Near-miss. My fault I think.

[9mm]

SK425 said:

9mm said:

Which bit do you think is a sweeping generalisation?

"Turning left from a right hand lane in the absence of road markings to support it, most definitely is [inherently dangerous]"

I suppose in one sense it is inherently dangerous, in the same way that driving a car is inherently dangerous and walking down the stairs is inherently dangerous, but I didn't think that was the sense you were getting at.

I stand by what I said. I don't doubt there are road layouts which support or facilitate such a move but that doesn't alter the fact that in my experience such moves are ill-advised and asking for trouble. It's not comparable to driving a car in general or walking down the stairs. What would be comparable would be driving a car with worn tyres or walking down stairs with your laces untied. Both are possible, as it is to turn left from a right hand lane (without markings or layout to support it) but both are also foolish and inadvisable.

[johnao]

9mm said:

Both [shoelaces and something else] are possible, as it is to turn left from a right hand lane (without markings or layout to support it) but both are also foolish and inadvisable.

It just depends. If circumstances are such that it's safe and legal to turn left from a right hand lane without markings, then it's neither foolish nor inadvisable; indeed, why wouldn't you do it if you wished to? If the circumstances are such that it's not safe then it would be foolish and inadvisable.

[SK425]

9mm said:

I stand by what I said. I don't doubt there are road layouts which support or facilitate such a move but that doesn't alter the fact that in my experience such moves are ill-advised and asking for trouble. It's not comparable to driving a car in general or walking down the stairs. What would be comparable would be driving a car with worn tyres or walking down stairs with your laces untied. Both are possible, as it is to turn left from a right hand lane (without markings or layout to support it) but both are also foolish and inadvisable.

Still sounds like a sweeping generalisation to me (and a groundless one IMO). You seem to be suggesting that circumstances cannot exist where overtaking in the manner being discussed here could be carried out safely and sensibly.

Walking down the stairs with your laces untied would be equivalent to committing to the overtake without worrying about whether it was safe and just hoping you get away with it. That would be as foolish and inadvisable in this roundabout scenario as it would be for any other overtake (which is the point I was trying - apparently not very well - to make with the single carriageway analogy earlier in the thread). You could simply decide never to consider overtaking in this manner but there is an alternative - you could decide to take each case on its merits, only considering overtaking where the road layout and prevailing traffic seem amenable and only committing if you can see it's safe.

To me, a policy of never considering overtaking in this manner makes as much sense as a policy of never walking down stairs in case in turned out your laces were undone.

[9mm]

SK425 said:

9mm said:

I stand by what I said. I don't doubt there are road layouts which support or facilitate such a move but that doesn't alter the fact that in my experience such moves are ill-advised and asking for trouble. It's not comparable to driving a car in general or walking down the stairs. What would be comparable would be driving a car with worn tyres or walking down stairs with your laces untied. Both are possible, as it is to turn left from a right hand lane (without markings or layout to support it) but both are also foolish and inadvisable.

Still sounds like a sweeping generalisation to me (and a groundless one IMO). You seem to be suggesting that circumstances cannot exist where overtaking in the manner being discussed here could be carried out safely and sensibly.

Walking down the stairs with your laces untied would be equivalent to committing to the overtake without worrying about whether it was safe and just hoping you get away with it. That would be as foolish and inadvisable in this roundabout scenario as it would be for any other overtake (which is the point I was trying - apparently not very well - to make with the single carriageway analogy earlier in the thread). You could simply decide never to consider overtaking in this manner but there is an alternative - you could decide to take each case on its merits, only considering overtaking where the road layout and prevailing traffic seem amenable and only committing if you can see it's safe.

To me, a policy of never considering overtaking in this manner makes as much sense as a policy of never walking down stairs in case in turned out your laces were undone.

Never say never. On an empty road it's no more risky than straightlining curves on an empty road. I can happily accept that there are situations where it might work/be advisable/carry little risk but I believe that in typical situations - such as the one in which the op was involved - it's asking for trouble.

[Jon1967x]

I wonder whether we're arguing semantics. To me, turning left from a right hand lane when there are no markings to suggest it's ok carries a higher tariff of risk than being in either the left land and turning left or indications suggest it's ok from the right. There will be circumstances e.g empty road where someone hangs out to the right and straightens the bend, but I would argue even this carries a higher tariff of risk in that instance compared to someone plodding up to the junction, shedding a lot more speed being in the left lane to turn left. Both maybe low levels of risk, but the lane straightening does mean cutting across into a different lane or mean being out of position. These are never absolutes, they are degrees of risk.

What ever the Latin is to take to extremes, this is one end of the spectrum.

If we want to debate whether a sweeping generalisation is one where we can think of any occurrence when the statement is untrue even if it's only a roundabout on the isle of Skye on the first bank holiday Monday in a leap year, we can I guess, but I too think in general turning left from the right lane is more dangerous than not.

I love PH debates like this

[SK425]

Jon1967x said:

What ever the Latin is to take to extremes, this is one end of the spectrum.

Given that we're talking about overtaking, I think the empty road example is beyond the end of the spectrum .

Jon1967x said:

If we want to debate whether a sweeping generalisation is one where we can think of any occurrence when the statement is untrue even if it's only a roundabout on the isle of Skye on the first bank holiday Monday in a leap year, we can I guess, but I too think in general turning left from the right lane is more dangerous than not.

I love PH debates like this

The debate is not about whether it's more dangerous than not, just whether it's so unmanagably dangerous it should never be considered. I've done it twice more today on the M11/A505 roundabout I posted a link to earlier and it wasn't dangerous at all.

Edited by SK425 on Wednesday 16th April 18:47

[Jon1967x]

SK425 said:

Jon1967x said:

What ever the Latin is to take to extremes, this is one end of the spectrum.

Given that we're talking about overtaking, I think the empty road example is beyond the end of the spectrum .

Jon1967x said:

If we want to debate whether a sweeping generalisation is one where we can think of any occurrence when the statement is untrue even if it's only a roundabout on the isle of Skye on the first bank holiday Monday in a leap year, we can I guess, but I too think in general turning left from the right lane is more dangerous than not.

I love PH debates like this

The debate is not about whether it's more dangerous than not, just whether it's so unmanagably dangerous it should never be considered. I've done it twice more today on the M11/A505 roundabout I posted a link to earlier and it wasn't dangerous at all.

Reductio ad absurdum I think is the phrase

I thought the contention was it was inherently more dangerous? Maybe just inherently dangerous. The former I would contend is true (even if at times by just a tiny bit), the later not so.

It actually happened to me today resulting in me being cut up (one of the junctions I'd posted) and the crazy thing is, the guy was not trying to make quick progress at all, he just got it all wrong and proceeded to plod along even on the dual carriage way that shortly followed. I valued the front off side wing of my car more than he did the near side door, which is lightly ironic as you can still get parts for mine and he was in a Saab

[SK425]

Jon1967x said:

I thought the contention was it was inherently more dangerous? Maybe just inherently dangerous. The former I would contend is true (even if at times by just a tiny bit), the later not so.

It was the latter that was contended I think. I don't think I could summon any interest in debating the former .

Jon1967x said:

I valued the front off side wing of my car more than he did the near side door, which is lightly ironic as you can still get parts for mine and he was in a Saab

Well there's a coincidence - I was in a Saab for one of mine today . I wasn't really plodding though...

Edited by SK425 on Thursday 17th April 15:11

[Foppo]

Ilovetwiglets said:

You ended up using a trick from my old van driving days to avoid traffic, a full circuit of the roundabout! Another one is getting off and on again at a motorway junction, are there any laws against either of them?

This happenes regulary when approaching a round about where I live.

Full circuit of the R/About bypassing all the traffic stationary in the left lane.Untill a cop car had a word with a few of these comedians thinking they where clever.Not sure about the law against it.

[Vipers]

Foppo said:

Ilovetwiglets said:

You ended up using a trick from my old van driving days to avoid traffic, a full circuit of the roundabout! Another one is getting off and on again at a motorway junction, are there any laws against either of them?

This happenes regulary when approaching a round about where I live.

Full circuit of the R/About bypassing all the traffic stationary in the left lane.Untill a cop car had a word with a few of these comedians thinking they where clever.Not sure about the law against it.

I and others do it all the time, can't see as it is against the law, use correct lanes, and signal correctly.

[Jon1967x]

Vipers said:

I and others do it all the time, can't see as it is against the law, use correct lanes, and signal correctly.

It's been done to death - not illegal just antisocial in most peoples opinion

Ps that's not an invitation to start the debate again, just reread the whole thread and others.

Edited by Jon1967x on Sunday 4th May 07:39

[timjswan]

DHB07 said:

A quick one for you guys on a similar subject.

See the A167 approaching this roundabout from the North: https://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=54.990172,-1.655502&...

Two lanes roll in and two lanes off as the 167 heads South East in to Newcastle City Centre.

When home, I'll always take the right hand lane and pass 5 or 6 cars in to the roundabout, not only passing them, but getting a much better view of the traffic from the right. More often than not, I can get away without touching the brakes. I exit in the right hand lane.

I've had other drivers giving me the finger, horns, near misses and all sorts of aggression thrown my way whilst doing it. More often than not however, I think it's jealousy of my lane/line choice.

Here's the caveat. Jump in to street view and you'll see the arrows marked on the road for left turn in the left hand lane, and straight on/right in the right hand lane. There's no straight on, or if there is, there's certainly no additional left hand turn (remember, only 3 exits total) unless you count the one that is substantially beyond the roundabout and only acts as a route for buses/KFC.

Surely I'm doing nothing wrong here? Of course, I expect a driver in the lefthand lane to cut across me on exit - it does and has happened form time to time - but I believe I'm good enough to predict it happening and avoid any sort of collision. The point is I'm willing to take the "risk" of it, and, if it resulted in an accident I feel I'm within my rights to use the roundabout as I have done.

Your thoughts please chaps?

EDIT: It's worth noting that I drive with an outlook of, even when within your rights, you should only put yourself in a position that could cause an accident if you accept beforehand that an accident could take place, even if the fault is technically not yours. Sitting in someone's blindspot for example will only cause issues, and yet you could offically place blame on the driver who moves in to your piece of road. Only sit in the blindspot if you're expecting a collision to take place (and don't be surprised if it does!)

Edited by DHB07 on Thursday 27th March 23:31

I know this roundabout very well as I'm originally from Morpeth and would go back and forth to the A1/Newcastle this way. I think you're right in doing what you do as the two lanes carry through the roundabout with the right hand lane going to the Morrison's exit. I've gone left in that lane countless times and never felt there was any danger as the roundabout is designed for that purpose. It's actually wrong to go straight on in the left hand lane as the road markings suggest (you would end up in the hatched off area). You are right to expect some people who don't know the roundabout to be going straight on from the left though. The only thing I would look out for is people going into lane two just after coming off the roundabout as they realise they could have just been better drivers like us (should have been in the right hand lane in the first place)

Another point to add for coming off in the right hand lane from that roundabout is there are usually people going left at that tight junction immediately after that exit and that corner is a bit blind as well. Just ignore people getting annoyed at you for no reason!

Edited by timjswan on Thursday 8th May 17:40

Edited by timjswan on Thursday 8th May 20:11

Edited by timjswan on Thursday 8th May 20:42

[Jon1967x]

timjswan said:

Just ignore people getting annoyed at you for no reason!

[timjswan]

Jon1967x said:

timjswan said:

Just ignore people getting annoyed at you for no reason!

"I've had other drivers giving me the finger, horns, near misses and all sorts of aggression thrown my way whilst doing it. More often than not however, I think it's jealousy of my lane/line choice."

As he said ^ that people would honk horns, swear etc... when he went left from the right hand lane (which is fine at the roundabout in question). So I was suggesting he ignored those people as they have no reason to be annoyed.

[R_U_LOCAL]

It's generally bad form to turn left at a roundabout from a right hand lane approach.

I'll add roundabouts to my growing list of planned posts.

[Jon1967x]

The world would be a better place if they stuck a few more road markings down. We may sell still get it wrong from time to time especially as cars ahead sometimes prevent us seeing them but it skim don't have clear up these sorts of debates.

We'd just gave to debate whether we agreed with the road markings instead lol

[Vipers]

R_U_LOCAL said:

It's generally bad form to turn left at a roundabout from a right hand lane approach.

I'll add roundabouts to my growing list of planned posts.

As probably said, in this situation, if you follow the HC, he was in the wrong lane, can't argue that. But if nothing else it has generated a lot of discussion and good points raised.

Then you have the smart arse undertaking, not a good manoeuvre.

We are not all perfect, not even me But I do try, honest.