We make the standards and we make the rules...
Discussion
...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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Speed limits are an interesting subject (well, relatively anyway - I don't think you'll pick up many young ladies (or gentlemen, depending on your preferences) by demonstrating a comprehensive knowledge of the history of speed limits in the UK).
Wikipedia has a nice section on the history of speed limits here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limits_in_...
Some highlights? Well, between 1930 and 1935 there was no speed limit for cars and motorcycles whatsoever. and during that time, road casualties fell by nearly 800 per year.
In 1935, a 30mph limit was introduced in built-up areas, but everywhere else remained free from any speed limits. At this time, I understand that the white circle/black diagonal line sign which we now recognise as an NSL sign was first introduced, but back then it was used to indicate the end of a built-up area and the start of a "de-restricted" or more correctly, an "unrestricted" section of road.
On the Isle of Man, these signs still have this meaning.
1935 also saw the start of police driver training and the development, firstly by Sir Malcolm Campbell and then further by the Earl of Cottenham, of a "system of car control" and the early stages of Roadcraft. Police training, and especially advanced police training, made full use of unrestricted roads and their lack of speed limits to train advanced students in higher speed driving. In built-up areas, however, police drivers were expected to set a good example and comply with the 30mph limit.
The national speed limt was introduced as an experimental measure in 1965 and then permanently in 1967. When introduced, all previously unrestricted sections of roads, including motorways, dual carriageways and single carriageways were subject to a 70mph limit.
The national speed limit has varied since it's introduction - the oil crisis in 1973 saw it dropped to 50mph (apart from motorways), and then finally set at 60mph on single carriageways and 70mph on dual carriageways and motorways in 1977.
Throughout this time, and up to the present day, the police have trained drivers at speeds above the national speed limit, but within the "red ringed" limits.
Police driver training has for a long time set the standard for civilian advanced training and this crossover has probably led to the commonly held opinion that it's more acceptable to exceed national speed limits than those in built-up areas.
In theory, the Government had it right all the way back in 1930. If everyone drove according to the hazards and risks present at the time, there would be no need for speed limits. Unfortunately, life isn't that simple, is it?
Wikipedia has a nice section on the history of speed limits here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limits_in_...
Some highlights? Well, between 1930 and 1935 there was no speed limit for cars and motorcycles whatsoever. and during that time, road casualties fell by nearly 800 per year.
In 1935, a 30mph limit was introduced in built-up areas, but everywhere else remained free from any speed limits. At this time, I understand that the white circle/black diagonal line sign which we now recognise as an NSL sign was first introduced, but back then it was used to indicate the end of a built-up area and the start of a "de-restricted" or more correctly, an "unrestricted" section of road.
On the Isle of Man, these signs still have this meaning.
1935 also saw the start of police driver training and the development, firstly by Sir Malcolm Campbell and then further by the Earl of Cottenham, of a "system of car control" and the early stages of Roadcraft. Police training, and especially advanced police training, made full use of unrestricted roads and their lack of speed limits to train advanced students in higher speed driving. In built-up areas, however, police drivers were expected to set a good example and comply with the 30mph limit.
The national speed limt was introduced as an experimental measure in 1965 and then permanently in 1967. When introduced, all previously unrestricted sections of roads, including motorways, dual carriageways and single carriageways were subject to a 70mph limit.
The national speed limit has varied since it's introduction - the oil crisis in 1973 saw it dropped to 50mph (apart from motorways), and then finally set at 60mph on single carriageways and 70mph on dual carriageways and motorways in 1977.
Throughout this time, and up to the present day, the police have trained drivers at speeds above the national speed limit, but within the "red ringed" limits.
Police driver training has for a long time set the standard for civilian advanced training and this crossover has probably led to the commonly held opinion that it's more acceptable to exceed national speed limits than those in built-up areas.
In theory, the Government had it right all the way back in 1930. If everyone drove according to the hazards and risks present at the time, there would be no need for speed limits. Unfortunately, life isn't that simple, is it?
SK425 said:
R_U_LOCAL said:
Throughout this time, and up to the present day, the police have trained drivers at speeds above the national speed limit, but within the "red ringed" limits.
What am I misunderstanding there? Police drivers (when required) are not bound by red ring limits any more than NSL. Surely in their training they exceed all sorts of speed limits, not just NSL?During emergency response "blues and twos" training, speed is capped at a maximum of 20mph over a posted speed limit. That's not to say that operational officers do not have an absolute exemption from speed limits - they do when appropriate, but for training purposes the 20mph cap is more than enough.
Craig85 said:
Johnnytheboy said:
I'm a little confused by the OP's perception that drivers that wish to overtake him shortly before the end of a 30 limit are unlikely to get up to 60 in the subsequent NSL section.
My experience would be that the more keen they are to overtake, the faster they will go overall.
The opposing view is that while obeying a 30 limit you will have people desperate to pass you then do 50 in a 60 limit.
These people exist, but rarely. Thankfully as rare as people who wait until the NSL sign then floor it in 3rd.
Maybe he wants to do more than 60 in the nsl.My experience would be that the more keen they are to overtake, the faster they will go overall.
The opposing view is that while obeying a 30 limit you will have people desperate to pass you then do 50 in a 60 limit.
These people exist, but rarely. Thankfully as rare as people who wait until the NSL sign then floor it in 3rd.
Edited by Johnnytheboy on Thursday 22 May 21:25
My thoughts and comments on speed and speeding are contained in a previous post here:
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Zeeky said:
The Op asks if he is a bad person for exceeding the 30 mph speed limit...
No I didn't.To clarify, I already know I'm a bad person, so I don't need any clarification on that point from random internet people.
Zeeky said:
...but doesn't seem bothered about breaking the NSL. Is this really a question for general consideration? If the OP is happy to break the NSL he shouldn't need moral support in breaking the 30 mph limit.
Nope, still miles off. I'm definitely not looking for any moral support, thanks. I did say I was happy for you (the collective wisdom of random PH members) to be the judge of my actions, but I certainly don't need or desire any moral support.If it helps, I did clarify the point of my post on the first page - perhaps you skipped over it, so I'll stick the quote in below:
Back on the first page Reg said:
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.
When you get 5 minutes, please read the above link. It should clarify my attitude towards speed and speed limits in general.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.
Actually, on re-reading the original post, I did write:
But in case anyone is in any doubt, I am actually a very bad man.
Hope this clarifies things.
On double checking Reg realised that he had actually said:
The book will tell you that this is wrong, wrong, wrong and that I'm a bad, bad man. But am I? Really?
In fairness, it should be obvious that this was a rhetorical question.But in case anyone is in any doubt, I am actually a very bad man.
Hope this clarifies things.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff