Smart motorway penalty
Discussion
TooMany2cvs said:
If the OP had reacted as soon as the gantry changed to show the closure, he could have been sat on the paint waiting for a gap before the divider started, even if there wasn't a gap to move to. Even if he'd been a bit tardy, he could have reversed a few car lengths back to the start of the divider.
But, no, he kept bimbling onwards for 46 seconds into the closed-off lane, hoping that his optimism would pay off... Even then, he only stopped because the BMW did.
Whilst I don't agree that bimbling along was the best course of action, it's easy and understandable for confusion to set in once you're in the situation. Ergo, the best course of action is 'ok sir, leave through this barrier when safe' and goodnight. Not a dressing down for changing into a lane that appeared to be open, and a threat of points.But, no, he kept bimbling onwards for 46 seconds into the closed-off lane, hoping that his optimism would pay off... Even then, he only stopped because the BMW did.
Edited by trackdemon on Thursday 20th September 13:32
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Pica-Pica said:
It is not about gantry signs or whatever
So, why do the earlier ones for the lane closure count?Why should he have stayed in lane?
Yes there was an opportunity to change lanes, because the gentry showed a speed limit, indicating the lane was open. Quite simple really, surely?
What a fun thread & video. However isn't it all a bit irrelevant? You've only posted because a HATO has told you that you'll get points, but you're forgetting that these are the same people who are responsible for overhead signs - being a compulsive liar is requirement of their employment.
You're not going to receive a NIP.
You're not going to receive a NIP.
trackdemon said:
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Pica-Pica said:
It is not about gantry signs or whatever
So, why do the earlier ones for the lane closure count?Why should he have stayed in lane?
Yes there was an opportunity to change lanes, because the gentry showed a speed limit, indicating the lane was open. Quite simple really, surely?
The event at 1:55 tells you all you need to know about the inadvisability of diving back to the left without thorough checking first.
Legally, OP should have stopped at the first red X, irrespective of when it was illuminated. He had time.
Legally, OP should have stopped at the first red X, irrespective of when it was illuminated. He had time.
Edited by speedking31 on Thursday 20th September 13:49
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Driving around London you learn to be on the ball and to react to opportunities to keep moving, very much a you snooze you lose environment. For all he knew the maintenance was moving slowly away from the tunnel and he just happened to reach the point at which they had just opened up the lane enough to allow passage through again. If it had actually been open how long would you say is appropriate for drivers to ignore that and stay in the left tunnel only?If anything it illustrates that the signage/layout/timing needs a rethink.
Thanks for all the input guys. I never have claimed or will claim that this was the best decision I've ever made on the road. I've been driving for about 10 years now with a total of 1 speeding ticket about 5 years ago, so it's not like I make a habit of weird decisions. The more I watch this the more sure I am that the decision to switch lanes was silly,but this is from the comfort of my own sofa now not having to make quick decisions.
As for when I stopped and why, I saw the sign change, but another set of green lights ahead. I stopped when I saw the last sign Bofors the tunnel which showed both lanes closed. It was a very confusing situation, and one I already lost sleep over. It wasn't helped by the traffic officer saying things like 'you're not very well educated', 'it was stupid' etc. No, it wasn't a good decision and I know that now, but surely at the moment when it was made it wasn't illegal.
As for when I stopped and why, I saw the sign change, but another set of green lights ahead. I stopped when I saw the last sign Bofors the tunnel which showed both lanes closed. It was a very confusing situation, and one I already lost sleep over. It wasn't helped by the traffic officer saying things like 'you're not very well educated', 'it was stupid' etc. No, it wasn't a good decision and I know that now, but surely at the moment when it was made it wasn't illegal.
Toltec said:
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Driving around London you learn to be on the ball and to react to opportunities to keep moving, very much a you snooze you lose environment. For all he knew the maintenance was moving slowly away from the tunnel and he just happened to reach the point at which they had just opened up the lane enough to allow passage through again. If it had actually been open how long would you say is appropriate for drivers to ignore that and stay in the left tunnel only?If anything it illustrates that the signage/layout/timing needs a rethink.
Pica-Pica said:
Yes, very simple, just keep changing lanes, make yourself a thorough nuisance. You are approaching two separate tunnels. You do not change at the last minute just because it becomes open. ‘Quite simple, surely’?
'Just keep changing lanes'? There's a fair chunk of video before the incident where he's mostly using L1, the only significant change appears when he goes L1, to L3 when it appears L3 is open. So I think your reply is a bit disingenuous.'You do not change at the last minute just because it becomes open.' Why not? Is there a specified time period you're supposed to wait between a lane becoming available, and you being able to use it? Besides, it wasn't last minute, there was plenty of time to get over into the lane without it being a last minute dive as implied.
Pica-Pica said:
trackdemon said:
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Pica-Pica said:
It is not about gantry signs or whatever
So, why do the earlier ones for the lane closure count?Why should he have stayed in lane?
Yes there was an opportunity to change lanes, because the gentry showed a speed limit, indicating the lane was open. Quite simple really, surely?
WinstonWolf said:
Pica-Pica said:
trackdemon said:
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Pica-Pica said:
It is not about gantry signs or whatever
So, why do the earlier ones for the lane closure count?Why should he have stayed in lane?
Yes there was an opportunity to change lanes, because the gentry showed a speed limit, indicating the lane was open. Quite simple really, surely?
WinstonWolf said:
So how many minutes *should* elapse before you move into a lane that's now showing open?
Given all the other clues that the RH tunnel is closedier than a closed thing - including the words RIGHT TUNNEL CLOSED on one gantry - I'm really not sure I'd be even contemplating a lane swap over to it just a handful of seconds before the solid divider, especially given that there's still two roadworks wagons stationary on that side, one right alongside at the first lane change... And all on the basis of just one sign... that then changes to agree with all the others before I've even got to the divider, still with time to recover the situation easily.Pica-Pica said:
WinstonWolf said:
Pica-Pica said:
trackdemon said:
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Pica-Pica said:
It is not about gantry signs or whatever
So, why do the earlier ones for the lane closure count?Why should he have stayed in lane?
Yes there was an opportunity to change lanes, because the gentry showed a speed limit, indicating the lane was open. Quite simple really, surely?
Metallfan said:
No, it wasn't a good decision and I know that now, but surely at the moment when it was made it wasn't illegal.
I'm not so sure. What if the gantry sequence was 50 - X - 50. Does the red X indicate that only the 1 m of road below the gantry is closed? Logic dictates that the entire section from that gantry to the next 50 is closed. that is the area that you joined.Of course, under normal circumstances, for example if a broken down vehicle is the cause, then people rejoin the lane immediately after the obstruction is passed. But that's not legal either.
speedking31 said:
'm not so sure. What if the gantry sequence was 50 - X - 50. Does the red X indicate that only the 1 m of road below the gantry is closed? Logic dictates that the entire section from that gantry to the next 50 is closed. that is the area that you joined.
Of course, under normal circumstances, for example if a broken down vehicle is the cause, then people rejoin the lane immediately after the obstruction is passed. But that's not legal either.
But the sequence was X - X - X - X - X - X - X - X - <limit> <pause> XOf course, under normal circumstances, for example if a broken down vehicle is the cause, then people rejoin the lane immediately after the obstruction is passed. But that's not legal either.
There were other clues in the roadworks and RIGHT TUNNEL CLOSED signs.
But the OP thought he'd be clever, and save a couple of seconds.
WinstonWolf said:
Pica-Pica said:
WinstonWolf said:
Pica-Pica said:
trackdemon said:
Pica-Pica said:
Yes it is cut and dried. It is not about gantry signs or whatever, but a manoeuvre that could be considered careless or dangerous. As far as I understand, the OP was not instructed at the last minute to move lanes, but saw a last-minute given opportunity to move lanes, but should have stayed in current lane. I stand to be corrected, but that seems the essence to me.
Pica-Pica said:
It is not about gantry signs or whatever
So, why do the earlier ones for the lane closure count?Why should he have stayed in lane?
Yes there was an opportunity to change lanes, because the gentry showed a speed limit, indicating the lane was open. Quite simple really, surely?
I think technically after a Red Cross the lane is closed until you pass a sign telling you it's Opened.
I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
Marcellus said:
I think technically after a Red Cross the lane is closed until you pass a sign telling you it's Opened.
I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
This is also my understanding. Just the same as with speed limit signs, you don't accelerate when you see the sign, you accelerate when you pass the sign. I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
The op shouldn't technically have been able to pass the sign as it was beyond the lane split / solid white lines so when he moved into L3 he was technically driving in a closed lane even though the sign up ahead said a speed limit.
Marcellus said:
I think technically after a Red Cross the lane is closed until you pass a sign telling you it's Opened.
I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
I fully understand that logic, however that makes the placement of the sign illogical as you can neither leave just before or enter just after the sign. The workable thing would have been to have it not illuminated at all and therefore not giving the impression the lane was open.I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
Toltec said:
Marcellus said:
I think technically after a Red Cross the lane is closed until you pass a sign telling you it's Opened.
I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
I fully understand that logic, however that makes the placement of the sign illogical as you can neither leave just before or enter just after the sign. The workable thing would have been to have it not illuminated at all and therefore not giving the impression the lane was open.I think the OP went into the lane before he went past a sign saying it had been opened, as he'd seen the sign ahead saying it would be open from that point but before he got there it was changed.
Therefore the OP was driving in a closed lane as per the gantry he passed under at 20:51:44.
Sorry I think you'll not plead that one away.
In this case, it would have been better for them to leave it on red X's and for the OP to have stayed in his lane.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff