Aborted overtakes

Author
Discussion

DocSteve

718 posts

221 months

Monday 27th November 2017
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
I don't see that someone personally not seeing there to be much to be gained from overtaking as inevitably leading to road trains in NSL roads (although I concede that attitude coupled with other undesirable traits may lead to it).

If you don't see a benefit for overtaking yourself, then you should be leaving sufficient gap in front for others to use it if they wish to.

Personally if I'm not looking to overtake vehicles ahead, for whatever reason, I'll be leaving a 4 sec plus gap in front as it affords me greater space, visibility & time, whilst at the same time allowing others a decent stop over gap should they wish to avail themselves of it (& should they avail themselves of it there is less likely to be any adverse impact for me because of the size of the space left for them).

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 27th November 19:51
Yes, fair enough I also concede - that behaviour/attitude alone shouldn't lend itself to stacks of traffic but a lot of drivers are not like you and will be especially keen to "close up" and prevent anyone overtaking part of the queue in order to eventually get past. Very British, of course...

I don't see why if it is perfectly safe to overtake and a driver was previously willing to drive at a higher speed then they should then sit behind another slower vehicle for miles just because they prefer not to. I would wager that they do not have the confidence to overtake and/or consider it to be a dangerous manoeuvre which is perpetuated by statements about overtaking being dangerous. I recall seeing something ridiculous published in a national newspaper, probably with the backing of Brake, that said you should only overtake if your life depends on it, which it better had as otherwise you are risking your life and that of others doing it (or words to that effect).

MrMickS

37 posts

215 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
This is BRAKE's advice on overtaking:

[quote]
Overtaking on single carriageway roads is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres drivers can perform – and is usually unnecessary. Overtaking is dangerous because is impossible to accurately judge the speed and distance of approaching traffic. This lack of judgement can easily be fatal when travelling at speed on the wrong side of the road. If two vehicles headed towards each other are both travelling at 60mph the gap between decreases by about 60 metres every second.

It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.

Brake advises overtaking should be avoided unless absolutely essential, for instance to overtake an extremely slow moving vehicle on a long, open stretch, without speeding or traffic coming the other way. Otherwise just hang back, relax and enjoy the journey.

[/quote]

I travel along a nice straight bit of road every morning and evening. I often overtake. Its part of the enjoyment I get out of the drive. The other day I had someone give me the finger as I overtook whilst he was coming in the other direction. I didn't understand why. There was nothing dangerous about the pass. I was out and in easily with no danger and no need for him even to lift off. He's probably one of the 14% that reported to BRAKE that they'd seen dangerous overtakes.

Overtaking in general appears to be a lost art. People don't know how to do it, so assume that anyone else doing it must be a crazy and dangerous. I've been flashed by the person I've overtaken on more occasions than I care to remember. I really don't understand their problem other than I've gone past them and they consider that they are driving at the appropriate speed for the road.

On the time advantage gained from the above BRAKE propaganda. I'd say that someone that overtakes is likely to gain more on corners with decent visibility than they will lose from having to slow for them. They are likely to brake later, and carry more speed around the corner, than the person pottering along at 45-50 in NSL.

vonhosen

40,198 posts

216 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
1) Of course it's not impossible to judge speed/distance well, it's a skill you can acquire. The danger is the time you are doing the activity whilst trying to acquire the skill.

2) To a degree BRAKE are correct that often there isn't much to be gained from overtaking time wise, if you are going to maintain a speed within speed limits throughout the overtake & the rest of your journey that is.

3) Are people who say they are good at overtaking actually good at overtaking? It rather depends on how you are measuring good. I've certainly sat beside a lot of people who'd claim to be good at (driving) overtaking but by my measurements I wouldn't consider them so & no doubt there must be people who have sat beside me who think the same about me.

Solocle

Original Poster:

3,247 posts

83 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
1) Of course it's not impossible to judge speed/distance well, it's a skill you can acquire. The danger is the time you are doing the activity whilst trying to acquire the skill.

2) To a degree BRAKE are correct that often there isn't much to be gained from overtaking time wise, if you are going to maintain a speed within speed limits throughout the overtake & the rest of your journey that is.

3) Are people who say they are good at overtaking actually good at overtaking? It rather depends on how you are measuring good. I've certainly sat beside a lot of people who'd claim to be good at (driving) overtaking but by my measurements I wouldn't consider them so & no doubt there must be people who have sat beside me who think the same about me.
BRAKE overlook the number of people who potter at 40 everywhere. Overtakers like us provide a valuable community service by slowing them down to the limit in 30 zones thumbup

Zetec-S

5,832 posts

92 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
MrMickS said:
BRAKE said:
It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.
On the time advantage gained from the above BRAKE propaganda. I'd say that someone that overtakes is likely to gain more on corners with decent visibility than they will lose from having to slow for them. They are likely to brake later, and carry more speed around the corner, than the person pottering along at 45-50 in NSL.
yes I'm not usually that bothered following someone doing 55mph in a 60, but if they then slow to 40 every time there's a slight twist in the road, or a car approaches from the opposite direction then I will overtake if I get the opportunity. I have a 25mile/45 minute commute to work and more often than not it will involve at least 1 safe overtake. If I was to stick behind the bimbler's it would add 5-10 minutes to my journey - twice a day 5 days a week and that soon adds up.

nonsequitur

20,083 posts

115 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
MrMickS said:
This is BRAKE's advice on overtaking:

[quote]
Overtaking on single carriageway roads is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres drivers can perform – and is usually unnecessary. Overtaking is dangerous because is impossible to accurately judge the speed and distance of approaching traffic. This lack of judgement can easily be fatal when travelling at speed on the wrong side of the road. If two vehicles headed towards each other are both travelling at 60mph the gap between decreases by about 60 metres every second.

It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.

Brake advises overtaking should be avoided unless absolutely essential, for instance to overtake an extremely slow moving vehicle on a long, open stretch, without speeding or traffic coming the other way. Otherwise just hang back, relax and enjoy the journey.
Good advice from BRAKE, Which I invariably follow apart from, as they advise, passing very slow moving vehicles. Let's all (S)dab

Solocle

Original Poster:

3,247 posts

83 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
nonsequitur said:
MrMickS said:
This is BRAKE's advice on overtaking:

[quote]
Overtaking on single carriageway roads is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres drivers can perform – and is usually unnecessary. Overtaking is dangerous because is impossible to accurately judge the speed and distance of approaching traffic. This lack of judgement can easily be fatal when travelling at speed on the wrong side of the road. If two vehicles headed towards each other are both travelling at 60mph the gap between decreases by about 60 metres every second.

It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.

Brake advises overtaking should be avoided unless absolutely essential, for instance to overtake an extremely slow moving vehicle on a long, open stretch, without speeding or traffic coming the other way. Otherwise just hang back, relax and enjoy the journey.
Good advice from BRAKE, Which I invariably follow apart from, as they advise, passing very slow moving vehicles. Let's all (S)dab





yes

I think BRAKE must live in London and imagine the countryside as this:

Johnnytheboy

24,498 posts

185 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
After a couple of dashcam accident videos on news websites recently featuring someone overtaking multiple vehicles and someone pulling out to overtake in front of them, I have seen numerous comments from people saying it's "illegal to overtake more than one vehicle at once".

Where do they get this guff?

I did six in a row bimbling down a straight A-road behind a foreign registered car at 40 mph.

Most satisfying!

MrMickS

37 posts

215 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
Solocle said:
BRAKE overlook the number of people who potter at 40 everywhere. Overtakers like us provide a valuable community service by slowing them down to the limit in 30 zones thumbup
This is absolutely true. I've lost count of the number of people that I overtake in the NSL that don't bother slowing down in the 30 zone approaching my village and are tailgating me by the time I get to the 20 zone outside the school.

I think that they believe that the reason that the 20 light flashes is to remind them and that its triggered by all cars rather than ones that are over the limit. I make them slow down. I go especially slowly over the speed bumps smile

mko9

2,327 posts

211 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
BRAKE said:
It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.
This is a ridiculously simplistic statement. For example, somehow assuming you will have to slow down for "bends, junctions, and other traffic"; but the car you just overtook won't? Who is to say that by overtaking I won't get through the next set of lights on green, while the other car gets held up by the red? Maybe a tractor pulls out after I have now got by. The possibilities are endless. Worst case, you get to your destination at the same time you would if you had followed the other car (broke even). Assuming you are competent enough to execute a safe overtake, every other possible outcome is a better outcome than staying behind the other car.


Edited by mko9 on Tuesday 5th December 19:18

66mpg

648 posts

106 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
I would certainly give up overtaking if the vehicle I overtook then remained just behind me for the remainder of the journey. All the while I overtake then lose sight of them in the rear view mirror I’m going to keep on doing it if I believe I can do it safely.

caelite

4,273 posts

111 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
MrMickS said:
On the time advantage gained from the above BRAKE propaganda. I'd say that someone that overtakes is likely to gain more on corners with decent visibility than they will lose from having to slow for them. They are likely to brake later, and carry more speed around the corner, than the person pottering along at 45-50 in NSL.
Brake numbers totally don't take into account the fact that 80mph is my cruising speed, and they tend to be sitting at 35-40. biggrin Well sighted A/B-roads at my 11PM commute home.

nonsequitur

20,083 posts

115 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
Solocle said:
nonsequitur said:
MrMickS said:
This is BRAKE's advice on overtaking:

[quote]
Overtaking on single carriageway roads is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres drivers can perform – and is usually unnecessary. Overtaking is dangerous because is impossible to accurately judge the speed and distance of approaching traffic. This lack of judgement can easily be fatal when travelling at speed on the wrong side of the road. If two vehicles headed towards each other are both travelling at 60mph the gap between decreases by about 60 metres every second.

It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.

Brake advises overtaking should be avoided unless absolutely essential, for instance to overtake an extremely slow moving vehicle on a long, open stretch, without speeding or traffic coming the other way. Otherwise just hang back, relax and enjoy the journey.
Good advice from BRAKE, Which I invariably follow apart from, as they advise, passing very slow moving vehicles. Let's all (S)dab








Orkney?

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
mko9 said:
BRAKE said:
It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.
This is a ridiculously simplistic statement. For example, somehow assuming you will have to slow down for "bends, junctions, and other traffic"; but the car you just overtook won't? Who is to say that by overtaking I won't get through the next set of lights on green, while the other car gets held up by the red? Maybe a tractor pulls out after I have now got by. The possibilities are endless. Worst case, you get to your destination at the same time you would if you had followed the other car (broke even). Assuming you are competent enough to execute a safe overtake, every other possible outcome is a better outcome than staying behind the other car.
It's also an argument for doing 50 instead of 55 in the first place, nothing really to do with overtaking.

If the minute was relevant before you came across the slow vehicle, why isn't it now?

IcedKiwi

91 posts

114 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
nonsequitur said:
Orkney?
Too many trees!

Solocle

Original Poster:

3,247 posts

83 months

Tuesday 5th December 2017
quotequote all
IcedKiwi said:
nonsequitur said:
Orkney?
Too many trees!
Dorset, and one Wiltshire. So other corner of the country!

nonsequitur

20,083 posts

115 months

Wednesday 6th December 2017
quotequote all
Solocle said:
IcedKiwi said:
nonsequitur said:
Orkney?
Too many trees!
Dorset, and one Wiltshire. So other corner of the country!
...and some fell on stony ground...

nonsequitur

20,083 posts

115 months

Wednesday 6th December 2017
quotequote all
Zetec-S said:
MrMickS said:
BRAKE said:
It is therefore incredibly dangerous to overtake on rural roads, where there will rarely be enough straight, visible road ahead to be certain that nothing is coming in the opposite direction. It is also simply not worth it: if you are travelling at 55mph, and you overtake someone doing 50mph, and you have ten miles left of your journey, you’ll only arrive one minute faster than if you’d stayed behind the slower vehicle. However, in reality you wouldn’t even save this much time, as you would still need to slow down for bends, junctions, other traffic, and if entering lower speed limits.
On the time advantage gained from the above BRAKE propaganda. I'd say that someone that overtakes is likely to gain more on corners with decent visibility than they will lose from having to slow for them. They are likely to brake later, and carry more speed around the corner, than the person pottering along at 45-50 in NSL.
yes I'm not usually that bothered following someone doing 55mph in a 60, but if they then slow to 40 every time there's a slight twist in the road, or a car approaches from the opposite direction then I will overtake if I get the opportunity. I have a 25mile/45 minute commute to work and more often than not it will involve at least 1 safe overtake. If I was to stick behind the bimbler's it would add 5-10 minutes to my journey - twice a day 5 days a week and that soon adds up.
So much to do, so little time.

mac96

3,715 posts

142 months

Wednesday 6th December 2017
quotequote all
It's easy to say that it's not worth overtaking a vehicle travelling 5mph more slowly than you were. And if it was the only other car on the road, that may be true.

However, even on a quiet road, they will probably catch up with someone going 5mph slower than they were , and so on, until if no one overtakes you are not travelling 5mph less than your intended speed, but 25- 30mph less, and now with a group of 3+ cars in front, all driving dangerously close to each other so that you have to overtake them all in one go, or none at all.

Safer to overtake one at a time, regardless of small speed differentials.


dvenman

219 posts

114 months

Thursday 7th December 2017
quotequote all
mac96 said:
Safer to overtake one at a time, regardless of small speed differentials.
  • Easier* to overtake one at a time, but if the hand that's dealt is three so close together there's no landing space, then taking them all at once in a safe manner is easy, with practice and - more importantly - restraint.