So you think its ok to undertake?
Discussion
The scene: this morning, M1, travelling southbound, in the roadworks north of J5. I'm in lane 3 (contraflow lane) following a people carrier. Speed limit is 50mph.
As lame 3 rejoins lanes 1 and 2 after the roadworks, I'm looking to 'make some progress' and hoping the vehicle in front moves over quickly. Technically its still 50mph limit for another couple of hundred yards so I wait patiently. I notice the car behind me is a bit close to put it mildly.
As we pass the national speed limit signs the people carrier in front begins to move back into lane 2. Simultaneously the car behind dives into lane 2 and accelerates hard. There is nearly a coming together as the undertaker has to stray into lane 1 slightly to make avoid the people carrier now moving into lane 2. Luckily the people carrier driver is checking his mirrors and smartly moves over. Too close for comfort that...
We travel a bit further down the motorway and I'm waiting for the people carrier to move over. I give the people carrier a flash to make him aware that I want to get by. A couple of hundred yards later he again begins to move into lane 2. By this point the person behind me has lost patience and dived past in lane 2 accelerating hard. The people carrier has to abort another lane change. Thank god he's paying attention.
As the second undertaker zooms past I notice a third vehicle approaching quickly. I just know its going to happen a third time and sure enough, the people carrier has to abort a third lane change and the undertaker has to brake hard not to clip his rear corner.
When the people carrier eventually moved over I looked inside and the poor bloke looked really flustered. The only minor error he made was not moving over more quickly. But it was the impatience and stupidity of the other three drivers that resulted in
a) him having such difficulty in moving over to lane 2 (which would have freed lane 3 for us)
b) causing three dangerous situations (two very near misses) in only a couple of miles.
A perfect illustration of why you should never undertake. It was scary to watch...
As lame 3 rejoins lanes 1 and 2 after the roadworks, I'm looking to 'make some progress' and hoping the vehicle in front moves over quickly. Technically its still 50mph limit for another couple of hundred yards so I wait patiently. I notice the car behind me is a bit close to put it mildly.
As we pass the national speed limit signs the people carrier in front begins to move back into lane 2. Simultaneously the car behind dives into lane 2 and accelerates hard. There is nearly a coming together as the undertaker has to stray into lane 1 slightly to make avoid the people carrier now moving into lane 2. Luckily the people carrier driver is checking his mirrors and smartly moves over. Too close for comfort that...
We travel a bit further down the motorway and I'm waiting for the people carrier to move over. I give the people carrier a flash to make him aware that I want to get by. A couple of hundred yards later he again begins to move into lane 2. By this point the person behind me has lost patience and dived past in lane 2 accelerating hard. The people carrier has to abort another lane change. Thank god he's paying attention.
As the second undertaker zooms past I notice a third vehicle approaching quickly. I just know its going to happen a third time and sure enough, the people carrier has to abort a third lane change and the undertaker has to brake hard not to clip his rear corner.
When the people carrier eventually moved over I looked inside and the poor bloke looked really flustered. The only minor error he made was not moving over more quickly. But it was the impatience and stupidity of the other three drivers that resulted in
a) him having such difficulty in moving over to lane 2 (which would have freed lane 3 for us)
b) causing three dangerous situations (two very near misses) in only a couple of miles.
A perfect illustration of why you should never undertake. It was scary to watch...
Yung Man said:
Lesson for the day, when you are coming to end of the coned area indicate left with 100 yards to go, this way people behind know what you intend to do.
Does anybody bother to do this?. (indicate with 100 yards to go not indicate at the end of the cones)
No, except me, this is because nobody gives a stuff about them behind, I don't think I'v ever seen anybody indicate with 100 yards to go.
I think what you're saying (hope I haven't misunderstood!) basically boils down to 'indicate in plenty of time' which, of course, applies to all circumstances.Does anybody bother to do this?. (indicate with 100 yards to go not indicate at the end of the cones)
No, except me, this is because nobody gives a stuff about them behind, I don't think I'v ever seen anybody indicate with 100 yards to go.
In the particular example of my original post, I'm fairly certain that on each occasion the people carrier did indicate before moving over. The fact that my vehicle was between the people carrier and each undertaker meant that they probably did not see his signal until they had committed to the 'undertake'.
The people carrier could've moved over as soon as lane 3 merged with lanes 1 & 2 as it was safe to do so. Thats about the only criticism I could make of his driving. It was the impatience of the people behind us who turned a 30 second wait for him to move over into three dangerous situations.
Yung Man said:
DJ_AS said:
Yung Man said:
Lesson for the day, when you are coming to end of the coned area indicate left with 100 yards to go, this way people behind know what you intend to do.
Does anybody bother to do this?. (indicate with 100 yards to go not indicate at the end of the cones)
No, except me, this is because nobody gives a stuff about them behind, I don't think I'v ever seen anybody indicate with 100 yards to go.
I think what you're saying (hope I haven't misunderstood!) basically boils down to 'indicate in plenty of time' which, of course, applies to all circumstances.Does anybody bother to do this?. (indicate with 100 yards to go not indicate at the end of the cones)
No, except me, this is because nobody gives a stuff about them behind, I don't think I'v ever seen anybody indicate with 100 yards to go.
In the particular example of my original post, I'm fairly certain that on each occasion the people carrier did indicate before moving over. The fact that my vehicle was between the people carrier and each undertaker meant that they probably did not see his signal until they had committed to the 'undertake'.
The people carrier could've moved over as soon as lane 3 merged with lanes 1 & 2 as it was safe to do so. Thats about the only criticism I could make of his driving. It was the impatience of the people behind us who turned a 30 second wait for him to move over into three dangerous situations.
I hope you gave him the evil eye along with a little shake of the head as you passed.
No criticism of your driving was intended.
I think its pretty harsh to say he deserved to 'get himself into bother' though. Yes, he could've and should've moved over more quickly - but its not like we were stuck behind him for miles. From the first moment he could've moved over to the first undertake was probably just 30 seconds. The people carrier clearly intended (and tried to) get out of lane 3.
It was the undertakers who caused the bother and it was they who deserved the evil eye and shake of the head.
BertBert said:
As we are on the Advanced Driver forum, is there another approach to this situation to have achieved a safer outcome for all concerned and specifically the OP...
One of the things that the OP said was about his contribution...his position may have concealed the LH indicator of the people carrier. The OP also had a tailgater, so would a safer course of action have been to help the weaker driver. If the OP had moved over to L2, he could have created a safe buffer for the people carrier to pull into.
The tailgater behind would have accelerated up behind the people carrier adding pressure to move over and the tailgate would be in front of the OP.
All in all a much better outcome to remove oneself from a dangerous situation and potentially reduce the danger.
Of course this is with the benefit of hindsight. However, I do take that kind of action. If I am stuck behind a driver who will not move over and there is a car coming up behind me that looks like they really want to get by, I move over. Lets the guy behind get on with the monstering (which I wont do) and makes the guy in front think I am going to undertake. Often gets the job done. Car moves over, faster car goes through and I move out and follow.
Bert
I agree with the fact that it may have helped if I had moved in L2 and indeed would have done so had I been stuck behind the people carrier for a period of time.One of the things that the OP said was about his contribution...his position may have concealed the LH indicator of the people carrier. The OP also had a tailgater, so would a safer course of action have been to help the weaker driver. If the OP had moved over to L2, he could have created a safe buffer for the people carrier to pull into.
The tailgater behind would have accelerated up behind the people carrier adding pressure to move over and the tailgate would be in front of the OP.
All in all a much better outcome to remove oneself from a dangerous situation and potentially reduce the danger.
Of course this is with the benefit of hindsight. However, I do take that kind of action. If I am stuck behind a driver who will not move over and there is a car coming up behind me that looks like they really want to get by, I move over. Lets the guy behind get on with the monstering (which I wont do) and makes the guy in front think I am going to undertake. Often gets the job done. Car moves over, faster car goes through and I move out and follow.
Bert
I did not do so on this ocassion because I hoped the driver had the sense to move into L2. Which he did try to do.
Maybe I could've anticipated the actions of the following driver better and is something I will consider in the future.
ClioKarl said:
Why I should sit behind a driver who is not driving (safely) up to the speed limit, in the wrong lane, with no consideration for other drivers?
Karl
Because by not doing so you may create a dangerous situation. See my original post.Karl
Lane hogging = frustrating
Undertaking = dangerous
RumbleBee said:
DJ_AS, had you been further back from the people carrier, the undertaking cars could have seen it sooner and possibly avoided what happened. Im not saying that I think that undertaking is acceptable, but you have to anticipate what other people will do, even if it is stupid. There is no need to go right up behind people to get them to move over, a quick flash of lights or RH indicator will do from a reasonable distance IMHO. I dont want to criticise your driving, but making a suggestion to a possible solution.
As for the evil eye, keep that on the road, a hand gesture is sufficient.
I was sitting a safe distance from the people carrier - at least two seconds. I never tailgate, sometimes I give a flash of the headlights and that is normally sufficient.As for the evil eye, keep that on the road, a hand gesture is sufficient.
I do agree with what you say about anticipating others actions. My instructor used to say to me "always expect the people around you to do the stupidest things, so that when they do, you will be prepared".
I think the best suggestion to what I could have done is anticipated that the undertake was about to happen (the guy tailgating me) and moved over to lane 2 myself.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff