A question of good progress
Discussion
flemke said:
2) You shouldn't break the limit when overtaking. There isn't a "ha ha, what about..." exception. You shouldn't do it. So if you are at 50mph, in the NSL, and there isn't sufficient space to safely overtake without going above 60mph, then you shouldn't overtake. Same on the motorway, at 70mph limit. Etc., etc., etc. All the Advanced Systems are very clear on this. You dont break the limit to overtake. You may decide to do so. Then you are in the wrong.
Yes. On two counts.
1) Legally you shouldn't break the limit. So that is black and white.
2) Advanced drivers are supposed to set an example to other road users. They are expected to follow and obey the highway Code and the Traffic Regulations. So that is also black and white.
I'm presuming these TrafPol are not those that get knocked for being cretins, or always picking on innocent drivers, or are part of the Police State (oh ya gotta laugh).
I'm new on here but do have a ROADA silver. In my experience driving at NSL means one should be responding to being overtaken or tailgated rather than planning an overtaking manouvre, unless you come across a farm vehicle, at which point one finds oneself in the somewhat invidious situation of have faster traffic approching from behind with slower traffic infront. Passing queing traffic at r/bouts etc., reversing around corners and good hill starts seemed to impress my examiner far more than minimising TED.
As we all know, the law is the law and you'll be prosecuted if you're caught breaking it. But there's no real right or wrong here unless you're driving at ridiculous speed an endangering others. An advanced driver should be able to make reasonable judgements on these matters.
As we all know, the law is the law and you'll be prosecuted if you're caught breaking it. But there's no real right or wrong here unless you're driving at ridiculous speed an endangering others. An advanced driver should be able to make reasonable judgements on these matters.
When I took my IAM exam, the examiner told me clearly not to break any laws during the exam. However, I still managed to exceed the speed limit by 5-10 mph whilst overtaking 2 cars driving at 40mph on a single carriageway NSL.
As I pulled back to my side of the carriageway, I noticed my speed and eased off back to 60mph. I assumed that the examiner hadn't noticed when he commented 'That was nice'.
Of course, he had noticed and when the exam was over he pulled me up on it but didn't fail me.
As I pulled back to my side of the carriageway, I noticed my speed and eased off back to 60mph. I assumed that the examiner hadn't noticed when he commented 'That was nice'.
Of course, he had noticed and when the exam was over he pulled me up on it but didn't fail me.
outofthebox said:
I'm new on here but do have a ROADA silver. In my experience driving at NSL means one should be responding to being overtaken or tailgated rather than planning an overtaking manouvre, unless you come across a farm vehicle, at which point one finds oneself in the somewhat invidious situation of have faster traffic approching from behind with slower traffic infront. Passing queing traffic at r/bouts etc., reversing around corners and good hill starts seemed to impress my examiner far more than minimising TED.
As we all know, the law is the law and you'll be prosecuted if you're caught breaking it. But there's no real right or wrong here unless you're driving at ridiculous speed and endangering others. An advanced driver should be able to make reasonable judgements on these matters.
As we all know, the law is the law and you'll be prosecuted if you're caught breaking it. But there's no real right or wrong here unless you're driving at ridiculous speed and endangering others. An advanced driver should be able to make reasonable judgements on these matters.
Oh dear, trouble again! Was I wrong to run the old 406 up to about 100 last night to overtake this bod tootling along on a single carriageway at about 70 mph then?
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Philbes said:
"tootling along on a single carriageway at about 70 mph"
Interesting use of the word "tootling" as he was driving at the speed limit.
Interesting use of the word "tootling" as he was driving at the speed limit.
Ah yes 'tootling' - but these things are all relative, and actually the naughty fellow was speeding a bit himself (SC road). It's just that I drifted a bit further over the speed limit.
In any case, we're expected to 'make progress' aren't we? Well I was doing! I don't bumble about all the time.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
outofthebox said:
...there's no real right or wrong here unless you're driving at ridiculous speed an endangering others..
That's not strictly true, is it. It never fails to amaze me how many get confused by (or try and confuse things with) this issue of 'rights and wrongs'. The law says don't speed. So do Advanced groups. So, it is wrong to speed. You may decide to do otherwise, but it is still 'wrong'.
outofthebox said:
...An advanced driver should be able to make reasonable judgements on these matters..
Correct, and your Roada Silver will give you enough skill to know whats going on, and the effect it will have on others. However, it will still be 'wrong'.
The fact is that the Law, and the IAM, and Roada, and Advanced Driving UK, etc, etc, all state that speeding is wrong. You may decide to select that bit as the rule/training that you won't follow. That's fine. But it's still wrong.
Big Fat F'er said:
TripleS said:
Oh dear, trouble again! Was I wrong to run the old 406 up to about 100 last night to overtake this bod tootling along on a single carriageway at about 70 mph then?
Yep.
Hmm, your response does not surprise me. No worry. Take care BFF.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
TripleS said:
Big Fat F'er said:
TripleS said:
Oh dear, trouble again! Was I wrong to run the old 406 up to about 100 last night to overtake this bod tootling along on a single carriageway at about 70 mph then?
Yep.
Hmm, your response does not surprise me. No worry. Take care BFF.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Dear Triple S - I'm not sure I fully understand your position.
I read your earlier threads about the need to make progress, and overtake, and you appeared to be more comfortable without having to make progress all the time. You suggested that you were quite happy driving along at a pace below the limit, without feeling the 'Advanced' need to overtake to make progress. All of that is fine obviously, as each person drives to his or her comfort zone. That is as it should be.
Then your post immediately above suggests that someone in front was travelling relatively fast (approximately 10 miles per hour above the limit) and you appeared to feel the need to overtake. You did this at a speed equivalent to almost certain disqualification in the Courts at 100mph.
Although I may disagree with a specific viewpoint, I would defend your right to believe that you will a)drive at your own speed, often lower than the limit, without having to overtake b)overtake whenever necessary, even above the limit c)overtake at a figure massively above the limit. I'm just a little confused as to which is is.
There have also been newcomers on PH recently asking for advice. I think it may be up to us 'older generation' (I believe you have happily accepted that classification previously) to perhaps set an 'Advanced' example to the younger drivers.
Please take this in the spirit it was intended, one of confusion as to your position, rather than anything else.
Regards
Sally
Lady Godiva said:
Dear Triple S - I'm not sure I fully understand your position.
I read your earlier threads about the need to make progress, and overtake, and you appeared to be more comfortable without having to make progress all the time. You suggested that you were quite happy driving along at a pace below the limit, without feeling the 'Advanced' need to overtake to make progress. All of that is fine obviously, as each person drives to his or her comfort zone. That is as it should be.
Then your post immediately above suggests that someone in front was travelling relatively fast (approximately 10 miles per hour above the limit) and you appeared to feel the need to overtake. You did this at a speed equivalent to almost certain disqualification in the Courts at 100mph.
Although I may disagree with a specific viewpoint, I would defend your right to believe that you will a)drive at your own speed, often lower than the limit, without having to overtake b)overtake whenever necessary, even above the limit c)overtake at a figure massively above the limit. I'm just a little confused as to which is is.
There have also been newcomers on PH recently asking for advice. I think it may be up to us 'older generation' (I believe you have happily accepted that classification previously) to perhaps set an 'Advanced' example to the younger drivers.
Please take this in the spirit it was intended, one of confusion as to your position, rather than anything else.
Regards
Sally
I read your earlier threads about the need to make progress, and overtake, and you appeared to be more comfortable without having to make progress all the time. You suggested that you were quite happy driving along at a pace below the limit, without feeling the 'Advanced' need to overtake to make progress. All of that is fine obviously, as each person drives to his or her comfort zone. That is as it should be.
Then your post immediately above suggests that someone in front was travelling relatively fast (approximately 10 miles per hour above the limit) and you appeared to feel the need to overtake. You did this at a speed equivalent to almost certain disqualification in the Courts at 100mph.
Although I may disagree with a specific viewpoint, I would defend your right to believe that you will a)drive at your own speed, often lower than the limit, without having to overtake b)overtake whenever necessary, even above the limit c)overtake at a figure massively above the limit. I'm just a little confused as to which is is.
There have also been newcomers on PH recently asking for advice. I think it may be up to us 'older generation' (I believe you have happily accepted that classification previously) to perhaps set an 'Advanced' example to the younger drivers.
Please take this in the spirit it was intended, one of confusion as to your position, rather than anything else.
Regards
Sally
Hello Sally, and apologies for any confusion I may have caused. I will try to clarify things, but first a little detail to correct. I believe there is a PH member called Mrs Triple S who joined us here a few months ago. I was already here under the name TripleS, and there is no connection between the two of us. When I first became aware of her I posted a light hearted greeting which didn't seem to go down too well, so I'm a bit wary of causing an upset.
Oops, sorry - I have to curtail this for the moment. I'll be back later.
Best wishes,
Dave.
Hello again Sally, sorry about the interruption.
Right then, to recap - and this is just my own view:
An advanced driver should be able to make good progress relative to any prevailing circumstances. He will of course be required to demonstrate this ability for the duration of an advanced test. In the remainder of his driving he should be free to decide for himself how much progress to make.
Some of my driving is very leisurely, and some of it is pretty quick, and this varies according to how I feel at any one time. In leisurely mode I often ignore overtaking opportunities that could be taken, and I simply go with the flow. When in speedy mode I overtake fairly positively, and the NSL is of no interest whatsoever at such times, nor is it at any other time.
I am not an advanced driver, never claimed to be, never thought of myself in those terms, and not really bothered about acquiring a label. Many people seem to enjoy 'advanced driver' status as a result of, for example, passing the IAM test, which is fine and good luck to them. It would take rather more than that for me to feel 'advanced' and that is not going to happen. In the meantime I keep things under review and I seek to evolve to a better standard as and when little improvements can be made. There need be, indeed should be, no limit to this process.
As for setting a good example - well I'm not in a position to do that - certainly not as far as attitude to legalities (primarily our NSL) are concerned. I must leave the setting of good examples to the experts, and I just hope my contributions are not damaging their efforts too much.
Best wishes to you, and everyone,
Dave.
Right then, to recap - and this is just my own view:
An advanced driver should be able to make good progress relative to any prevailing circumstances. He will of course be required to demonstrate this ability for the duration of an advanced test. In the remainder of his driving he should be free to decide for himself how much progress to make.
Some of my driving is very leisurely, and some of it is pretty quick, and this varies according to how I feel at any one time. In leisurely mode I often ignore overtaking opportunities that could be taken, and I simply go with the flow. When in speedy mode I overtake fairly positively, and the NSL is of no interest whatsoever at such times, nor is it at any other time.
I am not an advanced driver, never claimed to be, never thought of myself in those terms, and not really bothered about acquiring a label. Many people seem to enjoy 'advanced driver' status as a result of, for example, passing the IAM test, which is fine and good luck to them. It would take rather more than that for me to feel 'advanced' and that is not going to happen. In the meantime I keep things under review and I seek to evolve to a better standard as and when little improvements can be made. There need be, indeed should be, no limit to this process.
As for setting a good example - well I'm not in a position to do that - certainly not as far as attitude to legalities (primarily our NSL) are concerned. I must leave the setting of good examples to the experts, and I just hope my contributions are not damaging their efforts too much.
Best wishes to you, and everyone,
Dave.
Vaux said:
Philbes said:
"tootling along on a single carriageway at about 70 mph"
Interesting use of the word "tootling" as he was driving at the speed limit.
Interesting use of the word "tootling" as he was driving at the speed limit.
SC limit for a car (not towing) is 60.
Yeah, I carelessly read the original post as dual-carriageway. Still, that strengthens my point - 10mph OVER the speed limit is definitely not 'tootling'.
Philbes said:
Vaux said:
Philbes said:
"tootling along on a single carriageway at about 70 mph"
Interesting use of the word "tootling" as he was driving at the speed limit.
Interesting use of the word "tootling" as he was driving at the speed limit.
SC limit for a car (not towing) is 60.
Yeah, I carelessly read the original post as dual-carriageway. Still, that strengthens my point - 10mph OVER the speed limit is definitely not 'tootling'.
In that particular instance my use of the word 'tootling' was a bit frivolous, but on any decent section of road (even a single carriageway) 70 mph feels fairly leisurely and unhurried to me. It's a matter of what you're accustomed to doing and what feels reasonably normal - for you, or me, or any of us.
Incidentally, I would suggest that whether or not 'tootling' is an appropriate term has little to do with with the extent to which a speed limit is being exceeded.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Big Fat F'er said:
flemke said:
Big Fat F'er said:
2) You shouldn't break the limit when overtaking. There isn't a "ha ha, what about..." exception. You shouldn't do it. So if you are at 50mph, in the NSL, and there isn't sufficient space to safely overtake without going above 60mph, then you shouldn't overtake. Same on the motorway, at 70mph limit. Etc., etc., etc. All the Advanced Systems are very clear on this. You dont break the limit to overtake. You may decide to do so. Then you are in the wrong.
If you were to break the NSL whilst, unknown to you, your driving were being observed by an unmarked trafpol, and the trafpol thought that what you'd just done was reasonable and safe and therefore he took no action, are you still "in the wrong"?Yes. On two counts.
1) Legally you shouldn't break the limit. So that is black and white.
When in this context you say "wrong", do you mean "morally wrong and unacceptable in a civilised society", or do you mean simply "contrary to the law"?
Big Fat F'er said:
2) Advanced drivers are supposed to set an example to other road users. They are expected to follow and obey the highway Code and the Traffic Regulations. So that is also black and white.
Interesting point, this one. As have no doubt many other PHers, I have been a passenger on numerous occasions with PC1 drivers and Police Advanced Driving Instructors who have exceeded the limit by a very substantial margin. So far as I am aware, none of these people has ever had a single RTA.
Their driving was and is superb. Its safety is an historical fact. What's the problem?
Big Fat F'er said:
I'm presuming these TrafPol are not those that get knocked for being cretins, or always picking on innocent drivers, or are part of the Police State (oh ya gotta laugh).
One occasionally hears such hyperbole, but generally it seems to have been said to make a point, not because anyone would take it literally. There are mediocre doctors, mediocre solicitors, mediocre racing drivers, even mediocre politicians (is that a job requirement?). It would be astonishing if in all of Britain there weren't a single mediocre copper.
At least on PH, it's broadly understood that innocent bystanders' and good drivers' lives are made worse by the unholy trinity of bad drivers, politicians, and bureaucrats, and it is this collection of fools and rogues who are the problem.
No doubt most police officers are antipathetic towards this trinity and are therefore on the same side as the innocent bystanders and good drivers.
Cheers.
Edited by flemke on Thursday 8th June 12:32
"No doubt most police officers are antipathetic towards this trinity and are therefore on the same side as the innocent bystanders and good drivers. "
On the same side as good drivers as long as they don't break any motoring (or other) laws?
I disagree with speed cameras and many other laws of the land, but I expect to be punished if I break those laws. Sometimes I also don't agree with the level of punishment.
If I don't agree with the any law or punishmnet then I make my opinion known to my local MP. perhaps more of us should do likewise. They may not listen, but they can't listen if you don't contact them.
On the same side as good drivers as long as they don't break any motoring (or other) laws?
I disagree with speed cameras and many other laws of the land, but I expect to be punished if I break those laws. Sometimes I also don't agree with the level of punishment.
If I don't agree with the any law or punishmnet then I make my opinion known to my local MP. perhaps more of us should do likewise. They may not listen, but they can't listen if you don't contact them.
Philbes said:
I disagree with speed cameras and many other laws of the land, but I expect to be punished if I break those laws. Sometimes I also don't agree with the level of punishment.
If I don't agree with the any law or punishmnet then I make my opinion known to my local MP. perhaps more of us should do likewise. They may not listen, but they can't listen if you don't contact them.
Yes, one will "expect to be punished" - that's only rational. Expecting to be punished and deserving to be punished are not the same thing. If I don't agree with the any law or punishmnet then I make my opinion known to my local MP. perhaps more of us should do likewise. They may not listen, but they can't listen if you don't contact them.
Making one's opinion known to one's local MP is good for almost nothing. Many public services have instituted policies and regulations whereby any customer (aka the citizen who pays their wages) who is deemed to be "abusive" to staff is reported to the police, possibly fined or arrested, etc. The staff are the ones who judge whether the customer is being abusive.
No matter how poor the service, regardless of how lazy or incompetent or apathetic the staff might be, the customer is not allowed to protest to staff.
Instead, the customer's only option is to write to headquarters management with details of the complaint. Upon being delivered at headquarters, the customer's letter of complaint will be dropped unread into the bin, never to be seen again. But you can't complain to staff - that would be abusive!
Do you think that Local Authorities and MPs are really interested in what citizens think? Guess again.
Most of the time they are directed in how to vote by their party leaders. On the rare occasions when they have some discretion, they are guided by their own opinions, predilections and tastes. Why should they have to waste time listening to us when they already know what is best?
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff