We make the standards and we make the rules...

We make the standards and we make the rules...

Author
Discussion

R_U_LOCAL

Original Poster:

2,676 posts

207 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
...And if you don't abide by them you must be a fool.

Is it ever ok for an advanced driver to break the rules?

I was out on a local run this morning which takes me from my home on the outskirts of town, up onto a moorland NSL road for a few miles and then down into a more built-up area with associated speed limits & hazards.

The stretch of moorland road starts as a 30mph limit and for most of the 30 section, the speed limit makes perfect sense. The road is bordered by residential properties, footpaths, minor road junctions and a few shops. In other words, it's a built-up area and the 30mph limit is quite correct.

The last 500 yards of the 30mph limit area are different though. There are no houses, entrances or other hazards, the road is open with a clear view ahead (albeit on a long, open right-hander), and the vast majority of drivers and riders completely ignore the 30 limit on this section and accelerate early up to and beyond the national speed limit.

Now, before you jump to conclusions, I'm not trying to justify these drivers actions. It should be obvious to anyone that it is still a 30mph speed limit - it has street lamps at regular intervals and there is a pub situated just before the increase in speed limits, so potentially some hazards associated with the pub car park, customers etc.

If I'm driving along this road with no following traffic, I'll stick to the speed limit right up to the NSL signs before increasing my speed. I then like to drive the NSL section at a speed I consider to be spirited but safe. Inevitably this is generally higher than the majority of other road users.

The problem is that when I'm in that last section of the 30mph limit and I've got following traffic, I tend to be the slowest car on the road. It's not uncommon to have a build up of quite a few vehicles behind me on the approach to the NSL signs, all bunching up, driving close and looking to overtake me.

Now, I have no problem whatsoever with being overtaken and I'm not a road captain, so I'm not out to spoil anyone elses's progress. However, in a few seconds time I will be accelerating away up to a speed which will likely be in excess of that which the following vehicles will be accelerating up to. In other words, if they overtake me in the 30mph limit, I will almost immediately be behind them, looking to overtake them when the speed limit increases.

So what to do? The opportunity to overtake comes just as the right-hander opens up, immediately next to the pub, but probably 50 yards before the speed limit increases.

So, to ensure I'm not overtaken, if there is close following traffic, I wait until I have a clear view into the pub car park, and then start to accelerate early, before I reach the NSL signs. To clarify, I don't absolutely floor it - I just add around 10mph or so, which creates a gap between me and the following vehicle and discourages them from moving into the overtake. Once I reach the NSL sign I apply some firmer acceleration and I'm off.

To clarify even further, very occasionally, the following vehicles (and this will usually be a motorcycle), will "go with" me and then still go for the overtake. In these circumstances I will not accelerate when being overtaken, and the overtaking vehicle will be quickly past me. Mostly though, I'll quickly see the following traffic rapidly disappearing into a tiny dot in the mirror never to be seen again.

So, if we go by "the book" (whichever book you choose to abide by), I'm choosing to break the speed limit. The book will tell you that this is wrong, wrong, wrong and that I'm a bad, bad man. But am I? Really?

In my mind I am weighing up the difference between the risks involved in momentarily exceeding a speed limit in a relatively hazard-free area, with the risks involved in overtaking slower vehicles on an NSL road.

What would you choose to do?

Here's another one. On the same stretch of road, only a few hundred yards further past the pub, the road raises up and then drops into a small dip. The road remains straight, but this dip forms a zone of invisibility and so the white centre lines become solid double white lines for a short time. As I approached these lines, I could see a cyclist ahead travelling in the same direction as me & just approaching the double-whites.

The road is reasonably wide, but for their comfort, I prefer to straddle the centre lines when passing cyclists along that road. The Highway Code tells me that this is fine for double-whites, providing the cyclist is travelling at 10mph or less.

The trouble is, he's one of those cyclists who looks like he's dropped off the peleton on at the Giro d'Italia. Fully lycra'd up on an expensive looking carbon bike, it's highly unlikely that he's travelling less than 10. On that road, he's likely to be in the 25-30mph range.

What to do? If we're going by the book, we should slow right down, sit in a following position on the cyclist, wait until the solid lines break, and then move out to overtake him.

What I actually did is lift off the accelerator on the approach, wait until I had a view into the dip, and then move out to straddle the white lines to pass the cyclist without losing much speed. It was perfectly safe, there was no risk for either of us, and neither of us were inconvenienced. Wrong? Well, strictly speaking I'd committed a moving traffic offence by contravening the double white lines.

Again, I had weighed up all the options and chosen one which presented the minimum of risks, but in the process I became an offender. I suppose I could argue that I thought he was going less than 10mph, and it would be difficult to prove he wasn't, but deep down I know he wasn't and I was committing an offence.

What would you do?

Does any of this mean I'm any less of an advanced driver? Well, if I was undertaking an advanced driving test, these actions would likely go against me. But out in the real world? I'm not so sure.

You be the judge.

S. Gonzales Esq.

2,556 posts

211 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
Pragmatism and common sense are excellent qualities, but probably won't stand up in court against a black-and-white interpretation of the rules.

Consciously or not, I think many people believe that if you stick to limits and follow the rules then you've discharged all your responsibilities as a driver. Perhaps deciding to go with the 'obedience of fools and guidance of wise men' thing requires a level of confidence that many drivers don't have.

In any case, whatever you do on the road, you've got to weigh up the risks and benefits. I don't see advanced driving (or whatever we're going to call it from now on) as being incompatible with a bit of independent thought. I might be happy for it to be more about the spirit of the law than the letter.

PS - Looking forward to seeing what the article called 'David Watts' will be about.

7db

6,058 posts

229 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
R_U_LOCAL said:
Is it ever ok for an advanced driver to break the rules?
There's only one rule. I wish I could be like David Watts.

No. It's not that. It's the one about stopping in the distance you can see to be clear. Everything else is style.

R_U_LOCAL

Original Poster:

2,676 posts

207 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
For he is of pure and noble creed.

I see you've clocked what's on Reg's USB player this week!

I should add that I've never been a big ICE enthusiast, but the USB connection in the BM is the best stereo gizmo gadget I've ever had. With 3500 tracks at my fingertips, I think I'll keep the song lyric theme going for a bit.

7mike

3,005 posts

192 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
On the subject of solid white lines I've come across several interesting situations with drivers I've trained over the years. One had received points for crossing the line to overtake a cyclist. Having queried the decision with the officer was told he could put his wheels over the nearest line but not the other!

Assessing a retired traffic cop driving vans for one of the supermarket chains; long straight road, double solid lines, high hedges and being tale-gated by a car. Jogger coming our way on the nearside & the driver would not move out to give him space. Reason; he was not stationary, on a horse, bicycle or fixing the road banghead The van's nearside mirror, like the Astra behind missed the jogger by inches.

Recently trained a guy for the RoSPA test who was told in his debrief that he should not have crossed the line to overtake a cyclist (well under 10mph; I asked) and could only cross in for maintenance vehicles.

Personally; any decision would be based on a bloody good look for plod in the vicinity as it appears some are not even aware of the rules, let alone capable of making judgements on flexibility. (I'm not anti-plod btw, work with lots of them)

goldblum

10,272 posts

166 months

Sunday 18th May 2014
quotequote all
R_U_LOCAL said:
I want to put my foot down on an approaching NSL stretch but there's quite a clear drag up to where this takes effect and because of this other cars get up my backside as they prepare to overtake me. Sometimes I'm forced to break the law by speeding up before the NSL starts because otherwise I'll be overtaken and won't have the road to myself. If they do overtake me then I'll have to overtake them right back and they'll soon be silly little dots in my rearview. Such an irritation.
One of these days you'll encounter one of those sneaky coppers who sets his radar or whatever just before the NSL starts. Then you'll have your answer as to what you should have done.





mph999

2,714 posts

219 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
What a refreshing read - you apply logical common sense, unfortunately the law doesn;t ...

I would like to say i do what you would do ...

greygoose

8,224 posts

194 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
I was pulled over for overtaking a slow moving car on a stretch of double white lines 20 years ago, the vehicle was only going at 20mph and you could see a long way down the road, the nice policeman said to be more careful in future that there wasn't a police car coming out of a side road behind me. I do have super advanced grovelling skills though and have never been given a ticket when pulled over.

Pit Pony

8,265 posts

120 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
A pub you say?

I rented a cottage about 300 yrds away from a lovely pub, on a country B road, with no pavements, and no street lights.

The walk home in the dark and rain? In 10 months I only tried that once. The cars blast around a blind bend and accelerate hard, and I fell into the ditch more than once. I had a torch.

So yeah 30 mph sounds slow, but I guess it makes walking back from the pub a bit safer ?

Monkeylegend

26,226 posts

230 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
If your garage is up to date OP, I bow to your superior driving skills, seeing almost all other drivers as a rapidly disappearing dot in your rear view mirror.

On the other hand the law is the law, break it at your peril.

CrutyRammers

13,735 posts

197 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
There are many places where I would not hesitate to cross a double line to give a cyclist space for example, because you can see that it's clear and safe to do so. With a plod behind? I'd slow down and wait. Speeding up before the end of a 30 zone? Well most drivers do, and they often extend the zones further out than they need to be to compensate for this.

R_U_LOCAL

Original Poster:

2,676 posts

207 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
I think there is some misunderstanding about the point of my original post. I'm not generally promoting breaking the law (to hell with the consequences), and neither am I attempting to portray myself as a driving god who can pick and choose what laws I do or don't comply with.

And for those who think I haven't considered the potential consequences of a tug and a ticket, please see this old post for my views on speed and speed limits:

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

The original post in this thread was a reaction to the myth that being an "advanced" driver requires rigid and unquestioning adherence to every single rule on every single occasion. That sometimes, on occasion, it may be considered appropriate to go outside the relevant legislation if you've assessed all the risks and kept them to a minimum.

The driver not moving out & crossing white lines for a pedestrian in the road is a perfect example. Rigid adherence to the white line rule resulted in a more dangerous situation than being a bit more flexible.

standards

1,117 posts

217 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
For being overtaken whilst at the limit it's hard to beat the 24/7 20 mph outside local schools. All within 30 zones

Now IF the pupils were arriving or leaving it would be very sensible; at 7 PM on an August evening it's ridiculously slow. So pretty much everyone, including local plod go at 30.

I would love to know if anyone has ever been done for exceeding 20 but not 30 in one of these 20 zones.

watchnut

1,161 posts

128 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
interesting points......for the "approaching the NSL"......pull over, park up let them go outof of sight, then put your foot down to "enjoy" the road.

For the cyclist.....that law is an arse, it was made for when bikes weighed 100KG, and had baskets on the front, the cyclist wore a straw hat and was called Mr Jones...(dads army fan here)

I would have a really good look behind me, and over take the lycra if I was sure the scooby coloured blue on my tail was not an unmarked plod.....the wrong thing, but if you "don't make progress" the old lady in her micra will over take the pair of you...in 4th gear....take ages to overtake....forcing you to slow further to allow her in before she hits the lycra.

For a drving test you would fail if it was over 10mph.....but the real world is different, I know what i may do, but, can't condone breaking the law

Zeeky

2,779 posts

211 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
R_U_LOCAL said:
...
In my mind I am weighing up the difference between the risks involved in momentarily exceeding a speed limit in a relatively hazard-free area, with the risks involved in overtaking slower vehicles on an NSL road.

What would you choose to do?
If I thought the difference in risk was significant I would refrain from overtaking. If the difference in risk is negligible then I find overtaking is more satisfying than driving at 40 in a 30 limit.

Toltec

7,159 posts

222 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
R_U_LOCAL said:
The original post in this thread was a reaction to the myth that being an "advanced" driver requires rigid and unquestioning adherence to every single rule on every single occasion.
Cannot say that I have ever heard that one, I always thought advanced driving was about thinking for yourself. If you break a rule you should ideally know you are doing it and have assessed the consequences both in terms of safety and legality.

Close to me is the A20, at the moment the central and side barriers are being replaced on an nsl dual carriageway section so there is a drop to 50 then 30mph. I suspect that rather than use the normal 50mph road works limit and close a lane they have dropped the limit to 30 so both can be left open.

In the late evening no one slows for the 50 and most do 50 - 60 in the 30 section...

Would you try to do 30 and risk being rear ended?



DreadUK

206 posts

131 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
If, as another observer commented, you get caught in a speed trap just at the speed limit, you have no choice but to take the financial hit. Are you doing what you consider safe by exceeding the 30mph limit because you 'think' someone may blast past you? That's not a good reason for breaking the speed limit, you should deal with what's happening, not what you think others might do in those circumstances. If you get overtaken by granny, that's tough, by the sounds of it there's plenty of opportunities when the national speed limit begins to get back past her. If plod was behind you, they would not be impressed if you decided to break the limit 'just in case'. As there is only 500 yards of 30 limit to cover I doubt you could get nicked for speeding (other than the camera) but potentially driving without due care instead.

Regarding the cyclist - If you have been using your mirrors like you should be you would be aware of any plodmobiles behind you except perhaps an unmarked one, even they are moderately easy to spot with two dodgy looking characters (usually) and a whole lot of machinery hanging from their sun visors.

As ex plod, I was taught that safety comes first in anything you do, progress is second. If you're doing sixty when you see the drongo in lycra and there is a car up your chuff, it might not be the best idea to slam on the brakes, crossing said white line may be the safest option. If it's plod behind you, he shouldn't be that close, but if the cyclist is completely unexpected and you had no option, I doubt you would get nicked. Even traffic cops like to see good driving, even if it does 'infringe' the law.

I could liken it to overtaking on a 'B' road. If the driver ahead is doing 55, you are quite entitled to overtake, but is it safe to crawl by at 60? or momentarily hit 70 before coming back down to 60 when past the car. I don't think any traffic cop would criticize you providing you overtake was good. In fact we were encouraged to do it on our driving courses. After all, progress is a priority.

Blakewater

4,303 posts

156 months

Monday 19th May 2014
quotequote all
With so many roads having their speed limits reduced to way below what the majority of drivers feel is necessary and appropriate, it's hard not to either brake the speed limit or be a rolling roadblock constantly being tailgated and dangerously overtaken. I never used to brake red ringed speed limits and never had much time for those who did, but I find nowadays I do simply to avoid feeling vulnerable an under siege. Plus I don't like to feel like I'm dithering around either to be honest. I think the lowering of speed limits has simply led to a lot more generally good and conscientious drivers braking the law on the road as well as leading to a lot more tailgating and risky overtaking as those who are more flexible about the speed limits seek to get past those who rigidly stick to them.

Of course, if you're being observant, you can look out for speed traps as you would any other hazard. We aren't yet in a situation in this country where they're camouflaged in woodland or hidden in wheelie bins. I must admit I still pick up the post with trepidation in the days after going for a spirited drive.

Jon1967x

7,175 posts

123 months

Tuesday 20th May 2014
quotequote all
Blakewater said:
I never used to brake red ringed speed limits and never had much time for those who did.
Is there a feeling that the NSL can be taken less seriously than these red ringed limits? The original post also implied that once into the NSL he'd drive much quicker than the hollowing traffic ( it was an example I know but the inference was stick to 30 in a 30, but drive as fast as you felt safe under NSL).

Or should advanced driving be simply driving at a speed relevant to the prevailing conditions? It doesn't preclude recognising that lower speed limits can be a warning in addition to all the other things we take into account. I'd hope everyone limited their speed to a safe speed for the conditions regardless before someone makes that point, but it seems if there is a lower speed limit that's red ringed, then these take precedent.

Edited by Jon1967x on Tuesday 20th May 08:35

monthefish

20,439 posts

230 months

Tuesday 20th May 2014
quotequote all
Another good, thought provoking piece.

As a slight aside, who actually decides where double white lines should and should not be applied?

I have seen many instances of inappropriate double white line usage at both ends of the spectrum, i.e. there where they shouldn't be, and also not there when they really should be (including a set that cease halfway round a blind corner, perhaps giving an indication to a driver unfamiliar with the road that the danger has passed).