Shared Middle Lanes
Discussion
The key question here is surely what type of road markings existing between the two lanes to the left of the picture.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/road-...
Centre lines:
Or Lane lines:
Personally, I'd consider those to be lane dividers with the the double whites marking the centre line. Consequently, the double whites mark the differentiation between usual direction of travel, vehicles travelling in the single lane to the right may cross the double whites to overtake if it is safe to do so.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/road-...
Centre lines:
Or Lane lines:
Personally, I'd consider those to be lane dividers with the the double whites marking the centre line. Consequently, the double whites mark the differentiation between usual direction of travel, vehicles travelling in the single lane to the right may cross the double whites to overtake if it is safe to do so.
Surely the fact that on a driving website, where people presumably have a higher level of interest than the average, there is still confusion about the priorities in that photo, suggests something is wrong?
It should be abundantly clear to any driver. To me, the photo suggests a dual carriageway uphill, and I should be able to overtake in Lane 2 without any fear of a head on. The drivers in the downhill lane are able to overtake if the lane is clear. I may be confused, but that is how I see it. (i'm making an assumption that the continuous line is indeed continuous, and the fact that it seems to vanish in places is a trick of the light/photograph)
IMO allowing downhill drivers into a "fast lane" where drivers are coming from L1 into L2 in complete confidence, and nailing it to pass something slow moving is daft. It would make more sense to have a stretch of double whites to make it very clear. They seem to slap double whites at the slightest provocation, so why not here.
It should be abundantly clear to any driver. To me, the photo suggests a dual carriageway uphill, and I should be able to overtake in Lane 2 without any fear of a head on. The drivers in the downhill lane are able to overtake if the lane is clear. I may be confused, but that is how I see it. (i'm making an assumption that the continuous line is indeed continuous, and the fact that it seems to vanish in places is a trick of the light/photograph)
IMO allowing downhill drivers into a "fast lane" where drivers are coming from L1 into L2 in complete confidence, and nailing it to pass something slow moving is daft. It would make more sense to have a stretch of double whites to make it very clear. They seem to slap double whites at the slightest provocation, so why not here.
It was once normal for main roads that had not been 'upgraded' to dual carriageway to be three lane single carriageway. There was no priority nor any mandate on how the 'middle' lane was used and it was expected that vehicles would use their respective left hand lane(s) and use the middle lane for overtaking only when it was safe to do so. The A40 from Denham to Beaconsfield is a case in point as this was, before the M40 was built, an 'A' class trunk road and yet it had this arrangement. Road deaths were higher in these times but not entirely because of this sort of road. Drivers were better disciplined about overtaking then and by and large it worked for the traffic densities of the day. The same stretch of road now is two lane and the middle part is a hatched strip along much of its length. Because the M40 has removed the bulk of the traffic the vehicle count is probably lower today than in, say, 1968.
Theophany said:
I drive that road a lot. That road is different as the overtaking sections have double solid whites for downhill traffic, i.e. they must not overtake. The road OP mentions had broken double white lines, i.e. they can overtake if it is safe to do so.
That is true now. They changed it to double whites a few years ago because of the number of drivers who had no idea of what road makings mean.boyse7en said:
It really is scary how many of you lot have no idea how to drive on one of these 'three lane' pieces of road - and this forum is supposedly populated by drivers who are interested in the process of driving!
The main A361 from Tiverton to Barnstaple near where i live has several sections to allow for overtaking, and every year a bunch of people who don't know the highway code assume that they have priority and just pull out without looking.
Agreed.The main A361 from Tiverton to Barnstaple near where i live has several sections to allow for overtaking, and every year a bunch of people who don't know the highway code assume that they have priority and just pull out without looking.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/road-...
If it's not purely common sense then read the above. I'm not surprised at the lack of knowledge, it was the same on the SAC I attended. The lack of understanding about road markings was amazing.
xRIEx said:
Exactly.
It's not a "middle lane", it's the right lane of the uphill-direction side of the road.
I think you are wrong.It's not a "middle lane", it's the right lane of the uphill-direction side of the road.
Lane A (furthest left in the pic and going uphill) can move into lane B by crossing a broken white line
Lane C (furthest right in the pic and coming downhill) can also move into lane B by crossing a broken white line
Why, in your view, has traffic moving from lane A got priority over traffic moving from lane C?
EDIT TO ADD HIGHWAY CODE INSTRUCTIONS (my bold)
Rule 127
A broken white line. This marks the centre of the road. When this line lengthens and the gaps shorten, it means that there is a hazard ahead. Do not cross it unless you can see the road is clear and wish to overtake or turn off.
Rule 127 is applicable to drivers heading up the hill in lane A wishing to move to lane B
Rule 128
Double white lines where the line nearest to you is broken. [b]This means you may cross the lines to overtake if it is safe[b], provided you can complete the manoeuvre before reaching a solid white line on your side. White direction arrows on the road indicate that you need to get back onto your side of the road.
Rule 128 is applicable to drivers coming down the hill in lane C wishing to move into lane B
I think that makes it fairly clear that neither driver has priority, and both need to check for oncoming traffic before moving in to lane B.
Edited by boyse7en on Thursday 28th April 11:49
Edited by boyse7en on Thursday 28th April 11:50
Overtaking down that hill is pretty sketchy. Generally if there's any oncoming traffic - even only one car - I won't vertake there. I try and get it done before or after the three lane section.
Overtaking up the hill feels less dodgy, but probably isn't all that safer. Only takes one idiot coming the other way.
Overtaking up the hill feels less dodgy, but probably isn't all that safer. Only takes one idiot coming the other way.
The A507 from Baldock out to Clophill used to have a suicide lane (the op's pic is not a suicide lane) - they've turned it into two very wide lanes, but you still get people overtaking as if it were three lanes. Not uncommon to see vehicles having to swerve to the left to avoid an oncoming bell-end who decided to do an overtake relying on others to get out of his way. What's fun is when you get two such bellends travelling in opposite directions. Never a shortage of smashed wing mirrors on the A507.
This thread is the perfect example of why these have to be treated with caution if you're overtaking from the single lane side.
Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
rxe said:
Surely the fact that on a driving website, where people presumably have a higher level of interest than the average, there is still confusion about the priorities in that photo, suggests something is wrong?
It should be abundantly clear to any driver. To me, the photo suggests a dual carriageway uphill, and I should be able to overtake in Lane 2 without any fear of a head on. The drivers in the downhill lane are able to overtake if the lane is clear. I may be confused, but that is how I see it. (i'm making an assumption that the continuous line is indeed continuous, and the fact that it seems to vanish in places is a trick of the light/photograph)
Hoist by your own petard, there.It should be abundantly clear to any driver. To me, the photo suggests a dual carriageway uphill, and I should be able to overtake in Lane 2 without any fear of a head on. The drivers in the downhill lane are able to overtake if the lane is clear. I may be confused, but that is how I see it. (i'm making an assumption that the continuous line is indeed continuous, and the fact that it seems to vanish in places is a trick of the light/photograph)
A dual carriageway has a central reservation, therefore "two carriageways"; there is no physical separation on the pictured road therefore it is a single carriageway. "Multiple lanes per direction" and "dual carriageway" are not the same thing.
Also, there is no "without fear of a head on" - you are performing a hazardous manoeuvre and need to stay observant for all hazards throughout, there's no room for complacency.
rxe said:
IMO allowing downhill drivers into a "fast lane" where drivers are coming from L1 into L2 in complete confidence, and nailing it to pass something slow moving is daft. It would make more sense to have a stretch of double whites to make it very clear. They seem to slap double whites at the slightest provocation, so why not here.
As above, "complete confidence" is a dangerous notion - you still have to take note of what's going on.E.g.
Scenario 1
Driver going uphill wants to overtake car in front; driver going downhill wants to overtake car in front.
- Both drivers need to assess the situation and see that another driver is likely to want to move into the lane
- priority for uphill traffic means the downhill overtaker should not make any move across the 'centre' line
Scenario 2
Driver going uphill wants to overtake car in front; driver going downhill already overtaking car in front.
- driver going uphill shouldn't be a f
king idiot and so doesn't try to kill both of them by moving into the occupied lanerxe said:
Surely the fact that on a driving website, where people presumably have a higher level of interest than the average, there is still confusion about the priorities in that photo, suggests something is wrong?
It should be abundantly clear to any driver. To me, the photo suggests a dual carriageway uphill, and I should be able to overtake in Lane 2 without any fear of a head on. The drivers in the downhill lane are able to overtake if the lane is clear. I may be confused, but that is how I see it. (i'm making an assumption that the continuous line is indeed continuous, and the fact that it seems to vanish in places is a trick of the light/photograph)
IMO allowing downhill drivers into a "fast lane" where drivers are coming from L1 into L2 in complete confidence, and nailing it to pass something slow moving is daft. It would make more sense to have a stretch of double whites to make it very clear. They seem to slap double whites at the slightest provocation, so why not here.
The fact people on a driving website don't know what a dual carriageway is a problem. The photo shows a multi lane single carriageway, no dual carriageways.It should be abundantly clear to any driver. To me, the photo suggests a dual carriageway uphill, and I should be able to overtake in Lane 2 without any fear of a head on. The drivers in the downhill lane are able to overtake if the lane is clear. I may be confused, but that is how I see it. (i'm making an assumption that the continuous line is indeed continuous, and the fact that it seems to vanish in places is a trick of the light/photograph)
IMO allowing downhill drivers into a "fast lane" where drivers are coming from L1 into L2 in complete confidence, and nailing it to pass something slow moving is daft. It would make more sense to have a stretch of double whites to make it very clear. They seem to slap double whites at the slightest provocation, so why not here.
The middle lane is an overtaking lane for both directions of travel.
Up hill can legally use two of the three marked lanes to overtake where safe to, down hill can legally use all three of the three marked lanes to over take where safe to.
BugLebowski said:
This thread is the perfect example of why these have to be treated with caution if you're overtaking from the single lane side.
Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
Was just reading that myself, the question though is whether the road markings have given priority.Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
I would ask, if there is no priority indicated why are there double white lines on only one of the lanes? If there was no priority there would surely be double white lines on both sides (or single hazard lines on both sides)?
boyse7en said:
xRIEx said:
Exactly.
It's not a "middle lane", it's the right lane of the uphill-direction side of the road.
I think you are wrong.It's not a "middle lane", it's the right lane of the uphill-direction side of the road.
Lane A (furthest left in the pic and going uphill) can move into lane B by crossing a broken white line
Lane C (furthest right in the pic and coming downhill) can also move into lane B by crossing a broken white line
Why, in your view, has traffic moving from lane A got priority over traffic moving from lane C?
EDIT TO ADD HIGHWAY CODE INSTRUCTIONS (my bold)
Rule 127
A broken white line. This marks the centre of the road. When this line lengthens and the gaps shorten, it means that there is a hazard ahead.<b> Do not cross it unless you can see the road is clear </b> and wish to overtake or turn off.
Rule 127 is applicable to drivers heading up the hill in lane A wishing to move to lane B
Rule 128
Double white lines where the line nearest to you is broken. <b>This means you may cross the lines to overtake if it is safe<b>, provided you can complete the manoeuvre before reaching a solid white line on your side. White direction arrows on the road indicate that you need to get back onto your side of the road.
Rule 128 is applicable to drivers coming down the hill in lane C wishing to move into lane B
I think that makes it fairly clear that <i>neither</i> driver has priority, and both need to check for oncoming traffic before moving in to lane B.
Edited by boyse7en on Thursday 28th April 11:49
Centre lines, hazard warning lines and lane lines are all "broken white lines" but they all mean different things.
BugLebowski said:
This thread is the perfect example of why these have to be treated with caution if you're overtaking from the single lane side.
Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
Exactly.Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
p1stonhead said:
battered said:
p1stonhead said:
Yes they do! The side with two lanes can treat it like a dual carriageway. The side with a single lane have to 'overtake' into the middle lane only when safe to do so.
Where does it say this, in HC or on the road? As I see it, it is a shared 50-50 lane unless otherwise marked. If you want to stop cars in lane C using the middle then you put in double whites. If not, shared.Drive to Cornwall and when you are back, tell me its a shared lane. Its not. Its a dual carriageway one side and a single carriageway the other side.
p1stonhead said:
battered said:
p1stonhead said:
Yes they do! The side with two lanes can treat it like a dual carriageway. The side with a single lane have to 'overtake' into the middle lane only when safe to do so.
Where does it say this, in HC or on the road? As I see it, it is a shared 50-50 lane unless otherwise marked. If you want to stop cars in lane C using the middle then you put in double whites. If not, shared.Drive to Cornwall and when you are back, tell me its a shared lane. Its not. Its a dual carriageway one side and a single carriageway the other side.
A single or dual carriageway is not defined by how many lanes there are.
You can have a single carriageway with multiple lanes in each direction & you can have a dual carriageway with one lane in each direction.
xRIEx said:
p1stonhead said:
battered said:
p1stonhead said:
Yes they do! The side with two lanes can treat it like a dual carriageway. The side with a single lane have to 'overtake' into the middle lane only when safe to do so.
Where does it say this, in HC or on the road? As I see it, it is a shared 50-50 lane unless otherwise marked. If you want to stop cars in lane C using the middle then you put in double whites. If not, shared.Drive to Cornwall and when you are back, tell me its a shared lane. Its not. Its a dual carriageway one side and a single carriageway the other side.
p1stonhead said:
xRIEx said:
p1stonhead said:
battered said:
p1stonhead said:
Yes they do! The side with two lanes can treat it like a dual carriageway. The side with a single lane have to 'overtake' into the middle lane only when safe to do so.
Where does it say this, in HC or on the road? As I see it, it is a shared 50-50 lane unless otherwise marked. If you want to stop cars in lane C using the middle then you put in double whites. If not, shared.Drive to Cornwall and when you are back, tell me its a shared lane. Its not. Its a dual carriageway one side and a single carriageway the other side.
"Multi-lane" is a completely separate concept. You can have dual carriageways with a single lane each side and you can have single carriageways with multiple lanes each side (as in this case).
Sorry xRIEx, I'm losing track of your position...
That implies that you agree that traffic heading up or down the hill has equal right to use the centre lane.
But earlier you said
[quote]As above, "complete confidence" is a dangerous notion - you still have to take note of what's going on.
E.g.
Scenario 1
Driver going uphill wants to overtake car in front; driver going downhill wants to overtake car in front.
- Both drivers need to assess the situation and see that another driver is likely to want to move into the lane
- priority for uphill traffic means the downhill overtaker should not make any move across the 'centre' line
Which implies that you think uphill traffic has priority.xRIEx said:
BugLebowski said:
This thread is the perfect example of why these have to be treated with caution if you're overtaking from the single lane side.
Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
Exactly.Single carriageway
135
Where a single carriageway has three lanes and the road markings or signs do not give priority to traffic in either direction
use the middle lane only for overtaking or turning right. Remember, you have no more right to use the middle lane than a driver coming from the opposite direction
do not use the right-hand lane.
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/general-rules-techn...
But earlier you said
[quote]As above, "complete confidence" is a dangerous notion - you still have to take note of what's going on.
E.g.
Scenario 1
Driver going uphill wants to overtake car in front; driver going downhill wants to overtake car in front.
- Both drivers need to assess the situation and see that another driver is likely to want to move into the lane
- priority for uphill traffic means the downhill overtaker should not make any move across the 'centre' line
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff