What was the offence?
Discussion
Jap-car
Perhaps you should read the post before replying .. he said there were about 3 cycles to go before he got through the lights. Therefore it was a substantial queue. His driving would have got him and everybody else to the front just as quickly, and have the added bonus of smoothing our the stop-start for those behind. And any radar would only read cars going through the lights, not 3 cycles back.
Perhaps you should read the post before replying .. he said there were about 3 cycles to go before he got through the lights. Therefore it was a substantial queue. His driving would have got him and everybody else to the front just as quickly, and have the added bonus of smoothing our the stop-start for those behind. And any radar would only read cars going through the lights, not 3 cycles back.
splodge s4 said:
I assumed (maybe wrongly) here that Splodge is sitting, say, in a long queue approaching roundabout/ traffic lights, where there will be a complete revolution of lights several times before he gets there
But jamesTT said:
Consiquently I was putting into practice some advanced techniques such that I arrived at the end of the queue just as it was starting to move off ... just slowly creeping up if you know what I mean.
He was doing exactly what I do in traffic - it makes no difference to journey time but reduced stop-start and clutch use (a big thing if you have a heavy clutch).
Iain
[quote=Streetcop]
I wouldn't worry about it and just forget the phallically challenged member....he will do it to a BiB or Kenny Noye type and really come unstuck...
Street
My interpratation of this comment is that poor driving at some point would be met with an incident of road rage which ultimatley could result in the loss of a life. I do not think that should your driving be considered poor by another driver you should expect to become fair game for a murderer.
I wouldn't worry about it and just forget the phallically challenged member....he will do it to a BiB or Kenny Noye type and really come unstuck...
Street
My interpratation of this comment is that poor driving at some point would be met with an incident of road rage which ultimatley could result in the loss of a life. I do not think that should your driving be considered poor by another driver you should expect to become fair game for a murderer.
wedge girl said:
[quote=Streetcop]
I wouldn't worry about it and just forget the phallically challenged member....he will do it to a BiB or Kenny Noye type and really come unstuck...
Street
My interpratation of this comment is that poor driving at some point would be met with an incident of road rage which ultimatley could result in the loss of a life. I do not think that should your driving be considered poor by another driver you should expect to become fair game for a murderer.
Have you read my last post where I appologised for causing you to misinterpret my earlier post?
In response to your latest post, I wholeheartedly agree with you that your driving should never warrant you to become fair game for a murderer, but that's the world we live in today. Consequently, one must always be on ones guard and must consider what knock on effect our actions might have on other drivers. Other drivers, who's state of mind we don't know...
I could tell you some horrendous stories about the people in cars on a few spaces from you in a traffic jam..
Stay safe..
Street
rbryant said:
Jap-car
Perhaps you should read the post before replying .. he said there were about 3 cycles to go before he got through the lights. Therefore it was a substantial queue. His driving would have got him and everybody else to the front just as quickly, and have the added bonus of smoothing our the stop-start for those behind. And any radar would only read cars going through the lights, not 3 cycles back.
I did read the post
Maybe it cycles three times because folks leave big gaps. Also how are the folks following supposed to know that you;ll eventually close the gap.
It may mean less clutch wear for the guy in front but it means more for anyone with a slightly higher geared car.
If the gap was excessive, I'd overtake.
jap-car said:
I did read the post
Maybe it cycles three times because folks leave big gaps.
The set of lights that you are seeing will also have a corresponding set. The big gaps could be in that crossing/joining traffic flow that is given priority.
jap-car said:
If the gap was excessive, I'd overtake.
So which traffic flow are you going to overtake in then to fill that gap.
How many nanoseconds further up the road to your journeys end are you by such action.
viggen114 said:
The set of lights that you are seeing will also have a corresponding set. The big gaps could be in that crossing/joining traffic flow that is given priority.
Indeed but even if the road is the more major, most lights systems will turn red if they detect no cars (ie a big gap) on one road and cars waiting on another. By leaving big gaps, it's not helping anyone, it just means more traffic light cycles and therefore more time during which no cars are passing through the junction.
viggen114 said:
So which traffic flow are you going to overtake in then to fill that gap.
As I've said already I would only overtake if it were safe and that means no cars coming the other way
viggen114 said:
How many nanoseconds further up the road to your journeys end are you by such action.
Sometimes none, sometimes a typical traffic light cycles worth - maybe 10-20 cars. This would seem like a good return for one safe low-speed over-take. Even if no time is saved, I would rather move forward in a queue at normal pace, come to a stop and think about something else /relax for a couple of minutes rather than concentrate on matching the snails pace of a car crawling along for those two minutes. I don't see any benefit in crawling. (and don't tell me about fuel / clutch / brake etc saving as this is negligible compared to a blast along an A-road which I expect the majority of P-H enjoy
) It's perfectly legal to over-take and if someone is going to crawl along a road leaving more than a reasonable gap, why complain when it's filled by someone else?
>> Edited by jap-car on Wednesday 22 September 09:08
JohnL said:
Jap-car's got a point tho, why does anyone have a right to deliberately hold up other drivers?
Not necessarily in this manouvre - which depends on how you do it - but doing anything that's un-necessarily and inappropriately delaying others?
I fully agree that no one has a right to delay other drivers, but in the situation originally described I'm not sure that they are guilty of that.
However, I'm mindful of the point jap-car makes about traffic lights detecting gaps in the queue and thus changing the lights back to red. Is that a frequently used system I wonder, rather than a simple timer or other method of controlling the lights?
Best wishes all,
Dave.
So just to confirm, to ensure a smooth and steady flow of traffic, the best policy is to control the traffic behind by maintaining a relatively slow but constant speed while attempting to prevent overtaking. This will ensure that when we do arrive at a junction / roundabout / incident / road-works etc (which is a certainty), speed reduction will be minimal.
Normally on dual-carriageway I move to the inside lane after passing another vehicle, but here’s an idea.
What if I just maintain a constant speed in the outside lane? Also I will attempt to cover two lanes with my vehicle if I feel that somewhere further down the road two lanes will merge to one. That would be best for everyone. Even better, what if the vehicles were linked and the speed controlled by a third party. We could call it a train and then attempt to tax cars off the road. This would be best for everyone.
Double standards anyone?
Normally on dual-carriageway I move to the inside lane after passing another vehicle, but here’s an idea.
What if I just maintain a constant speed in the outside lane? Also I will attempt to cover two lanes with my vehicle if I feel that somewhere further down the road two lanes will merge to one. That would be best for everyone. Even better, what if the vehicles were linked and the speed controlled by a third party. We could call it a train and then attempt to tax cars off the road. This would be best for everyone. Double standards anyone?
Pigeon said:
I'd always assumed that the box sitting on top of most traffic lights is a radar for that very purpose.
It may be a Doppler radar or it may be a PIR... both of which devices only produce an output if there is a *moving* vehicle.
They set off my Snooper. Am I correct in assuming that PIR is P...? Infra Red and therefore that my detector would not detect? (Although at very close range, my TV remote will be detected and this is Infra Red). It's also set off by anyone walking in front of the car with a mobile phone.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff