Road rage incident witnessed
Discussion
Setting aside the actual incident aftermath as the behaviour on both sides was utterly out of order, 6 of one - half dozen of other, wondered about forum views on the driving which precipitated the incident.
Road is one of those formerly NSL DCs which has had the limit reduced plus frequent width reductions to one lane by application of red paint with cross hatching surrounded by solid white line. Usually in vicinty of junctions / crossovers.
In effect you get lots of short stretches of two lanes a few hundred metres long split up by bits where one lane plus a must not enter area.
The 50 limit is policed v aggressively by scamps so normal progress means that, unless a vehicle is particularly slow, no legal overtaking is possible within the two lane stretches, i.e. either above limit or entering cross hatched areas.
Hope that's clear on road layout etc.
Incident up ahead so traffic backed up, and instead of the 50 mph +/-2mph camel train, the single file speed is reduced to ~ 30 mph.
Shortish two lane section approaching, it's clear that the queue extends into tand completely through the two lane section. A vehicle pulls out into lane 2, hoofs it past the queue, and then right at the end goes for a gap which wasn't there, never was there, and definitely wasn't there after two or three of the overtaken vehicles closed right up to block overtakee out.
Hence commencement of road rage behaviour which I'll leave out of things.
So nobody in the right, everybody in the wrong at some point for different things, just wondered what folks thought?
Road is one of those formerly NSL DCs which has had the limit reduced plus frequent width reductions to one lane by application of red paint with cross hatching surrounded by solid white line. Usually in vicinty of junctions / crossovers.
In effect you get lots of short stretches of two lanes a few hundred metres long split up by bits where one lane plus a must not enter area.
The 50 limit is policed v aggressively by scamps so normal progress means that, unless a vehicle is particularly slow, no legal overtaking is possible within the two lane stretches, i.e. either above limit or entering cross hatched areas.
Hope that's clear on road layout etc.
Incident up ahead so traffic backed up, and instead of the 50 mph +/-2mph camel train, the single file speed is reduced to ~ 30 mph.
Shortish two lane section approaching, it's clear that the queue extends into tand completely through the two lane section. A vehicle pulls out into lane 2, hoofs it past the queue, and then right at the end goes for a gap which wasn't there, never was there, and definitely wasn't there after two or three of the overtaken vehicles closed right up to block overtakee out.
Hence commencement of road rage behaviour which I'll leave out of things.
So nobody in the right, everybody in the wrong at some point for different things, just wondered what folks thought?
hedders said:
If there are two lanes, you should use them.
However, if performing an overtake you should be certain that there is a safe position to return to.
I know that it is one way traffic in this case but, there is an effective hazard ahead in the form of the no entry section.
Sounds like a poorly thought out road design that leaves a lot of gray around the red hatch areas.
hedders said:
If there are two lanes, you should use them.
Yes. And at the end of the two lanes you should merge in turn.
However: Until the Highway Code specifically includes this rule (which it currently does not) there will always be those who see overtaking as queue-jumping. Without a specific rule neither party is in the right (unless there is a MERGE IN TURN direction sign specifically placed at the merge point).
If there's an amendment to the Road Traffic Act I'd like to see it would be a
idealhighwaycoderuleifonly said:
At a merge point where two lanes for travelling in the same direction merge into one lane you MUST merge in turn if possible.
Would person overtaking have been aware how soon it went back down to one lane?
If so, they were wrong for starting the move - but then the other drivers were wrong for "blcoking" them out.
Personally, it would annoy me that somebody had done it - but life is too short, and I'd probably just let them in anyway, roads are stressful enough without people being stupid.
If so, they were wrong for starting the move - but then the other drivers were wrong for "blcoking" them out.
Personally, it would annoy me that somebody had done it - but life is too short, and I'd probably just let them in anyway, roads are stressful enough without people being stupid.
esselte said:
For an overtake to be safe surely you must not have to rely on others to let you back in?
Define "let".
In this case, 'let' seems to mean 'not close up to block you', and with that definition I'd place the safety risk squarely at the door of those closing the gap*. Not really any excuse, regardless of queue-jumping. At least there wouldn't have been had it been a single-carriageway, IMHO.
* That said, the overtaker here does seem to have been an impatient fool.
havoc said:
esselte said:
For an overtake to be safe surely you must not have to rely on others to let you back in?
Define "let".
In this case, 'let' seems to mean 'not close up to block you', and with that definition I'd place the safety risk squarely at the door of those closing the gap*. Not really any excuse, regardless of queue-jumping. At least there wouldn't have been had it been a single-carriageway, IMHO.
* That said, the overtaker here does seem to have been an impatient fool.
It's a bit of a grey area really isn't it? I suppose the overtaker should really have expected this 'cos it happens everywhere all the time in the described scenario....suppose it depends if traffic was moving reasonably freely or if it was standing.
Flat in Fifth said:
A vehicle pulls out into lane 2, hoofs it past the queue, and then right at the end goes for a gap which wasn't there, never was there.
Says it all, sounds like the sort of driver who makes this sort of situation twice as frustating. Nobody is going anywhere and you have a chopper trying to jump the queue and then slowing everybody else down.
tigger1 said:
Would person overtaking have been aware how soon it went back down to one lane?
Oh
I could see that the queue went all the way through the next two lane section before I'd left the previous two lane section and entered the one lane section. I acept that the observation skills of Mr Average is probably a lot worse than that but even so. tigger1 said:
If so, they were wrong for starting the move - but then the other drivers were wrong for "blocking" them out.
Personally, it would annoy me that somebody had done it - but life is too short, and I'd probably just let them in anyway, roads are stressful enough without people being stupid.
Personally I don't even let stuff like this bother me, life is too short, I'd make the room.
Flat in Fifth said:
it's clear that the queue extends into tand completely through the two lane section. A vehicle pulls out into lane 2, hoofs it past the queue, and then right at the end goes for a gap which wasn't there, never was there, and definitely wasn't there after two or three of the overtaken vehicles closed right up to block overtakee out.
Seems to me like the guy started overtaking already knowing that he'd have to disrupt other traffic to squeeze in. You wouldn't do this on the open road, nothing makes it right to do it here either.
Other drivers blocking are also in the wrong but understandably miffed by the first drivers actions - which, on a human level, would have been interpreted as him being an arrogant so-and-so.
Everyone should have shown restraint - but the first driver chose his actions, the others had them foist upon them.
andy_s said:
Flat in Fifth said:
it's clear that the queue extends into tand completely through the two lane section. A vehicle pulls out into lane 2, hoofs it past the queue, and then right at the end goes for a gap which wasn't there, never was there, and definitely wasn't there after two or three of the overtaken vehicles closed right up to block overtakee out.
Seems to me like the guy started overtaking already knowing that he'd have to disrupt other traffic to squeeze in. You wouldn't do this on the open road, nothing makes it right to do it here either.
Other drivers blocking are also in the wrong but understandably miffed by the first drivers actions - which, on a human level, would have been interpreted as him being an arrogant so-and-so.
Everyone should have shown restraint - but the first driver chose his actions, the others had them foist upon them.
Nail on the head
plonker who pulled out to overtake precipitated the incedent. Whilst in general it makes sense to use all available lanes, in circumstances where you are coming to an obvious bottle neck, using the two lanes achieves nothing. When occupying two lanes the queue would be half the length, but also it would travel at half the speed. That might be useful if it stopped the queue tailing back across a junction and thereby slowing crossing traffic too, but otherwise all it does is complicate the flow of traffic to no purpose.
Yeah, I want to hear what happened next!
"Legally" the driver of the overtaking car did nothing wrong (in my opinion)...assuming he didn't break the limit while over taking. Indeed, the offending parties were (again, in my opinion) the drivers closing up to not let him back in.
-I have just realised I've passed 10,000 posts and didn't even know!
"Legally" the driver of the overtaking car did nothing wrong (in my opinion)...assuming he didn't break the limit while over taking. Indeed, the offending parties were (again, in my opinion) the drivers closing up to not let him back in.
-I have just realised I've passed 10,000 posts and didn't even know!
Edited by TonyHetherington on Thursday 3rd May 16:53
Sadly many so-called safety measures are poorly thought out and cause conflicts of interests between motorists.
There is a stretch of former NSL dual carriageway near me that has had a daft 40 limit imposed due to peak queues, jaywalkers, suicide off bridge, etc.
Recently I was driving in lane 2 overtaking a nose-tail convoy of vehicles on inside lane doing 35 or thereabouts, a big 4WD pickup looms up out of the distance and sits a couple of feet off my tail. I'm doing 45ish (within ACPO guidelines of limit) as said stretch is scammed now and then (easy pickings). There were no gaps to squeeze into for some distance, so had to sit it out until I'd reached a gap to pull in an move over, cue horn, gesticulating etc. from former tailgater.
By the time I'd pulled in my speed was in excess of 50, I'd have been done by a talivan and the berk in the pickup would have got away scot-free due to number plate being obscured.
Still, what can you do except try not to exacerbate scenarios like this? There seems to be a lot of cluelessness out there when it comes to implementing road safety measures.
There is a stretch of former NSL dual carriageway near me that has had a daft 40 limit imposed due to peak queues, jaywalkers, suicide off bridge, etc.
Recently I was driving in lane 2 overtaking a nose-tail convoy of vehicles on inside lane doing 35 or thereabouts, a big 4WD pickup looms up out of the distance and sits a couple of feet off my tail. I'm doing 45ish (within ACPO guidelines of limit) as said stretch is scammed now and then (easy pickings). There were no gaps to squeeze into for some distance, so had to sit it out until I'd reached a gap to pull in an move over, cue horn, gesticulating etc. from former tailgater.
By the time I'd pulled in my speed was in excess of 50, I'd have been done by a talivan and the berk in the pickup would have got away scot-free due to number plate being obscured.
Still, what can you do except try not to exacerbate scenarios like this? There seems to be a lot of cluelessness out there when it comes to implementing road safety measures.
various people said:
Yeah, I want to hear what happened next!
OK in summary.
All got very silly. Everything started to come to a halt, bit of jockeying with vehicles but no actual contact, overtaker realised that the red paint, surrounded by solid white line was just that, ie not a physical barrier and not mined with explosives. So started to go over that only for the front vehicle (drop side Transit) in the blockees to pull right in a blocking manouevre and stop with the overtaker right up his chuff. Jockeying recommenced but road blocked.
I could see ahead of me several people raising hands in frustration as this was making us all late for work. One could imagine cartoon like bubbles emerging from car windows saying things like "Oh FFS!" and so on.
Overtaker starts to get out of vehicle. As did the two in the Transit. Built like brick outhouses they were too. I'm almost sure at this stage I could hear playground chants of "Fight Fight Fight!"
Coudn't hear what went on but I think the Tranny boys offered to "Taaarmac yore drooiiive sorr!" ,or something like that,
to the overtaker who meekly got back in car, and sat there while the queue started up again and sailed past. The Transit blokes just held him there. No idea what happened next tbh.
No contact, no claret spilt, no actual violence or assault, quite silly and pathetic really. Can't be arsed with all that business.
They all needed poking with a sharp stick.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff