Using the whole road space on a dual carriageway

[FiF]

waremark said:

Pica-Pica said:

I have never driven on a dual carriageway, and certainly not a motorway, where a bend is sufficiently tight such that changing lanes on a bend is an advantage. Apart from when overtaking, the most common reason for me changing lanes is to allow someone room to enter the carriageway.

There is quite a tight left hand bend on a DC near me for which I think there is a worth-while benefit from being in lane 2 - and I am happy to treat 'use the left lane unless overtaking' as guidance rather than a rule. In other words, if there is a worth-while benefit I would use another lane. On an Advanced Test, I would explain what I was doing, and I would expect the examiner to like it.

Routinely, I move within my lane to improve vision.

Pretty much the above. There's a reasonably tight double bend and then a left hander further along on a, sadly rare, NSL DC near me.

The vision is much better being in left lane on the right hander and vice versa on the left handers. Caveats on presence of other traffic as prev mentioned in other posts apply.

In fact if there is slower traffic on approach to the right hander then will peg it back a little to keep behind and avoid overtaking on the bend.

Interestingly in the opposite direction the road markings reduce it from two lanes to a single wide lane. Drivers aren't quite presented with the racing line through the double bend but definitely attempts to straighten things out. Vision etc mean that 60 is very conservative pace, and 70 would be even acceptable. Usually others are poddling through at 40 though.

Other reasons for moving from L1 to 2 could be vehicles stopped in a lay-by, and as above allow a vehicle wishing to join from the left easier possibilities.

[Super Sonic]

Hol said:

WelshRich said:

Counter argument… (a little tongue in cheek)

Most people accept that the most interesting roads have bends in them, so why waste the bends by straightening them out?

I have to agree with the above. I actually enjoy the added challenge of keeping up with the traffic in front, but remaining my side of the dotted line.
Otherwise, what is the point of choosing a twisty B road in the first place? You could get just as much of a challenge from an A road.

Absolutely this.

[mwstewart]

Super Sonic said:

Hol said:

WelshRich said:

Counter argument… (a little tongue in cheek)

Most people accept that the most interesting roads have bends in them, so why waste the bends by straightening them out?

I have to agree with the above. I actually enjoy the added challenge of keeping up with the traffic in front, but remaining my side of the dotted line.
Otherwise, what is the point of choosing a twisty B road in the first place? You could get just as much of a challenge from an A road.

Absolutely this.

Can carry a lot more speed through the bend. It also requires more skill carving your own, well-judged line than following a pre-marked white line.

[M4cruiser]

Majorslow said:

Which saw me cycling in the right hand lane of the A34 a week ago at Winnall Interchange: You have to be mad cycling along there.... glad you could tell the tale. That roundabout alone would give me heart palpitations on a bike

This is Winnall roundabout, and a good example of why you should stay in your lane ...
https://youtu.be/je211iT--QY

[paulrockliffe]

otolith said:

Mammasaid said:

Some years ago there was a short stretch of the A66 near Keswick that was a lovely 2 lane twisty dual carriageway what was great to straight-line if quiet. Unfortunately it's now been sanitised to a single lane west-bound enforced by 50 mph Av. Speed Cameras. (check the dates to view before and after)

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.6503069,-3.2216092...

I once woke up in the passenger seat there, having fallen asleep, and didn't realise it was dualled. The driver appeared to be mid way through a kamikaze overtake...

It was an awesome bit of road, there were a few accidents though, mostly tourists panicking when they were being overtaken.

It was sanitised because they can't get a good fix on the crash barrier because it drops steeply to the other carriageway.

[ninepoint2]

Bryanwww said:

See many people use this technique on roundabouts, straight lining them to ensure they don't need to waste any of their energy on needless steering inputs. Great when you are beside them and they haven't noticed you or act like their SUV takes priority over all lanes.

Which multi lane road are you going fast enough on public roads that you would need to take the racing line through corners?

The correct thing to do is stay in your lane and slow tf down if you are going fast enough to need more than one lane to take the corner.

It's not advanced driving to use track racing techniques on public roads. Advanced road driving is about leaving room for error on your own part and the errors of others on the road, not going as fast as possible. Your observations might be correct most of the time, but you can absolutely guarantee they are not correct all of the time.

FFS this is Pistonheads, not Mumsnet!!

[FiF]

ninepoint2 said:

Bryanwww said:

See many people use this technique on roundabouts, straight lining them to ensure they don't need to waste any of their energy on needless steering inputs. Great when you are beside them and they haven't noticed you or act like their SUV takes priority over all lanes.

Which multi lane road are you going fast enough on public roads that you would need to take the racing line through corners?

The correct thing to do is stay in your lane and slow tf down if you are going fast enough to need more than one lane to take the corner.

It's not advanced driving to use track racing techniques on public roads. Advanced road driving is about leaving room for error on your own part and the errors of others on the road, not going as fast as possible. Your observations might be correct most of the time, but you can absolutely guarantee they are not correct all of the time.

FFS this is Pistonheads, not Mumsnet!!

Ignored him when originally posted, but just to say, back in the day when was a relatively recently passed driving test sprog asked this question of straight lining roundabouts of my elder brother who was a class 1 traffic plod.

Given usual and obvious caveats about observation and 100% sure nobody else to be affected his firm advice, straightest line was usually the safest

[PlywoodPascal]

Pica-Pica said:

I have never driven on a dual carriageway, and certainly not a motorway, where a bend is sufficiently tight such that changing lanes on a bend is an advantage. Apart from when overtaking, the most common reason for me changing lanes is to allow someone room to enter the carriageway.

The A1 north of Berwick upon Tweed, before you get to Scotland, has a few bends where it is more comfortable to do so.

[Solocle]

M4cruiser said:

Majorslow said:

Which saw me cycling in the right hand lane of the A34 a week ago at Winnall Interchange: You have to be mad cycling along there.... glad you could tell the tale. That roundabout alone would give me heart palpitations on a bike

This is Winnall roundabout, and a good example of why you should stay in your lane ...
https://youtu.be/je211iT--QY

Yeah, it's a massive one. The A34 approach was just about manageable on a quiet evening. There was a moment at 3:00 where a taxi to my right touched the lane line and I thought he might be about to cut me off, which would have forced me to turn with him onto the M3... From Easton Lane to the A272 is nowhere near as bad. If you end up forced onto the northbound M3 slip road there you can always just cut through the works unit Not from experience, I hasten to add

Edited by Solocle on Monday 21st August 11:05

[911hope]

Solocle said:

Yeah, it's a massive one. The A34 approach was just about manageable on a quiet evening. There was a moment at 3:00 where a taxi to my right touched the lane line and I thought he might be about to cut me off, which would have forced me to turn with him onto the M3... From Easton Lane to the A272 is nowhere near as bad. If you end up forced onto the northbound M3 slip road there you can always just cut through the works unit Not from experience, I hasten to add

Edited by Solocle on Monday 21st August 11:05

Anyone cycling on a dual carriageway like this is insane.

[Solocle]

911hope said:

Anyone cycling on a dual carriageway like this is insane.

Tell me, if you live in Bolventor, how are you meant to cycle to Launceston or Bodmin without using the A30? I was able to detour around that section when cycling LEJOG, which still added 3 miles, i.e a not insubstantial 15 minutes, but that's because I was able to take the A39.

The River Itchen confines crossing points, and I'd already got lost once going completely the wrong direction out of Winchester.

The A34 is hugely unpleasant. It wasn't obvious that my route led to the A34 until I was well down the nice quiet dual carriageway that is the A33. And in numerous places the A34 is the only reasonably convenient route - case in point East Ilsley to Didcot.


I agree it's a dumb situation, but that's the cheap road infrastructure we have. Perhaps you'd rather the A34 still looked like this? Except, you know, with all the traffic. Heck, we could turn the other carriageway into a really nice cycleway!

If there was a contiguous network of alternatives than the A34 could be designated the A34(M). But there isn't, and it can't.

Edited by Solocle on Monday 21st August 11:47

[911hope]

Solocle said:

Tell me, if you live in Bolventor, how are you meant to cycle to Launceston or Bodmin without using the A30? I was able to detour around that section when cycling LEJOG, which still added 3 miles, i.e a not insubstantial 15 minutes, but that's because I was able to take the A39.

The River Itchen confines crossing points, and I'd already got lost once going completely the wrong direction out of Winchester.

The A34 is hugely unpleasant. It wasn't obvious that my route led to the A34 until I was well down the nice quiet dual carriageway that is the A33. And in numerous places the A34 is the only reasonably convenient route - case in point East Ilsley to Didcot.


I agree it's a dumb situation, but that's the cheap road infrastructure we have. Perhaps you'd rather the A34 still looked like this? Except, you know, with all the traffic. Heck, we could turn the other carriageway into a really nice cycleway!

If there was a contiguous network of alternatives than the A34 could be designated the A34(M). But there isn't, and it can't.

Edited by Solocle on Monday 21st August 11:47

Doesn't look too difficult to find a non DC route for East Ilsley to Didcot.

Issue with convenience of a DC, is that it can be fatal.

[Solocle]

911hope said:

Doesn't look too difficult to find a non DC route for East Ilsley to Didcot.

Issue with convenience of a DC, is that it can be fatal.

It's the difference between ~8 miles and 16-18 miles. There are some byways, but could be impassable on a road bike. That's a gigantic diversion. Practically speaking the 8 mile route is 1/2 mile of DC from slip road to slip road (plus 1/2 mile on the slips).

Probably a comparable road in terms of traffic flow would have been the old A74 Cumberland Gap. I think the current situation is better for everybody, although it did get removed from the NCN network for still being too hostile for families, as an NSL B/C road:

But you know, that costs money.

Edited by Solocle on Monday 21st August 16:38

[a340driver]

If it's clear why would you not use the entire road?

[Solocle]

a340driver said:

If it's clear why would you not use the entire road?

And assured to remain so of course! If there's a gap in the central reservation for a crossroads, it could well be a bad idea to move in such a manner, and instead remain predictable.

[911hope]

Solocle said:

It's the difference between ~8 miles and 16-18 miles. There are some byways, but could be impassable on a road bike. That's a gigantic diversion. Practically speaking the 8 mile route is 1/2 mile of DC from slip road to slip road (plus 1/2 mile on the slips).

Probably a comparable road in terms of traffic flow would have been the old A74 Cumberland Gap. I think the current situation is better for everybody, although it did get removed from the NCN network for still being too hostile for families, as an NSL B/C road:

But you know, that costs money.

Edited by Solocle on Monday 21st August 16:38

We'll a quick look at a map will find a non DC route quite close to your dangerous choice.

[Solocle]

911hope said:

We'll a quick look at a map will find a non DC route quite close to your dangerous choice.

I think you're misreading the map. No non-DC road for this very short section. 800 metres of that then becomes awfully tempting.

What those non-road routes are like, unsuitable for a road bike:


It would probably cost National Highways a few thousand pounds to build an acceptable cycleway there, a veritable drop in the road budget ocean. But they can't be bothered.

[PlywoodPascal]

If it were me, I’d be getting a bike capable of doing the non DC route.

HOWEVER

The roads are for all people and all vehicles, where they are not exempt like pedestrians/bikes/mopeds on a motorway,. It’s encumbent upon all of us as motorists to drive in a way that will enable us to negotiate other road users safely, even if the likelihood of encountering another road user is low (for whatever reason). Cyclists are allowed on A roads and so we need to be alert to the possibility they will BE on A roads and be prepared and equipped to negotiate them safely. I think it’s entirely reasonable for the poster above to want to and to expect to cycle on the roads specified above and to have other road users be able to pass him safely.

Above all it just shows how much more investment we need to cycling infrastructure. (I believe most new bits of A road would have bike lanes built alongside? Sadly probably not maintained (ie kept free of ste) once installed, but at least built?).

[Solocle]

PlywoodPascal said:

If it were me, I’d be getting a bike capable of doing the non DC route.

HOWEVER

The roads are for all people and all vehicles, where they are not exempt like pedestrians/bikes/mopeds on a motorway,. It’s encumbent upon all of us as motorists to drive in a way that will enable us to negotiate other road users safely, even if the likelihood of encountering another road user is low (for whatever reason). Cyclists are allowed on A roads and so we need to be alert to the possibility they will BE on A roads and be prepared and equipped to negotiate them safely. I think it’s entirely reasonable for the poster above to want to and to expect to cycle on the roads specified above and to have other road users be able to pass him safely.

Above all it just shows how much more investment we need to cycling infrastructure. (I believe most new bits of A road would have bike lanes built alongside? Sadly probably not maintained (ie kept free of ste) once installed, but at least built?).

Maintenance is oft overlooked and important. But even locally, the dualling of the A303 between Sparkford and Ilchester isn't going to have cycling provision. Ironically some motorways like the M48 Severn Bridge and M5 Avonmouth Bridge have really decent cycleways alongside.

Tbh I think the first step that would be necessary to rectify things would be prohibiting new-build AP dual carriageways with slip roads. If you want a motorway, you have to actually build a motorway, with all the access requirements that entails. Does nothing about the existing network, though.

[Andy86GT]

[url]|https://thumbsnap.com/QpSwq8HL[/url
This section of the A591 from Keswick to Thirlmere positively encourages using both lanes to improve the sight lines as it's really twisty. As others have said in this thread though, if not actually overtaking I would only venture into lane 2 if I was sure it wouldn't confuse anyone else.