Europe.
|
>>.............you get a referendum on Europe.
>>
And if the result is "Wrong" it will be repeated until the great unwashed get it "Right".
|
>>
>> New fixed penalty, introduced from July. mobile phone users penalty increases from £60 to £100 too.
Coming out of Swindon on Tuesday, big accident on Drakes Way going into Swindon. No end of people on their mobiles coming out of Swindon toward Greenbridge, either looking down into their lap and texting, updating their facebook status, etc, or phone welded to their ear having conversations, despite the presence of loads of police redirecting traffic. From what I saw not one person was pulled over for using their mobile, yet it was blatently obvious they were using them while driving.
edited road name from Drakes Road to Drakes Way
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 17 Jul 13 at 16:53
|
That, in a nutshell is the problem.
No point in increasing fines if the law isn't enforced.
Pat
|
First local reports I've seen of enforcement actually happening for tailgatitude and lane hoggery.
Local paper.
tinyurl.com/oxffbt6
Last edited by: Crankcase on Fri 22 Nov 13 at 15:21
|
>> First local reports I've seen of enforcement actually happening for tailgatitude and lane hoggery.
>>
>> Local paper.
>>
>> tinyurl.com/oxffbt6
"Tailgaters were fined seven times" Surely the fairest thing to do would be to fine each tailgater once?
I mean, fining an offender seven times does sound a bit excessive - even for tailgating!
;-0
|
More than 6,000 motorists have been fined in the last eight months for hogging lanes and tailgating, according to figures obtained by the BBC
The punishments have been handed out since last August, when police were given new powers to issue on-the-spot fines and three points, rather than bringing drivers to court.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27217226
|
They really do my head in. I use a section of A1(M) frequently near Peterborough where travelling south it is 3 lane and then the southernmost slip from Peterborough direction starts the 4 lane section. i.e. if you go down that slip you don't have to pull out as you have become lane 1.
Many "middle lane hoggers" on the 3 lane section keep in their lane as they pass this slip and often for miles after so on a fairly quiet road they are now in lane 3 of 4 so you need a huge sweep round them to pass from lane 1 or 2.
Shows such a dangerous lack of awareness.
|
>>
>> More than 6,000 motorists have been fined in the last eight months for hogging lanes
>> and tailgating,
What is tailgating? Leaving less than the 2-second clearance, closer than one car's length, or what? Does it depend on speed? Duration of the tail-gate? Is closing a gap prior to overtaking tailgating?
|
Just got back from the US.I drove 1000 miles over there and an experienced overtaking and undertaking.It soon became second nature and didn't find it a problem at all.I think it should be adopted here and then this stupid rule of going right over to lane 3 and then back to lane 1 to overtake would be no more.Much safer to undertake slower lane 2 traffic than our stupid rule here.
Also they had a rule that if you had to put you wipers on then you had to put your lights on as well.This also worked well when visibility was reduced and everyone seemed to comply.
|
>> Also they had a rule that if you had to put you wipers on then
you had to put your lights on as well.
My car automatically puts it's own lights on if the wipers are on. It also puts the wipers on automatically if it's raining. I'm not entirely at peace with its decision making but it does seem to be trying its best. Sometimes it's necessary to overrule it.
|
Much safer to undertake slower lane 2 traffic...
...and already perfectly legal here. Google 'keep up with traffic in your own lane'.
|
I was taken to Liverpool this week by our 23yr old valeter in the firms van to bring a damaged car back for repair. It was a white knuckle ride ! At one point on the M62, in the overtaking lane, we were tailgating a Transit at 8)mph about 20 ft behind. I hadn't a clue what was happening in front and I'm sure he hadn't ! He drove like that for most of the journey, even in town traffic he seemed to have no awareness of brake lights ahead, stamping on the brakes just before rear-ending other traffic.
I pulled him up over some of it but I do sometimes have to work with him so a bad atmosphere is not a thing to create.
I took the car back yesterday after a new window had been fitted, the fleet manager said the valeter was in Liverpool and I could get a lift back....I said not to interrupt his work and I would get a train back. I was dropping the car in Moorfields, outside the station anyway.
Booked a £7.00 ticket, got a Costa Mocha at Lime Street and had a relaxing trip by train and tram !
I can't see him surviving undamaged too long in the cut and thrust of modern traffic !
|
>> At one point on the M62, in the overtaking lane, we were tailgating a Transit at 8)mph about 20 ft behind. I hadn't a clue what was happening in front and I'm sure he hadn't ! He drove like that for most of the journey, even in town traffic he seemed to have no awareness of brake lights ahead, stamping on the brakes just before rear-ending other traffic.
Shudder... I am amazed by your restraint Horatio. But thinking about it, I guess he was just crap rather than seriously frightening. I'm sure you would have reacted to that.
I often explain to people, again and again, that a decent gap makes the whole enterprise so much more relaxed that tailgating is simply blindingly stupid. Except momentarily during an overtaking manoeuvre.
Never mind safety, whippersnappers have fast reactions after all. The point is to minimise stress.
They don't really listen, any more than I did when I was like that.
|
It's all about the TED - Time Exposed to Danger.
A decent gap lets you minimise the time spent on the other carriageway.
It also means the fud you are overtaking can't accelerate as easily as you pass them, if indeed they are fuds.
|
|
6000 in 8 months! That will be about 0.001% of those doing it!
|
>> That will be about 0.001% of those doing it!
Every little helps.
|
But does it? Given that I use a 12-mile stretch of M4 twice a day I estimate that over eight months I must have seen about 1000 hoggers - that would be at the rate of four each way each day, which is probably conservative.
Given that that is barely one 200th of the UK's motorway length, let's say there would have been 150,000 hoggers over that period. And I use the M4 for less than an hour a day, so let's multiply in another factor of, say, ten. 1.5 million hoggings, at a conservative estimate, and 6,000 penalties applied - four per thousand. Drop, meet bucket.
For the record, I've observed no change in drivers' behaviour since the penalties were introduced. With odds like this, it's hardly surprising.
|
WdB, how do you define a hogger?
This week I am commuting on M4 J8 - M25 J14
and in the normal busy time traffic it is difficult to classify one whereas previously, m6 toll, for example, I used to see examples regularly
Last edited by: commerdriver on Thu 1 May 14 at 10:58
|
Subjective, I know, but someone who could reasonably use the left lane but is holding up following traffic (not necessarily me) by choosing not to. Like you, I find it harder to observe when the motorway is very busy, so maybe my multiplier of ten is a big underestimate.
Curious that the taxi drivers who regularly take me to Heathrow on the same stretch routinely cruise in lane 2. I just close my eyes and think about something else.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Thu 1 May 14 at 11:00
|
Doesn't matter if you just stay in lane 3 with the retina burners lit up. The 'others' can do what they like!
;-)
|
£100 for middle lane "hogging" - VxFan
