roundabout rule 186
Discussion
The most annoyng 'rule' within the highway code has got to be the allowance of drivers to change lanes at the point where they exit a roundabout!
(Rule 186)
Conflict maneouvre shown in yellow.
Nearly every week at a local roundabout there is a car buried in the footpath railings due to drivers deciding to make a lane change at the roundabout exit and in doing so cutting up another driver who is taking the same exit in lane 1.
I have always wondered why this maneouvre is allowed and promoted in the highway code.
From my experience from what I have seen on many roundabouts and through our companies access to the national traffic accident database, it seems like many minor and sometimes serious colisions occur due to drivers simply being cut up during the above maneouvre.
Using the above diagram from the highway code (but with obvious alterations shown in yellow), the driver approaching from the top (call it car 'A', other car turning right on roundabout being car 'B'), sees nothing in lane 1 and therefore enters the roundabout on lane 1 wishing to turn left. (If car B is already on the roundabout in lane 1, then obviously car A gives way to car B).
Car B already on roundabout in lane 2 approaches exit and decides to make a lane change from lane 2 to lane 1 on the exit of roundabout. Car B has not looked in mirrors (or if he did he may find car A in blind spot),....the result is a collision in a dangerous part of the road where pedestrians and footway railings are present.
(What you have to appreciate in the above example is that driver speeds can be considerably different and cars can line up side by side when it comes to the exit point...and also roundabout dimensions can mean that it is not such a simple case as shown in the diagram above).
So what are people's views on rule 186 ??
(Rule 186)
Conflict maneouvre shown in yellow.
Nearly every week at a local roundabout there is a car buried in the footpath railings due to drivers deciding to make a lane change at the roundabout exit and in doing so cutting up another driver who is taking the same exit in lane 1.
I have always wondered why this maneouvre is allowed and promoted in the highway code.
From my experience from what I have seen on many roundabouts and through our companies access to the national traffic accident database, it seems like many minor and sometimes serious colisions occur due to drivers simply being cut up during the above maneouvre.
Using the above diagram from the highway code (but with obvious alterations shown in yellow), the driver approaching from the top (call it car 'A', other car turning right on roundabout being car 'B'), sees nothing in lane 1 and therefore enters the roundabout on lane 1 wishing to turn left. (If car B is already on the roundabout in lane 1, then obviously car A gives way to car B).
Car B already on roundabout in lane 2 approaches exit and decides to make a lane change from lane 2 to lane 1 on the exit of roundabout. Car B has not looked in mirrors (or if he did he may find car A in blind spot),....the result is a collision in a dangerous part of the road where pedestrians and footway railings are present.
(What you have to appreciate in the above example is that driver speeds can be considerably different and cars can line up side by side when it comes to the exit point...and also roundabout dimensions can mean that it is not such a simple case as shown in the diagram above).
So what are people's views on rule 186 ??
rlw said:
All well and good but if there are two lanes where you are heading why not use them. I do all the time and regard such things as a decent overtaking opportunity when there's loads of numpties about.
These days - some of the only overtaking opportunities are on roundabouts...klootzak said:
Worst "I just had an accident because I didn't give way on a roundabout, but I'm looking for an excuse why it wasn't my fault" thread ... evah.
k
hahahak
I work for a company that works for the HA, it is my line of work and therefore have an interest on views from the public about these rules. This particular rule at roundabouts seems to be the cause of MANY minor incidents whereby our company is having to repair the kerbs, footpath, railings etc. etc.
The local roundabout that I mention in my above post previously had no road markings on it.... the main road appraching and exiting it is 2-lane, but there are 3 other exits that are 1-lane.
The company I work for decided to upgrade the roundabout by making it a 2-lane roundabout (this happened about 4 years ago).
But it has had little effect on the number of minor accidents due to lane changes at exits.
Drivers were crashing before the lanes were introduced and also after the lanes were introduced.
But it seems the real problem is that drivers are taught to perform a lane change at the most critical point on a roundabout....why not change the highway code to ban this maneouvre and persuade drivers to make this lane change after they have exited the roundabout? (just a thought)
I am guessing no amount of road markings or signs would be able to stop these collisions as long as the highway code says it is acceptable to do such a maneouvre.
I have been cut up myself on numerous occasions on roundabout in the above mannor, but always been alert enough to avaoid accident.
AJI said:
I am guessing no amount of road markings or signs would be able to stop these collisions as long as the highway code says it is acceptable to do such a maneouvre.
That's odd, because I'm guessing the accidents wouldn't have happened if people coming onto the roundabout had actually given way to those already on the roundabout – as stipulated by the very same highway code. k
The ones that get me are the ones that make you cross about 3 lanes to get off, within 1 exit - you happily sit in the lane marked with whatever road you want to take, and then all of a sudden that lane changes to one 2-3 away (e.g. the A404/M40 roundabout at Wycombe used to be like this). Add traffic lights and from a standing start with traffic everywhere you have to get over 2-3 lanes quickly.
I don't see though how that brings you into conflict with someone turning left - if you're indicating correctly and they've given way correctly they won't be there ?
I don't see though how that brings you into conflict with someone turning left - if you're indicating correctly and they've given way correctly they won't be there ?
klootzak said:
AJI said:
I am guessing no amount of road markings or signs would be able to stop these collisions as long as the highway code says it is acceptable to do such a maneouvre.
That's odd, because I'm guessing the accidents wouldn't have happened if people coming onto the roundabout had actually given way to those already on the roundabout – as stipulated by the very same highway code. k
klootzak said:
AJI said:
I am guessing no amount of road markings or signs would be able to stop these collisions as long as the highway code says it is acceptable to do such a maneouvre.
That's odd, because I'm guessing the accidents wouldn't have happened if people coming onto the roundabout had actually given way to those already on the roundabout – as stipulated by the very same highway code. k
So you can quite easily give way to traffic from the right and then catch it up on the roundabout.
Happens all the time especially when you get drivers who are slowing down because they are not sure which exit they need.
Edited by AJI on Wednesday 8th July 10:14
dreamer75 said:
The ones that get me are the ones that make you cross about 3 lanes to get off, within 1 exit - you happily sit in the lane marked with whatever road you want to take, and then all of a sudden that lane changes to one 2-3 away (e.g. the A404/M40 roundabout at Wycombe used to be like this). Add traffic lights and from a standing start with traffic everywhere you have to get over 2-3 lanes quickly.
M25 junction 2 southbound joining the A2 london bound is a classic example.Traffic wanting to join the A2 sits in lane 3 at the lights, traffic joining M25 south *should* be in lanes 1 and 2. As the traffic lights change, it's a bit of a nervous start as those in lane 3 cross two lanes to lane 1 after the M25 exit, praying that those in lane 1 + 2 head onto the M25 slip and watching out for the inevitable person continuing round in lane 2...
Fun times...
AJI said:
The conflict that arises in this particular rule is largely due to cars in lane 1 catching up with cars in lane 2 - at the exit point.
But the cars in lane 1 have no right to pull onto the roundabout in the first place. In the diagram you show, they are subject to a give way line.That doesn't mean "pull onto the roundabout because you think someone on the roundabout will stay out of your way" it means "give way to anyone on the roundabout". Give way meaning "let them go first". Anyone meaning "anyone who's already on the roundabout".
Quite simple really, but apparently a rule that eludes some people. Possibly the sort of drivers who should have their licences taken away.
k
Edited by klootzak on Wednesday 8th July 10:22
Edited by klootzak on Wednesday 8th July 10:22
AJI said:
why not change the highway code to ban this maneouvre and persuade drivers to make this lane change after they have exited the roundabout? (just a thought)
Why not just give way to the traffic on the roundabout, like they're supposed to, exercise a bit of patience and restraint and voila!, problem solved. 
klootzak said:
AJI said:
The conflict that arises in this particular rule is largely due to cars in lane 1 catching up with cars in lane 2 - at the exit point.
But the cars in lane 1 have no right to pull onto the roundabout in the first place. In the diagram you show, they are subject to a give way line.That doesn't mean "pull onto the roundabout because you think someone on the roundabout will stay out of your way" i means "give way to anyone on the roundabout". Anyone.
Quite simple really, but apparently a rule that eludes some people. Possibly the sort of drivers who should have their licences taken away.
k
A car (car x) comes from car Ys right and passes in front of Car Y in lane 2.
Car Y pulls out behind Car X but in lane 1.
Car x slows for whatever reason and Car Y is now beside it.
Car x turns into Car Y as they both exit the roundabout at the same junction.
Morally Car X is at fault. Legally I suspect it's Car Ys fault for passing on the left despite Car X causing that to happen.
Edited by Munter on Wednesday 8th July 10:26
AJI said:
The most annoyng 'rule' within the highway code has got to be the allowance of drivers to change lanes at the point where they exit a roundabout!
(Rule 186)
Conflict maneouvre shown in yellow.
Nearly every week at a local roundabout there is a car buried in the footpath railings due to drivers deciding to make a lane change at the roundabout exit and in doing so cutting up another driver who is taking the same exit in lane 1.
I have always wondered why this maneouvre is allowed and promoted in the highway code.
From my experience from what I have seen on many roundabouts and through our companies access to the national traffic accident database, it seems like many minor and sometimes serious colisions occur due to drivers simply being cut up during the above maneouvre.
Using the above diagram from the highway code (but with obvious alterations shown in yellow), the driver approaching from the top (call it car 'A', other car turning right on roundabout being car 'B'), sees nothing in lane 1 and therefore enters the roundabout on lane 1 wishing to turn left. (If car B is already on the roundabout in lane 1, then obviously car A gives way to car B).
Car B already on roundabout in lane 2 approaches exit and decides to make a lane change from lane 2 to lane 1 on the exit of roundabout. Car B has not looked in mirrors (or if he did he may find car A in blind spot),....the result is a collision in a dangerous part of the road where pedestrians and footway railings are present.
(What you have to appreciate in the above example is that driver speeds can be considerably different and cars can line up side by side when it comes to the exit point...and also roundabout dimensions can mean that it is not such a simple case as shown in the diagram above).
So what are people's views on rule 186 ??
I failed my first driving test for that exact manoeuvre!(Rule 186)
Conflict maneouvre shown in yellow.
Nearly every week at a local roundabout there is a car buried in the footpath railings due to drivers deciding to make a lane change at the roundabout exit and in doing so cutting up another driver who is taking the same exit in lane 1.
I have always wondered why this maneouvre is allowed and promoted in the highway code.
From my experience from what I have seen on many roundabouts and through our companies access to the national traffic accident database, it seems like many minor and sometimes serious colisions occur due to drivers simply being cut up during the above maneouvre.
Using the above diagram from the highway code (but with obvious alterations shown in yellow), the driver approaching from the top (call it car 'A', other car turning right on roundabout being car 'B'), sees nothing in lane 1 and therefore enters the roundabout on lane 1 wishing to turn left. (If car B is already on the roundabout in lane 1, then obviously car A gives way to car B).
Car B already on roundabout in lane 2 approaches exit and decides to make a lane change from lane 2 to lane 1 on the exit of roundabout. Car B has not looked in mirrors (or if he did he may find car A in blind spot),....the result is a collision in a dangerous part of the road where pedestrians and footway railings are present.
(What you have to appreciate in the above example is that driver speeds can be considerably different and cars can line up side by side when it comes to the exit point...and also roundabout dimensions can mean that it is not such a simple case as shown in the diagram above).
So what are people's views on rule 186 ??
Munter said:
Morally Car X is at fault. Legally I suspect it's Car Ys fault for passing on the left despite Car X causing that to happen.
Morally and legally, car Y is at fault.Edited by Munter on Wednesday 8th July 10:26
Pulling onto the roundabout, car Y had responsibility to stay clear of car X. Doesn't matter whether car X slows, stops, does a U-turn or hops onto its back wheels and begs. Give way means give way.
k
If people bothered looking properly and read the road ahead (ie looking for their "9 oclock option") half the incidents wouldnt happen.
The lanes that have been painted on roundabouts within the last 10 years or so has changed things for the better IMHO. The ones that, if you are in the correct lane to start with and carry on in that lane, you will come out on the correct exit. They are idiot proof, but some people still manage to cock it up.
The lanes that have been painted on roundabouts within the last 10 years or so has changed things for the better IMHO. The ones that, if you are in the correct lane to start with and carry on in that lane, you will come out on the correct exit. They are idiot proof, but some people still manage to cock it up.
At one roundabout near here people full up on the left to go to exit 3 because there's always a queue for 3rd exit intenders and little in the left lane. They know nobody's likely to be going to exit 2 from the right hand lane as it's a motorway exit and exit 2 is going straight back onto the motorway. I quite expect a collision when legitimate lane 3 intenders in the righ hand lane change lane on the exit into their intended route and clash with smart-aresed all-the-way-around-on-the-left drivers. Occasionally you'll get a vigilante type who forces the point and makes Mr Smart-Arse either rejoin the motorway or brake hard to avoid the otherwise inevitable collision.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff