The Middle Lane Militia
Discussion
TooMany2cvs said:
So post some of the videos of people doing what you claim...
Riiiight, so this is a bullsh!t test? Of course, I sat here and completely made up these scenarios. What an odd accusation, I would assume if I was to lie on an internet forum I could think of some wilder stuff than commenting on someone else changing lanes on a motorway. I assume your request is to analyse what I'm doing and find fault, a PH hobby for some. Just for you mate, next time I have video footage of someone being oddly militant in the middle lane, I'll put it up just for you. I suspect by saying that I'm not that fussed about traipsing through 5-6 hours of uneventful driving to find 10 seconds of footage of a van driving like a cretin, I'm admitting it's all a fairy tale but I'll be honest this was merely a discussion on a forum that was intended to be fairly light hearted.
Out of interest, has this subject raised a particular annoyance to you? Genuine question.
Edited by Alex_225 on Wednesday 7th December 14:03
esxste said:
Alex_225 said:
Just seems to be a small percentage of drivers out there who are intent on being quite the opposite of the middle lane hoggers. As I mentioned Mr Van driver trying to get everyone over to the left whether suitable and other various drivers moving constantly from lane one to two to three etc. Some drivers, again a minority almost drive in such as way as to over emphasise moving back to lane one.
I kind of get the impression that you're a Middle Lane Motorist, and you're overly sensitive to people who drive properly. Just this Monday evening I experienced an uneventful, but less than pleasant trip back to Farnborough from Stratford-upon-Avon. Normally I go 'cross-country' avoiding motorways (because idiots). This time, it was just getting dark when we left, and mist was forming as we went, with warnings of poor visibility so I stayed on the motorways to get it over and done with more quickly.
I tend to drive mainly in lane 1 on motorways. Mainly because I like to stretch my fuel out, and because I'm retired so there's no blinding rush to join the free-for-all that the other lanes are resembling these days. So I'll say that the OP has seen things I also have seen. Most often, those who try to 'bully' other drivers out of lane 2 are just as guilty themselves. They just drive a little faster is all. Seen regularly...
"blast down slip-road with no attempt to match speed to a space. Straight into lane 2 from slip road with no pause in lane 1 for mirror checks, signals, or any of the rest of the "careful driver tedium". Remain in lane 2 whether lane 1 is empty or full. Make no attempt to plan ahead, and therefore miss golden opportunities to overtake in lane 3 before arriving close behind a fellow MLM and tooting or flashing at them to "get out of my overly self-important way". If "victim" relents and moves into lane 1, remain in lane 2 and pass, then continue in lane 2 until destination slip-road is reached. If "victim" doesn't move over, make a song-and-dance about getting into lane 3, slow when level, blast the horn, and hurl abuse whilst also hand signalling your displeasure. Return to lane 2, quick brake-check, roar off to find another victim. Repeat ad infinitum".
Monday? Ah yes, where was I? Monday evening, I found myself staying in lane 2 more often than I'd normally like to. Why? Because in lane 2 I could see, via my offside door mirror, the Pied Piper leading his merry band of MLMs in lane 2. There were many of them, and ALL of them could have been behind me in lane 1 quite easily. Realising I'd get boxed in by this queue of MLMs if I stayed left, I moved out early for my next overtake. Possibly as much as 15 seconds too early. But entirely justified in the circumstances. The idiot leading the conga behind me could easily have joined lane 3 to pass, or simply adjusted his speed slightly to allow me to pass the truck ahead in lane 1. But no. He perceptibly accelerated to create conflict where there was none, and then flashed his lights at me. I just laughed it off, as any other course of action would have borne little fruit. After I'd smoothly, over a few seconds, moved back into lane 1 (having completed my overtaking of a number of 'heavies' in lane 1) I got the toot, the slow-down alongside me, the hand signals, the works. My response was a smile, and to gesture toward the empty lane in front of him (and in front of me too
) so as to invite him to get the f
k on with it. Why is it that these idiots, who seem so keen to "make progress", all of a sudden find they have all the time in the world to muck about being aggressive and slowing down alongside "slower" traffic that dares to "get in their way"???F
k 'em is my view. Given recent news stories about deaths caused by truck drivers not paying attention, then the VERY LAST place on earth I'm going to allow myself to be 'boxed in' is within a short space between two heavies. If that means staying out longer than YOU would consider appropriate, then you can fking sue me. Or suck my salty stump. Your choice. My safety, and that of my passengers, is paramount. If that means making small steering adjustments and taking my time moving from one lane to another? Tough. If it results in me occasionally not going back to lane 1 into a risky situation? Tough. Sometimes, certain traffic and weather conditions will preclude me safely returning to lane 1 even if YOU think I ought to. Like in heavy rain when the gap in lane 1 is less than twice safe stopping distance from (my speed) in the wet. I will NEVER move back to the left if to do so will cause the vehicle(s) I've just passed to have to brake to maintain a safe stopping distance. And sometimes you'll HAVE to accept that the motorway is so busy that it's better for everyone if we all remain in our current lanes unless and until there's a definitive NEED to move left to leave the motorway.Lot's of contributions to this thread so far could easily go into the "Knob" thread. If you have nothing to contribute in the name of genuine debate on a point, shut the f
k up and trot off elsewhere. Don't spoil it for those of us who'd like to discuss the actual point of the thread by simply picking holes in the OP's choice of words, style of posting, or poor estimation of time gaps. The only person that belittles is the one deliberately being obtuse.Personally I have no problem with MLMs - the very fact that they behave as they do permits me to drive calmly in lane 1 for mile after mile, with acres of braking space ahead of me and room to head into the hard shoulder if needs be, while they all sit a second apart in lane two getting madder by the minute, each blaming the other one for being "incorrectly" in the middle lane, while believing that they are justifiably there. Bunch of w
kers!Alex_225 said:
Well your impressions would be wholly incorrect I'm afraid I am far from being a middle lane hogger.
I fear that may just be a matter of perspective.Alex_225 said:
To clarify this point. I would say that 10-20 seconds is the amount of time I would consider in my mind reasonable to allow someone to complete an overtake and then move back into lane one.
For overtaking one car, that sounds like quite a long time to me. Which may be the reason for different perspectives. One man's terrifyingly fast anti-MLM overtaker may be another man's normal overtake of an MLM.I suspect the video request is less about calling bulls
t and more about illustrating your suggestion so we can better understand; it could be useful all round.Alex_225 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
So post some of the videos of people doing what you claim...
Riiiight, so this is a bullsh!t test?You say it happens all the time. I've never seen it. Is it just a matter of perspective? If so, whose perspective is out?
Alex_225 said:
Just for you mate, next time I have video footage of someone being oddly militant in the middle lane, I'll put it up just for you.
Great. I look forward to it.Of course, there is always perspective and I can categorically tell you that I am not a middle lane hogger. It is a bug bear of mine when I see this happening and I will keep left (as stated throughout the thread) throughout the regular motorway driving I do.
I have been a member of the IAM (so by that I like to think I'm not completely ignorant to decent driving!) and my understanding was that if you are doing say, 70mph and passing vehicles in lane 1 fairly quickly. I look ahead, not miles but a few seconds and see I am gaining on the next car in lane 1. Reading the road ahead, knowing I would need to be in lane 2 to pass, it is safer to remain in that lane for a few more seconds, pass that car and then move over. As opposed passing one car, back into lane 1, closing the gaps between cars, another few seconds and then back out to lane 2 and so on.
I'm not sure staying in lane 2 and passing one more car is justification for another driver (in this case the van) to come up behind me at significantly more than my speed, putting his main beams on solidly rather than just going into lane 3, overtaking and carrying on with his day.
I have always been of the thinking that if vehicle in lane 2 is clearly gaining and passing cars in lane 1 yet I am travelling faster than them, I would just use lane 3 and pass them.
Ultimately there are three lanes which can be used. Sitting in an overtaking lane for mile upon mile on a nearly empty motorway is one thing, sitting alongside cars not overtaking in said lanes is also unnecessary but spending an extra few seconds to pass vehicles safely, being easier to predict for other motorists and then moving aside to the correct lane? I don't see as being a bad methodology!
Also, just for scale of reference, I do a 260 miles motorway drive every other weekend. I would say that nine times of ten it's fairly uneventful. You'll see the odd idiot, a couple of random crashes in the time I've been doing it but essentially it's stress free. I certainly haven't incurred the wrath of other drivers for being in the middle lane as like I have said, I don't hog the middle lane. This one driver stood out on this occasion and I have seen it happen to other motorists and not because they are necessarily the typical middle lane hogger we are dislike but because the aggressor thinks everyone should be out of their way regardless.
I have been a member of the IAM (so by that I like to think I'm not completely ignorant to decent driving!) and my understanding was that if you are doing say, 70mph and passing vehicles in lane 1 fairly quickly. I look ahead, not miles but a few seconds and see I am gaining on the next car in lane 1. Reading the road ahead, knowing I would need to be in lane 2 to pass, it is safer to remain in that lane for a few more seconds, pass that car and then move over. As opposed passing one car, back into lane 1, closing the gaps between cars, another few seconds and then back out to lane 2 and so on.
I'm not sure staying in lane 2 and passing one more car is justification for another driver (in this case the van) to come up behind me at significantly more than my speed, putting his main beams on solidly rather than just going into lane 3, overtaking and carrying on with his day.
I have always been of the thinking that if vehicle in lane 2 is clearly gaining and passing cars in lane 1 yet I am travelling faster than them, I would just use lane 3 and pass them.
Ultimately there are three lanes which can be used. Sitting in an overtaking lane for mile upon mile on a nearly empty motorway is one thing, sitting alongside cars not overtaking in said lanes is also unnecessary but spending an extra few seconds to pass vehicles safely, being easier to predict for other motorists and then moving aside to the correct lane? I don't see as being a bad methodology!
Also, just for scale of reference, I do a 260 miles motorway drive every other weekend. I would say that nine times of ten it's fairly uneventful. You'll see the odd idiot, a couple of random crashes in the time I've been doing it but essentially it's stress free. I certainly haven't incurred the wrath of other drivers for being in the middle lane as like I have said, I don't hog the middle lane. This one driver stood out on this occasion and I have seen it happen to other motorists and not because they are necessarily the typical middle lane hogger we are dislike but because the aggressor thinks everyone should be out of their way regardless.
Edited by Alex_225 on Wednesday 7th December 14:45
TooMany2cvs said:
You say it happens all the time. I've never seen it. Is it just a matter of perspective? If so, whose perspective is out?
I didn't say all the time but in the comparatively small number of miles I do per year, I have seen a handful of drivers who seem oddly militant with the usage of the middle lane. Enough for me to remember them at least whether they impacted on my drive or not. I assumed that there may be some others out there (such as the post above) who have experienced other drivers that have done the same. This is by no means a regular occurrence and I can honestly say that the driving displayed by the van driver example was the only time I have experienced such aggression. The impression given by him was that everyone should be in lane 1 whether they're over taking or not.
My other example was having witnessed some drivers who return to lane 1 (that's good obviously), then are back in lane 2 within a short moment and seem to chop and change lanes without reading the road ahead. So instead of going lane 1, 2, 1, 2 constantly, could have seen they were catching up on cars ahead stayed in lane 2 that bit longer and then moved over with zero impact on other road users. That may be an awkward way to explain it.
Edited by Alex_225 on Wednesday 7th December 16:10
I've had exactly this!. Tw@ in a van tries to push me over from what he perceives to be lane 2 into lane 1, when in fact I'm in lane 1 for the M3 & what he considers to be lane 1 is the lane for heading onto the A303. Personal plate on van so easy to remember & did consider reporting him for dangerous driving but didn't bother in the end as life is too short!. (This occured possibly 100 metres prior to the painted markings & overhead sign.) W4RMU white Peugeot Boxer should you have the misfortune of meeting this chump on the roads.
Edited by Richard-390a0 on Wednesday 7th December 16:03
Edited by Richard-390a0 on Wednesday 7th December 16:04
Alex_225 said:
... If you are passing vehicles, I've always assumed you were entitled to staying that lane as it is for overtaking and that is what you're doing. If on the other hand you are simply sitting at the same speed as vehicles in that lane or lane one is empty, you should move over.
A couple of observations here. This is an advanced driving forum and in the rarefied world of advanced driving there is no such thing as an "overtaking" lane on a motorway or dual carriageway. We have lanes 1, 2, 3 etc [lane 1 being that on the left, or nearside, of the carriageway].In my experience advanced drivers will use whichever of the available lanes gives them the greatest advantage, providing no other road user is endangered or inconvenienced.
A couple of simple examples where an advantage can be gained by not using lane 1 that come to mind are:
a) Dual carriageway: You are travelling through a long left-hand bend on a dual carriageway. The vision through the curve of the bend is obscured by hedges and trees close to the nearside. By moving to lane 2 (or 3 if available) the driver can extend his vision further along the carriageway and thereby move the limit-point further down the road increasing the distance on the surface of the road seen to be clear.
I would make this move, to lane 2, in the above situation, even if there were vehicles in lane 1 ahead whose speed I was matching, because the vision from lane one is reduced even further by the presence of the vehicle/s in lane 1.
b) Motorway: You see a couple of LGVs in lane 1 ahead, the second is relatively close to the first, close enough to maybe contemplating an overtake by the time that you arrive on the scene. Lanes 2 and 3 are clear in front and behind (clear in the sense that you won't inconvenience anyone should you choose to use one or both of them). By moving to lane 3 you gain the advantage that if LGV(No.2) decides to overtake LGV (No.1) then your change of lane, to lane 3, has already been made, the change was completely under your control and not dictated by the timing of LGV (No. 2)'s overtake maneuver, and you may be thanked by the the driver of LGV (No.2) for helping to facilitate his overtake.
As they say: with all things advanced driving... "it just depends".
yellowjack said:
Monday? Ah yes, where was I? Monday evening, I found myself staying in lane 2 more often than I'd normally like to. Why? Because in lane 2 I could see, via my offside door mirror, the Pied Piper leading his merry band of MLMs in lane 2. There were many of them, and ALL of them could have been behind me in lane 1 quite easily. Realising I'd get boxed in by this queue of MLMs if I stayed left, I moved out early for my next overtake. Possibly as much as 15 seconds too early. But entirely justified in the circumstances. The idiot leading the conga behind me could easily have joined lane 3 to pass, or simply adjusted his speed slightly to allow me to pass the truck ahead in lane 1. But no. He perceptibly accelerated to create conflict where there was none, and then flashed his lights at me. I just laughed it off, as any other course of action would have borne little fruit. After I'd smoothly, over a few seconds, moved back into lane 1 (having completed my overtaking of a number of 'heavies' in lane 1) I got the toot, the slow-down alongside me, the hand signals, the works. My response was a smile, and to gesture toward the empty lane in front of him (and in front of me too ) so as to invite him to get the fk on with it. Why is it that these idiots, who seem so keen to "make progress", all of a sudden find they have all the time in the world to muck about being aggressive and slowing down alongside "slower" traffic that dares to "get in their way"???
Been there got the T-shirt. ) so as to invite him to get the fk on with it. Why is it that these idiots, who seem so keen to "make progress", all of a sudden find they have all the time in the world to muck about being aggressive and slowing down alongside "slower" traffic that dares to "get in their way"??? I find that acceleration in conjunction with the early move to lane 2 neatly disposes of the conga. The leader is usually to dozy to react, so I seldom get the conflict/coffee beans result.Another thing, which baffles me. I have lost count of the number of drivers who close up quickly from behind then sit glued to my bumper when there is an empty lane (in front and behind) to their right which they could use to perform an overtake. If I'm in lane 2 at the time they sit there until I have finished my overtake of the HGV freight train and pulled back to lane 1. Whereupon they speed up, staying in lane 2, only to repeat the exact same process with someone else further down the road. I reckon they suffer from tunnel vision and are totally fixated in lane 2 as I can't think of any other explanation.
If I'm in lane 1 they will close up then sit behind me for miles until it is as if someone has turned on a lightbulb in their head. They suddenly swing out into lane 2 and zoom past at warp factor 9. Utterly bizarre behaviour.
johnao said:
A couple of observations here. This is an advanced driving forum and in the rarefied world of advanced driving there is no such thing as an "overtaking" lane on a motorway or dual carriageway. We have lanes 1, 2, 3 etc [lane 1 being that on the left, or nearside, of the carriageway].
Although would I be correct in saying that the Highway Code states that on motorways you should keep left unless the road ahead is clear. Once you are then past slower moving vehicles you then return to lane 1? I only mean it in the sense that I'd sit in lane 1 at a steady speed, overtake in lane 2 or 3 and then return to lane one. So essentially using them predominantly for overtaking. Also for example on a dual carriageway motorists should return to lane 1 unless overtaking rather than sitting in lane 2 as that enables faster moving vehicles to pass?
Edited by Alex_225 on Thursday 8th December 09:30
Alex_225 said:
johnao said:
A couple of observations here. This is an advanced driving forum and in the rarefied world of advanced driving there is no such thing as an "overtaking" lane on a motorway or dual carriageway. We have lanes 1, 2, 3 etc [lane 1 being that on the left, or nearside, of the carriageway].
Although would I be correct in saying that the Highway Code states that on motorways you should keep left unless the road ahead is clear. Once you are then past slower moving vehicles you then return to lane 1? I only mean it in the sense that I'd sit in lane 1 at a steady speed, overtake in lane 2 or 3 and then return to lane one. So essentially using them predominantly for overtaking. Also for example on a dual carriageway motorists should return to lane 1 unless overtaking rather than sitting in lane 2 as that enables faster moving vehicles to pass?
Edited by Alex_225 on Thursday 8th December 09:30
But, it's worth remembering that the Highway Code does not deal with advanced driving techniques, methodology or problem solving. One wouldn't expect the Highway Code to include the type of scenarios that I mentioned above, nor the methodology employed in resolving the issues they present in the way that advanced drivers would be expected to deal with them. The Highway Code is in part a "Driving for Dummies"; an essential guide for those seeking the basic "rules of the road"; ideal for someone who is looking for "rules". But, as this is an advanced driving forum, I have no reservation is suggesting that forum members are looking for "principles" rather than "rules". The scenarios that I outlined earlier were examples of where "principles" would be employed by an advanced driver rather than rigid "rules". In saying all of this I am fully aware that one can't "break the rules" unless one fully understands them in the first place.
An interesting discussion.
Maybe if motorway driving was part of the driving test it would help or is this naïve thinking.I wouldn't think of pushing a driver out of lane two.I like to keep distance no matter which lane I'm on.If I join a motorway keep in lane one depending on traffic and join lane two.Don't like to be sandwiched between lorries if I can help it.All three lanes are equal but the majority of drivers don't see it that way.
Slow lane Middle lane Fast lane.>
Slow lane Middle lane Fast lane.>
johnao said:
Alex_225 said:
johnao said:
A couple of observations here. This is an advanced driving forum and in the rarefied world of advanced driving there is no such thing as an "overtaking" lane on a motorway or dual carriageway. We have lanes 1, 2, 3 etc [lane 1 being that on the left, or nearside, of the carriageway].
Although would I be correct in saying that the Highway Code states that on motorways you should keep left unless the road ahead is clear. Once you are then past slower moving vehicles you then return to lane 1? I only mean it in the sense that I'd sit in lane 1 at a steady speed, overtake in lane 2 or 3 and then return to lane one. So essentially using them predominantly for overtaking. Also for example on a dual carriageway motorists should return to lane 1 unless overtaking rather than sitting in lane 2 as that enables faster moving vehicles to pass?
Edited by Alex_225 on Thursday 8th December 09:30
But, it's worth remembering that the Highway Code does not deal with advanced driving techniques, methodology or problem solving. One wouldn't expect the Highway Code to include the type of scenarios that I mentioned above, nor the methodology employed in resolving the issues they present in the way that advanced drivers would be expected to deal with them. The Highway Code is in part a "Driving for Dummies"; an essential guide for those seeking the basic "rules of the road"; ideal for someone who is looking for "rules". But, as this is an advanced driving forum, I have no reservation is suggesting that forum members are looking for "principles" rather than "rules". The scenarios that I outlined earlier were examples of where "principles" would be employed by an advanced driver rather than rigid "rules". In saying all of this I am fully aware that one can't "break the rules" unless one fully understands them in the first place.
An interesting discussion.
vonhosen said:
johnao said:
Alex_225 said:
johnao said:
A couple of observations here. This is an advanced driving forum and in the rarefied world of advanced driving there is no such thing as an "overtaking" lane on a motorway or dual carriageway. We have lanes 1, 2, 3 etc [lane 1 being that on the left, or nearside, of the carriageway].
Although would I be correct in saying that the Highway Code states that on motorways you should keep left unless the road ahead is clear. Once you are then past slower moving vehicles you then return to lane 1? I only mean it in the sense that I'd sit in lane 1 at a steady speed, overtake in lane 2 or 3 and then return to lane one. So essentially using them predominantly for overtaking. Also for example on a dual carriageway motorists should return to lane 1 unless overtaking rather than sitting in lane 2 as that enables faster moving vehicles to pass?
Edited by Alex_225 on Thursday 8th December 09:30
But, it's worth remembering that the Highway Code does not deal with advanced driving techniques, methodology or problem solving. One wouldn't expect the Highway Code to include the type of scenarios that I mentioned above, nor the methodology employed in resolving the issues they present in the way that advanced drivers would be expected to deal with them. The Highway Code is in part a "Driving for Dummies"; an essential guide for those seeking the basic "rules of the road"; ideal for someone who is looking for "rules". But, as this is an advanced driving forum, I have no reservation is suggesting that forum members are looking for "principles" rather than "rules". The scenarios that I outlined earlier were examples of where "principles" would be employed by an advanced driver rather than rigid "rules". In saying all of this I am fully aware that one can't "break the rules" unless one fully understands them in the first place.
An interesting discussion.
Dr Jekyll said:
I agree with Von on this one. Advanced driving is about maintaining standards, not about techniques.
I agree with maintaining standards. But what are the standards to which you refer? Clearly they are not the standards of a newly qualified driver. I would submit that they are the standards of someone who has acquired a degree of experience and expertise in advanced driving techniques. Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff