Shared Middle Lanes

[ukaskew]

I’m sure this has been discussed before but I’ve no idea what these are actually called so didn't find anything with a search. I’m talking about one of these…



This particular stretch is notorious for (fatal) accidents, I think there were 28 accidents in one year recently, for bonus points it crests a hill and is not particularly straight, a few years back they reduced the length of the ‘shared’ lane but this just seemed to move all the crashes to a smaller area. I’m not sure if they’re common across the country but we have a few around Wiltshire and everyone seems to have tales of witnessing near-crashes on a regular basis.

My assumption has been that nobody has priority over the central lane aside from whoever was there first, although I think most people treat it as though the direction of travel with two lanes split by broken lines has priority. What are the insurance implications on a stretch like this when crashes occur? I guess crashes are caused by cars from opposite directions could moving out at roughly the same time, even if there is a reasonable distance between them with the closing speeds and seemingly general reluctance to abort an overtake it can escalate quite quickly.

[Troubleatmill]

Suicide lane

[rb5er]

Thats not a "shared" lane. That is for one direction of traffic to use.

No wonder there are accidents if people don't know what the solid lines indicate.

[Timfy]

There's one fairly local to me.

I've not known of any issues there, but people don't tend to push their luck there.

Edited by Timfy on Thursday 28th April 12:58

[DMN]

Its not a solid line for cars in the single lane.

I've seen a few of these in Devon and have wondered about how safe they are. I can see the need for two lanes to be running in one direction, to allow cars past slower traffic crawling up hills. However I don't see the need for cars coming the other way to be allowed to overtake on them.

Similar roads in North Yorks have solid lines for both directions of travel.

[worsy]

I always assumed priority was with the side having dual lanes. So normally a and b below.

|a:b|:c|

Unless lane a was clear or very obviously single car in vision I'd never use lane b from a position in c.

This is usually the side ascending the hill on the example shown.

[ukaskew]

rb5er said:

Thats not a "shared" lane. That is for one direction of traffic to use.

No wonder there are accidents if people don't know what the solid lines indicate.

The irony is strong in this one. The solid line just indicates that the traffic travelling top to bottom in the photo can't use the 'third' lane.

Edited by ukaskew on Thursday 28th April 10:32

[Theophany]

rb5er said:

Thats not a "shared" lane. That is for one direction of traffic to use.

No wonder there are accidents if people don't know what the solid lines indicate.

It's not double whites though, so both directions of traffic can use the lane, but one direction of traffic has priority.

[ukaskew]

Theophany said:

Iboth directions of traffic can use the lane, but one direction of traffic has priority.

Is this explicitly mentioned anywhere?

[Quhet]

IIRC the middle lane of the aston expressway into Birmingham from Spaghetti Junction used to be a shared lane for motorbikes.
It's used instead now as an extra commuting lane inbound/outbound at rush hour

[anonymous-user]

ukaskew said:

I’m sure this has been discussed before but I’ve no idea what these are actually called so didn't find anything with a search. I’m talking about one of these…



This particular stretch is notorious for (fatal) accidents, I think there were 28 accidents in one year recently, for bonus points it crests a hill and is not particularly straight, a few years back they reduced the length of the ‘shared’ lane but this just seemed to move all the crashes to a smaller area. I’m not sure if they’re common across the country but we have a few around Wiltshire and everyone seems to have tales of witnessing near-crashes on a regular basis.

My assumption has been that nobody has priority over the central lane aside from whoever was there first, although I think most people treat it as though the direction of travel with two lanes split by broken lines has priority. What are the insurance implications on a stretch like this when crashes occur? I guess crashes are caused by cars from opposite directions could moving out at roughly the same time, even if there is a reasonable distance between them with the closing speeds and seemingly general reluctance to abort an overtake it can escalate quite quickly.

It's pretty obvious who has priority though? The problem is people either ignore the lines or don't know what they mean?

[Theophany]

ukaskew said:

Is this explicitly mentioned anywhere?

I've no idea. It's what I've always understood it to mean though. There's a similar layout on the bypass near my parents' house and they used to have similar crash problems because berks would overtake on a blind bend.

[Riktoid]

Surely the furthest left lane is a 'crawler' lane?

[ukaskew]

yonex said:

It's pretty obvious who has priority though? The problem is people either ignore the lines or don't know what they mean?

The highway code on broken white lines just says..."This means you may cross the lines to overtake if it is safe", there is nothing specific to 'suicide lanes' that I can find and crawler lanes have no specific rules either, the lines are the only enforceable element. Surely in this case that rule applies equally to both directions of travel?

The solid white line only exists to stop vehicles nearest to that line crossing it.

Either way, say a car pulls out from the 'single lane' side to overtake very shortly before a car pulls out from the other side, who's at fault if they have a head-on?

Edited by ukaskew on Thursday 28th April 10:53

[bristolracer]

ukaskew said:

Is this explicitly mentioned anywhere?

Highway code

Rule 128
Double white lines where the line nearest to you is broken. This means you may cross the lines to overtake if it is safe, 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.


I nearly got killed on one outside Warminster in Wiltshire, though i wouldnt want to see them gone they do present overtaking opportunities that are getting less and less these days.

Always always check that the vehicle you are overtaking is aware you are there, I got forced over into lane 3 by an hgv and met a landrover coming the other way.

[p1stonhead]

ukaskew said:

yonex said:

It's pretty obvious who has priority though? The problem is people either ignore the lines or don't know what they mean?

The highway code on broken white lines just says..."This means you may cross the lines to overtake if it is safe", there is nothing specific to 'suicide lanes' that I can find. Surely in this case that rule applies equally to both directions of travel?

The solid white line only exists to stop vehicles nearest to that line crossing it.

Either way, say a car pulls out from the 'single lane' side to overtake very shortly before a car pulls out from the other side, who's at fault if they have a head-on?

The person who crossed the line from the single lane would be at fault. They shouldnt have crossed the line without making sure they are not going to hit anything.

[ukaskew]

bristolracer said:

I nearly got killed on one outside Warminster in Wiltshire

This is the exact one in question (and pictured). Many fatalities there over the past few years, sadly.

[tintopracer]

Quhet said:

IIRC the middle lane of the aston expressway into Birmingham from Spaghetti Junction used to be a shared lane for motorbikes.
It's used instead now as an extra commuting lane inbound/outbound at rush hour

The middle lane used to be able to be used by motorbikes. There's a drain that runs down the middle of it and a displaced grate lead to a fatal accident. Bikers were barred from using it.

[boyse7en]

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.

[ukaskew]

p1stonhead said:

The person who crossed the line from the single lane would be at fault. They shouldn't have crossed the line without making sure they are not going to hit anything.

Arguably it was 'safe' to pull out at the time they decided to do so, they were not going to hit anything until a car on the other side decided to pull out to also overtake.

Rightly or wrongly people here overtake on the single lane side all the time (even when there is traffic on the other side). The concept is inherently flawed unless it's somehow enforced that it can only be used when the road is completely deserted.

Surely a driver on the two lane side also has a duty to check that their overtake is safe? As far as I can tell there are no special rules relating to crawler lanes, you should still only be crossing the broken white lane if it's safe to do so (much like turning left out of a junction, you should always look left as well as right as there could be traffic on the wrong side of the road, i.e. passing a parked car)