Undertaking scenarios on motorway
Discussion
Chris1255 said:
Agreed, the biggest risk of an undertake would be the vehicle on the right deciding to move to the correct lane and not expecting anyone to be there or not looking in their blind spot. By slowing down you're staying in that danger zone for longer.
OTOH, the blind spot to the left is far bigger than the blind spot to the right, which makes it far more likely that you're going to miss something in your left-hand blind spot than in your right-hand one.Which is a big reason for passing on the right in preference to passing on the left - less chance of something going wrong.
Edited by Pete317 on Wednesday 2nd December 07:52
Hooli said:
ferrariF50lover said:
I've abandoned the concept that there is a system of lane priority in the UK. Any lane, any speed. I don't have any trouble. Standards are now so low that your average steering wheel operative hasn't a clue what's right and what's wrong, so doesn't understand they're being 'undertaken'.
Snap. The average car user is too retardedly dumb to understand where to drive on the road.Hooli said:
ferrariF50lover said:
I've abandoned the concept that there is a system of lane priority in the UK. Any lane, any speed. I don't have any trouble. Standards are now so low that your average steering wheel operative hasn't a clue what's right and what's wrong, so doesn't understand they're being 'undertaken'.
Snap. The average car user is too retardedly dumb to understand where to drive on the road.Ilovejapcrap said:
LoonR1 said:
IanH755 said:
xxChrisxx said:
I don't know the image you had in your mind when you typed this scenario. But if it's very light traffic, and there is nothing in the inner or middle lanes. Why are you behind him to begin with?
I suggest you read his post again, VERY CAREFULLY. Nowhere in his post does he say he's in the third lane behind the man, nowhere.Chris1255 said:
ging84 said:
Jarcy said:
In example 1, I would approach the maneuver in two stages.
a) Pull up parallel with old chap, in lane 1 and match his speed (for a short duration).
b) Then increase speed and carry on your way.
This two stage approach demonstrates due care and attention, and I would not see this as an "undertake".
Why do people like this answer?a) Pull up parallel with old chap, in lane 1 and match his speed (for a short duration).
b) Then increase speed and carry on your way.
This two stage approach demonstrates due care and attention, and I would not see this as an "undertake".
how does slowing down in the middle of an under take demonstrate due car and attention ? seems like the exact opposite to me.
Personally think we should just admit defeat and allow passing in any lane, seems to work in the US.
Jarcy said:
By slowing down to his speed as you arrive at the "undertake", you have time to react if he starts pulling over. A short press of your brake and you'll safely be behind him if he cuts across. If your closing speed differential is (say) 30mph {to get the job done quickly} then what happens when he (inevitably) picks that exact moment to move across? No chance at all to react, safely or otherwise.
You're describing a scenario where old boy is doing 40mph in the outside lane. If he's not, for your closing speed to be 30mph you're doing 80, 90 or 100mph yourself, at which point the undertake, plus the speed, is going to land you nicely in the s
t.Edit: my point being, your closing speed is not going to be anything like 30.
I should also mention the issue that you can't be "guilty" of undertaking as has been mentioned a number of times.
highway code said:
Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.
Interesting that Rule 268 doesn't mention a speed where this becomes unacceptable. Its therefore arguable that if lanes 2 and 3 are trundling at 60mph, its not illegal to drive in lane 1 at 70. The key point appears to be that diving between lanes is a no-no, whereas maintaining your position in the same lane and passing other vehicles on the left is perfectly OK (when done safely)Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.
Certainly on my daily slog on the M42 round Birmingham, Lane 1 is very often making the best progress, even more so when the hard shoulder is a live lane, as people seem to have some kind of aversion to using it. I can often "undertake" hundreds of cars that are crawling at 20-30mph while the live hard shoulder is trundling at a slightly-less irritating 40mph
Smokehead said:
Argh! It's overtake, on the left or right. Undertake comes later, in a box. 
"Undertake" goes in the same box as "road tax". No, it's not the phrase the textbooks use, but here in the real world, it's a handy phrase for casual conversation and saves "passing to the left" being trotted out when such formality is completely unnecessary. Here, on the internet, "undertake" is perfectly acceptable.Your in place of you're, could/would/should of in place of X've and the g'r'e'e'n'g'r'o'c'e'r's apostrophe are all still punishable by death.
Horses for courses.
There is no offence of passing on the nearside. The theory with regulatory offences is that if there is no specific offence, then other circumstances have to be proved to make it an offence. However, if you are reported for the offence then the likelihood is that you will get a fixed penalty notice. The probable offence will be careless driving. The prosecution have to prove that the driving is not up to standard, but much will depend on the magistrate's view, and they will, in all probability, just nod the case through and if you disagree you will have to challenge it: an expensive operation.
One option might be to challenge the notification. Ask for specifics of the offence, pointing out that the exceptions to the ban by the HC are not exclusive. A reason might be that you felt, in the circumstances, that overtaking the vehicle was the safest option. But that might depend on there being a fair bit of traffic around. In which case:
If there is a fair bit of traffic around then you could claim congestion.
One excuse might be that you are holding up traffic, and that the vehicle behind was driving too closely and you felt the safets route . . . etc.
If I was a supervisor of traffic officers I'd probably have a word with any who reported a driver for an offence without some aggravating factor. Given that most traffic units are cut to the bone and beyond - my old force often puts out one single crewed traffic unit at times - I'd want them to use a bit of common sense.
So don't depend on it.
One option might be to challenge the notification. Ask for specifics of the offence, pointing out that the exceptions to the ban by the HC are not exclusive. A reason might be that you felt, in the circumstances, that overtaking the vehicle was the safest option. But that might depend on there being a fair bit of traffic around. In which case:
If there is a fair bit of traffic around then you could claim congestion.
One excuse might be that you are holding up traffic, and that the vehicle behind was driving too closely and you felt the safets route . . . etc.
If I was a supervisor of traffic officers I'd probably have a word with any who reported a driver for an offence without some aggravating factor. Given that most traffic units are cut to the bone and beyond - my old force often puts out one single crewed traffic unit at times - I'd want them to use a bit of common sense.
So don't depend on it.
I experienced a similar scenario on the M11 last Sunday.
I was in L1 doing around 50ish because there were a couple of cars ahead. Ford Focus in L2 doing 50ish.
I notice in rear mirrors queue of cars in L2 expecting the Focus to either increase speed or change lanes; hence I left enough room in L1 in case the Focus sigballed left.
The Focus poodled along at 50 neither showing a wllingness to either increase speed or change into L1.
The other cars started moving into L3 as the queue started getting longer due to the moving chicane.
I noticed that the gap infront of me in L1 was getting bigger and bigger. In the end, rather than slowing sub-50 and having to move into L2 then L3 then back into L2 and L1, I gunned my car to 62ish plus to undertake and carry on in L1 at NSL (ish) speeds.
I don't like to undertake because the driving exhibited by the Focus indicated higher probability of moving without a mirror check.
If the Focus wasn't causing such a long tailback, I'd be tempted to play orbitals
I was in L1 doing around 50ish because there were a couple of cars ahead. Ford Focus in L2 doing 50ish.
I notice in rear mirrors queue of cars in L2 expecting the Focus to either increase speed or change lanes; hence I left enough room in L1 in case the Focus sigballed left.
The Focus poodled along at 50 neither showing a wllingness to either increase speed or change into L1.
The other cars started moving into L3 as the queue started getting longer due to the moving chicane.
I noticed that the gap infront of me in L1 was getting bigger and bigger. In the end, rather than slowing sub-50 and having to move into L2 then L3 then back into L2 and L1, I gunned my car to 62ish plus to undertake and carry on in L1 at NSL (ish) speeds.
I don't like to undertake because the driving exhibited by the Focus indicated higher probability of moving without a mirror check.
If the Focus wasn't causing such a long tailback, I'd be tempted to play orbitals
For those who do pass on the nearside, here's a tip that was given to me by an advanced driving instructor:
Look at the front wheel in these and similar circumstances. It is not only the first thing that signifies a change of direction, but the whole car moving is not apparent immediately. I was told this when I used to motorcycle and it saved me a couple of probable incidents. It also shows when a car has stopped fractionally before the rest of the car does.
Works for me.
Look at the front wheel in these and similar circumstances. It is not only the first thing that signifies a change of direction, but the whole car moving is not apparent immediately. I was told this when I used to motorcycle and it saved me a couple of probable incidents. It also shows when a car has stopped fractionally before the rest of the car does.
Works for me.
Chris1255 said:
Personally think we should just admit defeat and allow passing in any lane, seems to work in the US.
We already do, its just that a) we don't encourage it and b) the Highway Code tells you not to.But there is no "offence of undertaking," and it amuses me that this comes up so often on a motoring forum where, presumably at least, there are more people who understand the rules of the road and motoring law than in the general public.
Can we have another couple of threads now about how having no "road tax" invalidates your insurance, and that it is illegal to tow on a motorway?
rs1952 said:
We already do, its just that a) we don't encourage it and b) the Highway Code tells you not to.
But there is no "offence of undertaking," and it amuses me that this comes up so often on a motoring forum where, presumably at least, there are more people who understand the rules of the road and motoring law than in the general public.
Can we have another couple of threads now about how having no "road tax" invalidates your insurance, and that it is illegal to tow on a motorway?
And whether you can drive 150 miles to a booked MoT when your car doesn't have one. But you need to stop for petrol on the way there. And when it does have an MoT, with three weeks left before expiry, and it is taken off you when your car then fails. And you then can't drive it home because your insurance is invalidated.But there is no "offence of undertaking," and it amuses me that this comes up so often on a motoring forum where, presumably at least, there are more people who understand the rules of the road and motoring law than in the general public.
Can we have another couple of threads now about how having no "road tax" invalidates your insurance, and that it is illegal to tow on a motorway?
Have I missed anything?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff