Was my driving technically correct?

Was my driving technically correct?

Author
Discussion

EmailAddress

12,214 posts

219 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
The OP...

mY RoiGHt oF wAy


alscar

4,152 posts

214 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
Surely I had right of way? Was I being unreasonable about making a point about right of way?

No and yes are the correct respective answers.

I seem to recall a poster who vanished from here around the same time this poster arrived - went by the name of Large Chris or suchlike.
Very similar posting style and words.
His thread on finding a golf bag trolley was nearly as good as this one.

ScoobyChris

1,693 posts

203 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
alscar said:
I seem to recall a poster who vanished from here around the same time this poster arrived - went by the name of Large Chris or suchlike.
I remember he was kind of a big deal… biggrin

Chris

alscar

4,152 posts

214 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
ScoobyChris said:
I remember he was kind of a big deal… biggrin

Chris
Exactly !

pinchmeimdreamin

9,967 posts

219 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
Hammersia said:
I am approaching just before the line of parked cars and it is clear that the BMW expects to plow ahead and I should wait for him.
If it’s clear you should wait for him, Why didn’t you ?

vaud

50,603 posts

156 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
mcpoot said:
Let us not forget the OP's Ryanair First Class seats thread and this question:

"Am I on a special list of some kind? I suppose I'm an elegant fairly posh and presentable sort of bloke, is it like when I'm shown to the front of restaurants to give more window appeal to prospective customers?"

I think perhaps the oncoming mid tier local council manager types failed to recognise the OP's superior status and were definitely at fault for not giving way to him.
Restaurants often fill the window to make them look busy. Oh and keep them away from other customers.

eharding

13,740 posts

285 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
QuickQuack said:
Well that's bks. There's no such convention. For a start, aircraft can move in more than one dimension... Second, most passenger aircraft are equipped with TCAS to resolve this scenario because no international convention exists, hence the convention is to do whatever instruction the TCAS gives you which is usually up or down because planes can do that much more easily and quickly, not left or right. In other cases, ATC will usually intervene. There's no specific convention on what your avoidance action has to be when at risk of a mid-air collision with another aircraft other than those. "Turning right" in an aircraft isn't as simple as turning the steering wheel in your car. laugh
You may want to peruse both (RA) 2307 Rule 13 (military) and SERA.3210 (c)(1) (civilian) rules of the air.

QuickQuack

2,214 posts

102 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
This thread definitely hasn’t gone the way the Op hoped!

Hopefully he will rethink his driving strategy and brush up on the rules.

Op. Everything you need to know for the circumstance in question in in Highway Code Rule 163

Edited by blueg33 on Tuesday 19th March 07:19
I think it's gone precisely as he'd hoped and planned. I'm convinced that he meticulously searched for that specific topology, which is practically flat, in that rural village/narrow country road setting on Google maps purely to start this thread and wind people up, made sure he got the directions correct with the cars on Street View pictures, and drop the numbers in at the right moment, but he hasn't actually been on that road or in this scenario with the people he's describing at all.

He's just a troll who may or may not be a reincarnation of a previous poster. I'd go so far as to suggest that mods should check the veracity of this tale and the OP's profile/credentials, and should consider sanctioning the OP.

I hate trolls with a vengeance.

blueg33

35,981 posts

225 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
QuickQuack said:
blueg33 said:
This thread definitely hasn’t gone the way the Op hoped!

Hopefully he will rethink his driving strategy and brush up on the rules.

Op. Everything you need to know for the circumstance in question in in Highway Code Rule 163

Edited by blueg33 on Tuesday 19th March 07:19
I think it's gone precisely as he'd hoped and planned. I'm convinced that he meticulously searched for that specific topology, which is practically flat, in that rural village/narrow country road setting on Google maps purely to start this thread and wind people up, made sure he got the directions correct with the cars on Street View pictures, and drop the numbers in at the right moment, but he hasn't actually been on that road or in this scenario with the people he's describing at all.

He's just a troll who may or may not be a reincarnation of a previous poster. I'd go so far as to suggest that mods should check the veracity of this tale and the OP's profile/credentials, and should consider sanctioning the OP.

I hate trolls with a vengeance.
I hadnt really considered that, as I hadnt looked at his posting history. If he is a troll - he needs to grow up and get a life, if he isnt, he needs to learn to drive

Super Sonic

4,904 posts

55 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
eharding said:
You may want to peruse both (RA) 2307 Rule 13 (military) and SERA.3210 (c)(1) (civilian) rules of the air.
So back on topic, do you think
a) it's completely irrelevant
b) think the op is correct,
c) both cars should have turned right,

blueg33

35,981 posts

225 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
Super Sonic said:
eharding said:
You may want to peruse both (RA) 2307 Rule 13 (military) and SERA.3210 (c)(1) (civilian) rules of the air.
So back on topic, do you think
a) it's completely irrelevant
b) think the op is correct,
c) both cars should have turned right,
Both cars should have turned right and adjusted their altitude..............

eharding

13,740 posts

285 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
Super Sonic said:
eharding said:
You may want to peruse both (RA) 2307 Rule 13 (military) and SERA.3210 (c)(1) (civilian) rules of the air.
So back on topic, do you think
a) it's completely irrelevant
b) think the op is correct,
c) both cars should have turned right,
I think the OP is fuil of fertilizer, but he isn't the only one. Details matter.

Roger Irrelevant

2,943 posts

114 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
alscar said:
I seem to recall a poster who vanished from here around the same time this poster arrived - went by the name of Large Chris or suchlike.
Very similar posting style and words.
His thread on finding a golf bag trolley was nearly as good as this one.
If that's the one I think I recall it was an amazing thread. Wasn't it something like the Chris chap nicked a golf gizmo, had a twinge of conscience and so posted on PH asking if what he did was OK, got told by everybody that no nicking golf Gizmos wasn't OK, and then came up with a series of ludicrous reasons why he was purer than the driven snow despite being a golf gizmo thief? If anybody's got a link I'd like to relive that one - it's a slow day at work - and yes there are certain similarities with this thread.

Super Sonic

4,904 posts

55 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
eharding said:
I think the OP is fuil of fertilizer, but he isn't the only one. Details matter.
When they're relevant.

TriumphStag3.0V8

3,863 posts

82 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
Super Sonic said:
eharding said:
You may want to peruse both (RA) 2307 Rule 13 (military) and SERA.3210 (c)(1) (civilian) rules of the air.
So back on topic, do you think
a) it's completely irrelevant
b) think the op is correct,
c) both cars should have turned right,
Both cars should have turned right and adjusted their altitude..............
But the OP insists he was adjusting his altitude, by going uphill, just not up a hill.

Hungrymc

6,674 posts

138 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
This is fabulous.

That the OP believes (we all know he doesn't really) that a two lane road rising 2m over a 400m distance causes all other rules and laws to be trumped by the "uphill clause". Imagine being so fragile as to have to cling to that.

Greendubber

13,222 posts

204 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
This thread is a fascinating read.

Monkeylegend

26,464 posts

232 months

Tuesday 19th March
quotequote all
QuickQuack said:
He's just a troll who may or may not be a reincarnation of a previous poster. I'd go so far as to suggest that mods should check the veracity of this tale and the OP's profile/credentials, and should consider sanctioning the OP.
OP is not intelligent enough to be a troll.

u-boat

723 posts

15 months

Sunday 7th April
quotequote all
An exciting new thread from the op, similar results to this one but got more people to agree with him this time.

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

I don’t think it’s trolling tbh.

Pit Pony

8,648 posts

122 months

Sunday 7th April
quotequote all
I like the OP occassionally decide that the cars in the distance coming towards me are going over the posted limit, and as I've reached the parked cars, and they have enough time to safely reduce their speed, I continue to overtake the parked cars.

Often they wave with a middle finger. Okay. Thanks. I just wave back with a normal wave. Or shrug.