Roundabout lanes
Discussion
davepoth said:
Wow.
jaf01uk said:
Yeah that's what I thought too... should maybe be mystic ROG? 
This from two people who can't judge speed and distance and who are posting on an Advanced Driving forum. Is there perhaps a "How far away is that car?" forum just to get you started?
Cheers, Jim
jimmy the hat said:
davepoth said:
Wow.
jaf01uk said:
Yeah that's what I thought too... should maybe be mystic ROG?
This from two people who can't judge speed and distance and who are posting on an Advanced Driving forum. Is there perhaps a "How far away is that car?" forum just to get you started?Cheers, Jim
I find it difficult to be anything other than facetious, I read most of these threads as if everybody's on one massive wind-up.
I've been straightlined on a roundabout when I was side by side with the other car and they were found to be completely at fault, in circumstances that were much closer to what you've described. i.e. Pulled on side-by-side and they just smashed into me as if my lane and my right to be there vanished. Slightly different roundabout format but close enough for me to doubt that the OP would be in any bother at all.
Cheers, Jim
davepoth said:
but if the other car had reacted differently there could have been a crash, and the OP would have been found at fault due to the circumstances. That's the opposite of advanced driving, although I'd probably get in trouble for calling it retarded driving.
Again, all other motorists could take it upon themselves to drive directly at you as fast as possible and there wouldn't be much you could do about it. Given what the BMW would have to have done to cause an accident, I don't think you can state with any certainty that anybody other than them would be found to be at fault. Unless you're mystic davepoth of course.I've been straightlined on a roundabout when I was side by side with the other car and they were found to be completely at fault, in circumstances that were much closer to what you've described. i.e. Pulled on side-by-side and they just smashed into me as if my lane and my right to be there vanished. Slightly different roundabout format but close enough for me to doubt that the OP would be in any bother at all.
Cheers, Jim
The IAM tells drivers to "expect the unexpected". As a driver, I would not expect someone to overtake me on a roundabout. I don't think I'd get flustered by it, but I can imagine certain drivers who would, and who would then do something unexpected which could result in a crash.
By that line of thinking the advanced driver should look at the scene, say to themselves "what could happen unexpectedly here?" answer "there's a chance that I might come into conflict with another road user by straight-lining this roundabout" and then avoid straight-lining the roundabout. It's hardly rocket science.
By that line of thinking the advanced driver should look at the scene, say to themselves "what could happen unexpectedly here?" answer "there's a chance that I might come into conflict with another road user by straight-lining this roundabout" and then avoid straight-lining the roundabout. It's hardly rocket science.
Zeeky said:
jimmy the hat said:
...I've been straightlined on a roundabout when I was side by side with the other car and they were found to be completely at fault...
What were you doing side by side with another car on the roundabout? This being an advanced driving forum 
Gary
jaf01uk said:
Insults kinda backfired there mate eh? My experience is in my profile but I disagree with willy waving, I personally would not have done that manoeuvre in that situation, there was only 1 lane exiting so the left lane should be the one to use and that was where the BMW was, the OP did what you did and the results could easily been as you highlighted above...
Gary
Gary
Damn my sausage fingers.
No, actually the insults didn't kind of backfire. The roundabout I was talking about (slightly different format, remember) has two lanes round it so it's as legitimate to be alongside another car there as it is to do so on a dual-carriageway. My situation was akin to someone sideswiping me as I overtake them on a two-lane DC. If we're "expecting the unexpected" (you know, ignoring the fact that this is a nonsense) do we no longer use Lane 2 in case somebody just swerves across? Or do we accept that it's an impossibility to remove all risk of somebody doing something stupid (as I've referred to previously but you've utterly failed to address) and that all driving is a calculated risk and the only thing that differs, as in this thread, is where the line is drawn?
For the umpteenth time, the BMW could have straight-lined the roundabout without coming into any conflict with the OP on account of the fact that the OP was ahead of the BMW before, into and across the roundabout. This makes the "thou shalt not" insistence that there's only one correct lane to use in this instance irrelevant. I'm also not convinced that there is only one lane that may be used, the HC describes an example of a common situation rather than providing hard and fast rules.
Yes, the BMW could have been a sleeper with an M3 lump in it, dropped it to first and floored it whilst steering hard right into the OP and if you're saying that this is too much of a risk for you then that's probably what you should have said. All I'm saying is that this is so unlikely as to make the risk level acceptable for me.
By the way, for future reference, putting "it's hardly rocket science" doesn't make the irrelevant drivel that precedes it irrefutable fact. I'm genuinely not sure what you thought you were arguing there Dave.
Cheers, Jim
No, actually the insults didn't kind of backfire. The roundabout I was talking about (slightly different format, remember) has two lanes round it so it's as legitimate to be alongside another car there as it is to do so on a dual-carriageway. My situation was akin to someone sideswiping me as I overtake them on a two-lane DC. If we're "expecting the unexpected" (you know, ignoring the fact that this is a nonsense) do we no longer use Lane 2 in case somebody just swerves across? Or do we accept that it's an impossibility to remove all risk of somebody doing something stupid (as I've referred to previously but you've utterly failed to address) and that all driving is a calculated risk and the only thing that differs, as in this thread, is where the line is drawn?
For the umpteenth time, the BMW could have straight-lined the roundabout without coming into any conflict with the OP on account of the fact that the OP was ahead of the BMW before, into and across the roundabout. This makes the "thou shalt not" insistence that there's only one correct lane to use in this instance irrelevant. I'm also not convinced that there is only one lane that may be used, the HC describes an example of a common situation rather than providing hard and fast rules.
Yes, the BMW could have been a sleeper with an M3 lump in it, dropped it to first and floored it whilst steering hard right into the OP and if you're saying that this is too much of a risk for you then that's probably what you should have said. All I'm saying is that this is so unlikely as to make the risk level acceptable for me.
By the way, for future reference, putting "it's hardly rocket science" doesn't make the irrelevant drivel that precedes it irrefutable fact. I'm genuinely not sure what you thought you were arguing there Dave.
Cheers, Jim
jimmy the hat said:
The roundabout I was talking about (slightly different format, remember) has two lanes round it so it's as legitimate to be alongside another car there as it is to do so on a dual-carriageway.
No it isn'tjimmy the hat said:
My situation was akin to someone sideswiping me as I overtake them on a two-lane DC.
No it wasn't.See previous post for simplified explanation.
jimmy the hat said:
Damn my sausage fingers.
No, actually the insults didn't kind of backfire. The roundabout I was talking about (slightly different format, remember) has two lanes round it so it's as legitimate to be alongside another car there as it is to do so on a dual-carriageway. My situation was akin to someone sideswiping me as I overtake them on a two-lane DC. If we're "expecting the unexpected" (you know, ignoring the fact that this is a nonsense) do we no longer use Lane 2 in case somebody just swerves across? Or do we accept that it's an impossibility to remove all risk of somebody doing something stupid (as I've referred to previously but you've utterly failed to address) and that all driving is a calculated risk and the only thing that differs, as in this thread, is where the line is drawn?
For the umpteenth time, the BMW could have straight-lined the roundabout without coming into any conflict with the OP on account of the fact that the OP was ahead of the BMW before, into and across the roundabout. This makes the "thou shalt not" insistence that there's only one correct lane to use in this instance irrelevant. I'm also not convinced that there is only one lane that may be used, the HC describes an example of a common situation rather than providing hard and fast rules.
Yes, the BMW could have been a sleeper with an M3 lump in it, dropped it to first and floored it whilst steering hard right into the OP and if you're saying that this is too much of a risk for you then that's probably what you should have said. All I'm saying is that this is so unlikely as to make the risk level acceptable for me.
By the way, for future reference, putting "it's hardly rocket science" doesn't make the irrelevant drivel that precedes it irrefutable fact. I'm genuinely not sure what you thought you were arguing there Dave.
Cheers, Jim
Oh dear! Your going to fit in well here! You cannot see that staying either in front or behind the car alongside is a good idea so that you don't get involved in a collision if they stray out of lane yet you are trying to preach to us where the BMW is when it is out of shot, the highway code does not say that where there are 2 lanes in and 1 lane out that you can take either lane, the picture on the first page from HC shows 2 in 2 out which is not the case here. I think I'll carry on as I am if that's ok with you,No, actually the insults didn't kind of backfire. The roundabout I was talking about (slightly different format, remember) has two lanes round it so it's as legitimate to be alongside another car there as it is to do so on a dual-carriageway. My situation was akin to someone sideswiping me as I overtake them on a two-lane DC. If we're "expecting the unexpected" (you know, ignoring the fact that this is a nonsense) do we no longer use Lane 2 in case somebody just swerves across? Or do we accept that it's an impossibility to remove all risk of somebody doing something stupid (as I've referred to previously but you've utterly failed to address) and that all driving is a calculated risk and the only thing that differs, as in this thread, is where the line is drawn?
For the umpteenth time, the BMW could have straight-lined the roundabout without coming into any conflict with the OP on account of the fact that the OP was ahead of the BMW before, into and across the roundabout. This makes the "thou shalt not" insistence that there's only one correct lane to use in this instance irrelevant. I'm also not convinced that there is only one lane that may be used, the HC describes an example of a common situation rather than providing hard and fast rules.
Yes, the BMW could have been a sleeper with an M3 lump in it, dropped it to first and floored it whilst steering hard right into the OP and if you're saying that this is too much of a risk for you then that's probably what you should have said. All I'm saying is that this is so unlikely as to make the risk level acceptable for me.
By the way, for future reference, putting "it's hardly rocket science" doesn't make the irrelevant drivel that precedes it irrefutable fact. I'm genuinely not sure what you thought you were arguing there Dave.
Cheers, Jim
Gary
Bacon Is Proof said:
jimmy the hat said:
The roundabout I was talking about (slightly different format, remember) has two lanes round it so it's as legitimate to be alongside another car there as it is to do so on a dual-carriageway.
No it isn'tjimmy the hat said:
My situation was akin to someone sideswiping me as I overtake them on a two-lane DC.
No it wasn't.See previous post for simplified explanation.
jaf01uk said:
Oh dear! Your going to fit in well here! You cannot see that staying either in front or behind the car alongside is a good idea so that you don't get involved in a collision if they stray out of lane yet you are trying to preach to us where the BMW is when it is out of shot, the highway code does not say that where there are 2 lanes in and 1 lane out that you can take either lane, the picture on the first page from HC shows 2 in 2 out which is not the case here. I think I'll carry on as I am if that's ok with you,
Gary
First of all it's "you're" as in "you are". Gary
Yes, it's a good idea. I'm sure that on a two lane DC it's a "good idea" but at some point there you're going to be alongside someone. Or don't you ever? Being in lane two on a three or more lane DC must scare you to death, surely?
I'm not preaching anything, I'm simply stating the irrefutable facts about what is going on in that video. It's not a matter of opinion where the BMW starts to fall behind the OP, it's a matter of fact and that's all I've stated. In fact I've gone as far as to state that it's feasible that the BMW could be alongside the OP, given dramatic acceleration. It would appear your reading comprehension isn't up to much and you're inferring what you think you can argue with rather than dealing with what is actually there.
Again, the HC shows an example of what can be done in a common, but particular, instance. It's not an exhaustive instruction. There are many roundabouts that are not covered by the examples in the HC. What does they mean to you? Does your brain melt? Is it just a lawless free-for-all because there's no specific instruction for you to refer to? Do you have to turn round and go back the way you came for fear of having to exercise some free thought?
You carry on doing what you want based on "but the picture says", I'll carry on doing what I'm doing based on rational thought.
It's exactly as I thought, BTW, most of those saying "no" appear to be slavishly following what is supposed to be a guide rather than a list of commandments.
Still, it's good fun, eh?
Cheers, Jim
jimmy the hat said:
I'm sure that on a two lane DC it's a "good idea" but at some point there you're going to be alongside someone. Or don't you ever? Being in lane two on a three or more lane DC must scare you to death, surely?
Being alongside someone on a d/c whilst passing a junction is generally not a good idea without an escape route. The same is true of a roundabout, after all, thats just a small circular dual carriageway with lots of junctions.Distant said:
Being alongside someone on a d/c whilst passing a junction is generally not a good idea without an escape route. The same is true of a roundabout, after all, thats just a small circular dual carriageway with lots of junctions.
Indeed, which is why I used the example. I wouldn't normally do it, of course, and I wouldn't argue that one should, generally, given the amount of straightlining that goes on at literally every roundabout. However, I have. I've been straight-lined. They were found to be at fault. These are facts rather than arbitrary and tangential speculation. The fact remains that the OP is passing the BMW before the roundabout and is almost certainly ahead across it and therefore not alongside in any case.It would seem that this is a bit difficult for some to follow.
Cheers, Jim
Interesting and thought provoking thread - cheers OP!
My 2p worth:
Having watched this several times I can't help but feel that although it worked out fine and I've done worse myself (!) this was an unnessecarily risky and slightly agressive manouvre, and on balance I would have waited.
I most certainly would not have considered overtaking a copper in the BMW's position like that, asking for a b
king at least.
I would have been more tempted had I been stuck behind the BMW for a while and I had more of a chance to assess their driving and preferred speed, if they had been cruising and making no signs they had any intention of overtaking the saxo I would have likely judged it unlikely they would have closed you out. However when you came up behing the BMW they were already being slowed by the saxo, who in turn were slowed by the moped ahead, the BMW had not refused an overtake opportunity and may well have been sizing up the saxo for an overtake themselves, they may have even considered your overtake and decided against it - which is likely to increase their sense of frustration at being 'cut up' by you, as you do clearly filter into their lane right into their safety space. To be fair on the BMW I think I would have felt tempted to close the gap up (even though I know this is the wrong thing to do). There seem to be quite a few aggressive, impatient, fast, arrogant, tired, frustrated BMW 3 series drivers out there in my experience (I know you can't make generalisations based on what type of car, but I'd say it's more likely you'd get a problem from a beemer in that situation than a slower less driver focused car, say a Rover for example).
The biggest problem for me though and the main reason I would have chosen to wait is the moped ahead of the saxo, L plates and their rather nervous looking positioning on the inside of their lane could have been an invitation for the saxo to pull out for an overtake on the exit of the roundabout. The possibility of someone approaching the first entrance to the roundabout could have easily caused the 'ped to veir into the middle of their lane (where they should be anyway). I think given that the likelyhood of the saxo wanting to overtake the 'ped is very high it would have been safer for the biker and more couteous to the BMW and Saxo to have anticipated they would be keen to overtake and allowed them to complete this safely without pressurising them or actually overtaking them. It's quite possible the saxo could be driven by a young or nervous driver who would've been taught (correctly) to give bikes a wide berth when overtaking them, not slide past as if it were a pushbike.
Anyway - I've rambled on enough. The fact that you are even thinking like this after a couple of years of driving is a very good sign and puts you in the top 10% drivers IMPO - 90% don't have a clue or any interest in thinking about or understanding things like this!
My 2p worth:
Having watched this several times I can't help but feel that although it worked out fine and I've done worse myself (!) this was an unnessecarily risky and slightly agressive manouvre, and on balance I would have waited.
I most certainly would not have considered overtaking a copper in the BMW's position like that, asking for a b
king at least.I would have been more tempted had I been stuck behind the BMW for a while and I had more of a chance to assess their driving and preferred speed, if they had been cruising and making no signs they had any intention of overtaking the saxo I would have likely judged it unlikely they would have closed you out. However when you came up behing the BMW they were already being slowed by the saxo, who in turn were slowed by the moped ahead, the BMW had not refused an overtake opportunity and may well have been sizing up the saxo for an overtake themselves, they may have even considered your overtake and decided against it - which is likely to increase their sense of frustration at being 'cut up' by you, as you do clearly filter into their lane right into their safety space. To be fair on the BMW I think I would have felt tempted to close the gap up (even though I know this is the wrong thing to do). There seem to be quite a few aggressive, impatient, fast, arrogant, tired, frustrated BMW 3 series drivers out there in my experience (I know you can't make generalisations based on what type of car, but I'd say it's more likely you'd get a problem from a beemer in that situation than a slower less driver focused car, say a Rover for example).
The biggest problem for me though and the main reason I would have chosen to wait is the moped ahead of the saxo, L plates and their rather nervous looking positioning on the inside of their lane could have been an invitation for the saxo to pull out for an overtake on the exit of the roundabout. The possibility of someone approaching the first entrance to the roundabout could have easily caused the 'ped to veir into the middle of their lane (where they should be anyway). I think given that the likelyhood of the saxo wanting to overtake the 'ped is very high it would have been safer for the biker and more couteous to the BMW and Saxo to have anticipated they would be keen to overtake and allowed them to complete this safely without pressurising them or actually overtaking them. It's quite possible the saxo could be driven by a young or nervous driver who would've been taught (correctly) to give bikes a wide berth when overtaking them, not slide past as if it were a pushbike.
Anyway - I've rambled on enough. The fact that you are even thinking like this after a couple of years of driving is a very good sign and puts you in the top 10% drivers IMPO - 90% don't have a clue or any interest in thinking about or understanding things like this!
Hmm, interesting. I've read this entire thread and watched the video a few times. I think there's scope to be hyper-critical and claim the OP was being a tad aggressive, but overall I don't think there's anything wrong with what he did.
The BMW driver was definitely behind the OPs car through the roundabout and I think the most likely thing that could've caused an accident would've been the BMW driver reacting badly to the OPs slightly aggressive actions. The BMW driver could've put his foot down and made a deliberate attempt to block the OPs car at the exit of the roundabout. The BMW driver would clearly have been in the wrong if that had happened, but it's the sort of reaction we've all seen from time to time.
Personally, I'm OK with the OPs actions and consider them well-judged and safe within reason. However, it would be very difficult / impossible to argue that his actions were the safest way of negotiating that roundabout.
The BMW driver was definitely behind the OPs car through the roundabout and I think the most likely thing that could've caused an accident would've been the BMW driver reacting badly to the OPs slightly aggressive actions. The BMW driver could've put his foot down and made a deliberate attempt to block the OPs car at the exit of the roundabout. The BMW driver would clearly have been in the wrong if that had happened, but it's the sort of reaction we've all seen from time to time.
Personally, I'm OK with the OPs actions and consider them well-judged and safe within reason. However, it would be very difficult / impossible to argue that his actions were the safest way of negotiating that roundabout.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff