M5/M6 merge/collision driving poll

[saaby93]

You've probably all seen the video now
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ETm9rqOEvA
First you can see a van up ahead merges into the line of moving traffic
then this car/caravan gives clear intention of trying to do the same

ETA
This isnt examining the behaviour of the car/caravan as like the van ahead theyve both decided that for whatever reason they need to get in the left lane. They could have any number of reasons for being in that position.

The poll is what do you do about it when you can see it happening just in front of you

Do you....>>>

Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 21st April 12:29

[saaby93]

Frimley111R said:

If you were standing a queue and someone did this what would you do?

Oi start your own poll

Depending how well they were built, tell them the queue starts back there?
Who'd try to keep them out of the queue into live traffic?

[saaby93]

Yes. I'm not examining the behaviour of the car/caravan as like the van ahead theyve both decided that for whatever reason they need to get in the left lane. They could have any number of reasons for being in that position.

The poll is what do you do about it when you can see it happening in front of you

[saaby93]

As I said at the top of the thread, this isnt to comment on the car/caravan, just accept you'll get some people trying to merge at an exit for any number of reasons, not sure of the road or knows what theyre doing - see the van doing the same ahead.

This poll is about what youd do in response - do you drop back or go for the collision

[saaby93]

Just to keep this on track again
The poll isnt about the car/caravan driver. You can see he's ahead of the truck signalling left and for whatever reason whether he's familiar or unfamiliar with the junction needs to take the exit and is trying to move into space to do it
The poll is about what would you do when this happens, would you hold the line to the point of having a collision or would you drop back and allow the guy and his family to carry on with their holiday.

[saaby93]

Frimley111R said:

Sorry but unless you have a different highway code it is the responsibility of the caravan owner to move safely into another lane.

Mine has more at the front? Same as mr grimnasty

king arthur said:

True but sometimes the queue can stretch back a few miles too. It's quite easy to be in lane two and then realise that a queue has built up suddenly to your left, leaving you looking for a gap to pull into. However, as everyone says, if there was no gap he should have carried on to the next junction rather than try to force himself in.

I would have, and very often do, let a driver like this in front of me. What's the point in doing anything else?

At this point isn't the caravan driver acting like a HGV?



He's pulled just far enough forward and put the indicator on to let our truck driver know he wants to merge.
Next he moves slightly left and holds position waiting for the car to move forward out the way while the truck stays behind.
Unfortunately the truck doesn't and the rest is history

If it was a HGV rather than a caravan would the truck have stayed back or still closed the gap?

Edited by saaby93 on Thursday 23 April 00:53

[saaby93]

iacabu said:

I voted close the gap but avoid a crash purely for the fact the caravan moved over before any indication the HGV was giving him room.

Taking account of the camera angles the caravan was in front of the truck at that point and uses positioning and signalling to show what he wanted to do, just like an HGV might if caught in that position. It must happen every day of the week.
Whether most truck drivers would take offence who can say. I'm not doing another poll on it

[saaby93]

RochdalePioneers said:

Replay the video from 26s. The HGV is in the lane. The CRV is not visible suggesting it is directly alongside. On the solid hatchings. You hear a horn (from the CRV) and some choice savverninnit verbal from the HGV driver. The Armco is ahead. There is no room at all in the diverging lane and there is an empty hard shoulder ahead on the main carriageway.

At which point the CRV accelerates and swerves right immediately in front of the HGV which collects him. Even if there had been just enough room between the corner of the Armco and the corner of the HGV to fit the car, there wasn't to fit the caravan.

You can discuss the actions of the HGV in not backing off to let the CRV in before 00:26. With the Scenic also in the non-gap and traffic presumably behind the HGV could I suppose have dropped anchor at that point. Probably causing an accident behind.

But that's NOT where the accident occurred. The CRV - from a point directly alongside an HGV - drives into solid hatchings then tries to drive through a not-big enough (and illegal) gap and get wrapped around the HGV.

The precursor to the crash was 50/50. The actual crash was 100% the fault of the CRV. He decided to drive onto hatchings and commit to a stupid won't work manuever. His fault.

Have another think about the camera angles
If the CRV was alongside the truck it wouldn't have appeared sideways across the front of it.
For the most part it was in the position an HGV would have been trying to the same position just in front of the truck with indicator on and would have been pretty clear from the trucks cab.

[saaby93]

heebeegeetee said:

Matt UK said:

If caravan man had bought a car with enough engine, he could have taken the gap ahead of the Renault...

I'm surprised how many haven't picked up on this. There is a much bigger gap in front of the Renault, who actually slows down to make the gap bigger. As I said in a previous post though, I do know that people 'fixate' on hgvs, (I think they're determined to have as much trouble with them as possible) and I think that's whats happened here.

I noticed that gap when I posted up the photo, and it looks the renault was prepared to yield if the CRV had gone ahead there. However the CRV seems to have chosen the 'professional' truck driver as someone who would let him in and so positioned alongside the renault in front of the truck, expecting the truck to stay behind him as he moves behind the renault.
Anyway we cant mind read

All we can do is ask what a normal driver would do when presented with those circumstances hence the poll

Edited by saaby93 on Friday 24th April 08:42

[saaby93]

C'mon own up .. who's adding to the crash number
32 now

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

I don't believe the lorry driver could reasonably have expected the caravan driver to do that suicidal move, I have re-watched this a few times now and at no point did I think the caravan would deliberately cross the hatched area to cut across the path of the lorry.

I know the camera is a bit narrow angle (in practice the whole of the car and caravan is visible from the truck cab) but I'm wondering what went through your mind as a couple of options of what might happen next

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

That was before the hatched area, I was onabout once they had reached the hatched area the lorry driver had already closed the gap by then

Hold the thought about the hatched area for now

Looking at the picture again, you're driving with due care and attentive, give a couple of thoughts about what could happen next

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

Could you reasonably expect a car to deliberately cross the hatched area in a last minute dash for a gap that didn't exist? I don't think so.

We'll take that in a minute, just have a think about the photo

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

I have, the lorry driver closed the gap in that photo, then caravan man got angry and decided he wasn't having that so rather than fall back in behind he kept his position, then in a last minute fit of anger he decided to crash.

ok but at the point in that photo where the gap hasnt yet been closed, can you see theres an indicator light on the car towing the caravan? Whats that saying

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

An indicator is not a right of way, the caravan should not change lanes until it is safe and clear to do so and besides the original gap was never actually big enough.

maybe not. But if you see a car with its left indicator on what do you think it might do next?

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

It says he wants to pull into a gap that does not exist. The bigger gap is behind the police car and that isn't big enough.


Indicating does not give right of way. This junction is very well signed and warning about getting in lane are for several miles before this happened, what does that tell you about the caravan driver?

yes what does the indicator tell you the caravan driver might do next that would be different to him not having the indicator on?

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

Wait for a gap to pull into? maybe wait for somebody to let him in? gentle headlight plash "there you go sir" I certainly would not expect him to go for a gap that didn't exists.

ok I'll give a clue
To me I'd be thinking
First has he seen the car to the left is he going to move over and take it out?
Second thought would be hes going to drop in behind it
Whatever happens it looks like hes going to move left

Would it be best to move forward into that position or drop back a bit just in case?

what do you think someone exercising due care would do?

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

He pulled into the path of a moving lorry,

Did you think the car/caravan might do that when you saw the photo with the indicator?

Edited by saaby93 on Friday 24th April 22:49

[saaby93]

NoNeed said:

saaby93 said:

NoNeed said:

He pulled into the path of a moving lorry,

Did you think he might do that when you saw the photo?

No.

ok thanks. I was trying to work out at what point people beocme aware there is danger
At that point that indicator came on, I'd have been going uh oh
and preparing to drop back or dropping back in case the next move was he was into the side of that car
You didnt have that sense of danger?

[saaby93]

How far off the mark would I be if I said anyone driving up the left side of someone with their left indicator showing is driving without due care and attention?
Apart from the obvious danger of where that someone is going to go next?