Motorway 'safe' distance chevrons

[25NAD90TUL]

People will doubtless correct me if I'm wrong Rob, but I'm thinking you just got BADLY OWNED!

I am an AD and can prove it, people here know me from IAM members only forum, are you and can you?

[WinstonWolf]

25NAD90TUL said:

People will doubtless correct me if I'm wrong Rob, but I'm thinking you just got BADLY OWNED!

I am an AD and can prove it, people here know me from IAM members only forum, are you and can you?

Advanced motorcyclist actually

Now owned generally requires you to be correct, can you point me to where one of your posts in this thread has been right?

Hack, you can't even flounce without getting it wrong

[25NAD90TUL]

WinstonWolf said:

By all means let us investigate this scenario...

PS, the car's fixed, no need to bump threads.

Oh.

Thank god for that, so you're no longer a danger to other road users then? Sweeeeet!

And the prognosis was?

[WinstonWolf]

25NAD90TUL said:

WinstonWolf said:

By all means let us investigate this scenario...

PS, the car's fixed, no need to bump threads.

Oh.

Thank god for that, so you're no longer a danger to other road users then? Sweeeeet!

And the prognosis was?

I'll reply there to save thread drift, suffice to say it was never a danger to anyone, merely an annoyance to me

[25NAD90TUL]

WinstonWolf said:

Advanced motorcyclist actually

Now owned generally requires you to be correct, can you point me to where one of your posts in this thread has been right?

Hack, you can't even flounce without getting it wrong

Now usually I get on very well with Blue Badge holders, they usually have a good view point. I'm not Blue Badge myself, hell of a lot of off-road experience though, currently rebuilding my 1970 'on any sunday' Husky.

My posts here? Yeah, the one where I said an AD will usually factor in an extra safety margin. Oh and of course the one where I said knowingly driving a faulty vehicle constitutes a danger to other road users.

Edited by 25NAD90TUL on Friday 17th January 15:55

[25NAD90TUL]

WinstonWolf said:

I'll reply there to save thread drift, suffice to say it was never a danger to anyone, merely an annoyance to me

I suppose the maths stands up in your favour on that one too then! I suppose you worked out the probability of you breaking down and decided like that did you? What did you use a Chi square?

You're growing on me but I have to say you do seem to use some categorical statements. This one again is a case in point.

Now I really am out, have to pick my wife up, thing is here in Cornwall, everyone uses a large gap on the 'motorway' actually it's a hundred mile A road, but we're not that much of country yokuls, it does have two lanes and a central reservation. Large gaps are de riguer here, apart, of course from when holiday makers from the hustle and bustle arrive, then our roads descend into chaos, sounds like a joke but sometimes, very sadly, it ends badly, that's why so many graves road-side.

Best wishes anyway Rob, you're growing on me, albeit very little, when I get back I'll have a look at that prognosis in the other thread.

Does anyone want to friend me? My current status is 'billy no mates' PMSL...Best wishes all!

[WinstonWolf]

I'm only categorical about the physics

[25NAD90TUL]

While it may be true that I may get figures wrong and sometimes fly off the handle, my message from the off was one of making safety a priority.

As far as gaps go, on a busy motorway I absolutely won't go closer than a 4 second gap if I'm in a decent car.

Toltec was the man in this thread imo!

Most of the time I pulling 3500kg so I tend to stay in lane 1.

Arbitrary figures, mathematical equations, it's been an interesting experience.

I don't mind being subject to a bit of ridicule if it makes a discussion on road safety.

As has been said before, I always play the black knight in these discussions.

Best wishes all and thank you for all the valued input!

[johnao]

I thought you were supposed to be picking your wife up!

[p1esk]

LordGrover said:

Who are you and what have you done with the real p1esk?

Best wishes all,
The Moose

Oh, I got rid of 'im, he's a most tiresome old buffer; can't be doing with that sort of attitude: knows it all, won't be told anything, always arguing. Quite hopeless. I just hope you find the new version to be an improvement.

[p1esk]

Good grief, having read the last two pages, if Eileen starts getting frisky this evening, I shall just have to say I've got a headache, and it'll be true, dammit!

[waremark]

waremark said:

johnao said:

..... I've got better things to do with my life than waste my time reading all this interminable rubbish (Actually, I haven't. I just made that bit up, the bit about better things to do with my life; it was just wishful thinking on my part). ....

Actually, I have, but I am afraid I find this stuff quite addictive, and I hurry back to see how many more pages there have been since I last looked. Sad, isn't it? And some of it really does make you think.

Now, how do you clever people explain the incident reported here:

http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/forum/viewtopic....

What should in the opinion of all but one of us have been a safe following distance very nearly proved inadequate. How did it happen?

Please keep going for another 10 pages.

Disappointed that this only got one response (doubting the credibility of what the guy in that thread reported). I know we have had another two pages but they have not got me very excited.

[0000]

That incident didn't get me very excited either. Sounds like his braking distance was adequate, even though it sounds like he didn't brake very hard, he didn't seem to make use of his steering or know how far ahead the car was. Difficult to say much about it from what we have to go on.

[25NAD90TUL]

waremark said:

Disappointed that this only got one response (doubting the credibility of what the guy in that thread reported).

I enjoyed that thread, and didn't remotely have any doubts as to it's credibility. It reminded me that these accidents don't always pan out as you'd expect, and that often vehicles don't come to a controlled stop in the way that perhaps has been suggested in this thread, it also illustrates the fact that in certain circumstances, a head-on isn't completely out of the question on the motorway, slight adjustment of that scenario might have resulted in a potential head-on. The link certainly made me think, so thanks.

Off-topic I know but I watched the Turkey cooking video! I wish I could get that amount of youtube views on my channel, although mine is a music instruction channel so will probably never get that many views just for one vid! Anyway it got another view so...Is that beautiful Lambo yours then?

Best wishes waremark.

[Vipers]

Well, having sat back and read most of the posts, all the various math suggestions, I am just wondering how I have survived all this time.

At the end of the day common sense must prevail. Not saying the maths are wrong, no doubt the calcs are correct, and all good stuff.

The only burning question I have is why do the chevrons only appear on a very small section of our motorway.

And if they are so important, taking to account that the NSL on most dual carriageways is 70 same as motorways, why don't we see them nationwide?

Any ideas? Or those sections prone to bunching I wonder.

[25NAD90TUL]

25NAD90TUL said:

Vipers said:

Just found this thread, very interesting.

I wonder though why these chevrons are only one or two roads, unless I have missed them.

My driving south once a year consists of Aberdeen to London via M74, M6, M1, and I can only recall seeing them on one stretch of the road.

They're very frequent on the M5, especially in areas near damp ground where sudden patches of thick fog may be a possibility or in other similar accident blackspot areas.

Taken from a much earlier page in the thread. Perhaps on your mway it is one of these areas or perhaps an area where congestion and bunching up, perhaps because of a busy exit, are commonplace, they are always going to be on account of this type of conditions. If I remember correctly the M6 has them around Stafford where the A500 exits is, Uttoxeter maybe? Hope that helps.

[0000]

25NAD90TUL said:

it also illustrates the fact that in certain circumstances, a head-on isn't completely out of the question on the motorway, slight adjustment of that scenario might have resulted in a potential head-on

Normally a head on is a concern because the car is driving towards you, not because of the orientation of the car.

[Tonsko]

Vipers said:

Well, having sat back and read most of the posts, all the various math suggestions, I am just wondering how I have survived all this time.

At the end of the day common sense must prevail. Not saying the maths are wrong, no doubt the calcs are correct, and all good stuff.

The only burning question I have is why do the chevrons only appear on a very small section of our motorway.

And if they are so important, taking to account that the NSL on most dual carriageways is 70 same as motorways, why don't we see them nationwide?

Any ideas? Or those sections prone to bunching I wonder.

I wondered that. Someone suggested cost. Then we went on to talk about another country who put gaps in the rumble strips to help with you distance instead of chevrons (which would be great), before the late mathematical unpleasantness.

Edited by Tonsko on Saturday 18th January 10:33

[25NAD90TUL]

Some photos showing the Safe distance Chevrons in use.

In this photo an AD is demonstrating a safe approach to the chevrons. This pic taken on the M5 is showing comparatively busy conditions, where conditions allow, an AD will allow a little extra safety margin while not inconveniencing other road users. The safe distance may be opened up further if conditions allow, always being sure to not cause inconvenience to other motorists. Note the position of the car in Lane 3 in relation to the car ahead of him, he is not allowing the minimum recommended two Chevron distance and may be a little too close for comfort.

Same thing again, this time in Lane 3.

In this pic the AD considered at an earlier stage ,pulling back to lane 1, only to decide that at this stage, it is unnecessary. Provided he/she is travelling at a higher speed than the Lorry, and therefore overtaking or in the process of overtaking this would not be considered illegal under the new 'lane hogging' laws.

In this pic the Land Rover Driver is demonstrating a sensible safety margin, while the camera car, driven by a Police Advanced Driver is demonstrating a slightly better safety margin, factoring in a further couple of car lengths into his.

What would you do? Remain in Lane 2, or pull into Lane 1? In this photo the camera car, driven by a Police Advanced Driver will have considered pulling into Lane 1 given the available gap behind the Lorry. What was his decision?

[Vipers]

I

25NAD90TUL said:

What would you do? Remain in Lane 2, or pull into Lane 1? In this photo the camera car, driven by a Police Advanced Driver will have considered pulling into Lane 1 given the available gap behind the Lorry. What was his decision?

Looking at the gap, I would pull into L1, but it does beg the question, depending on the gap and approach speed, the driver may consider staying in L2 only for plod to disagree. My scenario does relate to this situation btw.