keeping UP to the speed limit...

[tobeee]

I wrote a letter in my local paper last week about people tailgating me through the 30 zone, eventually overtaking me with the requisite flashing and hand signals, then allowing me to catch up with them as they dawdle through the 60 zone. Tailgating aside, there was a response from a chap who gave many reasons why he was proud to dawdle through 60 zones (fuel consumption and safety of course included). Anyway, I'm certain I recall seeing a section in Roadcraft/Highway Code about the need to keep as close to the speed limit and flow of traffic as possible (weather conditions considered) and I'd like to piss on his fire so please can anyone point me in the right direction...

Copied across from my unsuccessful hijack of a Chimaera forum thread!

[tigger1]

Can't remember anything written, but remember being taught that you shouldn't hold up other road users unnecessarily...and going unduly slowly in a NSL would be just that. Obviously if 60 wasn't safe then fair enough, but on a straight road, say, it would be.

[vonhosen]

There is nothing to say that you have to tarvel at the speed limit, unless there is a minimum speed limit imposed.
Other than that you shouldn't unnecessarily hold up others. You should allow them to pass when safe to do so, if you are driving a slow vehicle.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd October 16:40

[cj_eds]

vonhosen said:

There is nothing to say that you have to tarvel at the speed limit, unless there is a minimum speed limit imposed.
Other than that you shouldn't unnecessarily hold up others. You should allow them to pass when safe to do so, if you are driving a slow vehicle.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd October 16:40

I thought you could get done for "obstructing the queens highway" but to do so you had to be creating a real obstruction - not just dawdling along at 40?

[vonhosen]

cj_eds said:

vonhosen said:

There is nothing to say that you have to tarvel at the speed limit, unless there is a minimum speed limit imposed.
Other than that you shouldn't unnecessarily hold up others. You should allow them to pass when safe to do so, if you are driving a slow vehicle.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd October 16:40

I thought you could get done for "obstructing the queens highway" but to do so you had to be creating a real obstruction - not just dawdling along at 40?

YOu won't get done for obsruction where moving, you could get done for incosiderate driving if you were really slow & didn't (when safe) allow others to pass.

[Spearmint]

The amount of drivers I have seen lately dawdling along on a NSL road at 40-45 mph is really starting to do my nut. It never used to be like this, well not until some stupid tt in a suit sat behind a desk thought, 'Ooh I know, lets advise the councils that they have to review all speed limits'.

You fail your driving test if you where to carry out such a stupid and inconsiderate action. If they aren't confident, rip their licences up.

[Fat Audi 80]

Spearmint said:

The amount of drivers I have seen lately dawdling along on a NSL road at 40-45 mph is really starting to do my nut. It never used to be like this, well not until some stupid tt in a suit sat behind a desk thought, 'Ooh I know, lets advise the councils that they have to review all speed limits'.

You fail your driving test if you where to carry out such a stupid and inconsiderate action. If they aren't confident, rip their licences up.

I think that is a very good point. Unfortunately not much ( or in my case none) driving is done on NSL roads for the driving test. If you only did 45 in a NSL on your test and it was clear and safe to do so, you would fail.

Once you have passed though you can do what you bloody like....

[davy9449]

Just to add to this, this has been annoying me a little for some time now. Although I am easily irritated, people dawdling along in all sorts of limit zones don't seem to bother looking behind them. That winds me up. Especially on your way to work, 'old retired guy in Rover' (for arguments sake) tootles along a NSL road at 2 in the afternoon, either oblivious to the tail of traffic behind of people on way to work or transporting goods or looks and thinks 'I am driving safely - bollox'. Then people like me, get wound up (OK easily I admit again) and have to o/take! WHY? Can I stress I do not believe I take undue risks

Also, a road I use each day stretches about 4 miles in length and passes through 2 sets of traffic lights before entering a village. It is an A road, yet I have looked and looked and can't see a SL sign anywhere, or even a NSL sign. It has broken chevrons in the middle, so what's the limit? I believe it's 60, as most do. It's quite a wide road, but just wanted clarification if anyone has an idea?

[slowly slowly]

vonhosen said:

There is nothing to say that you have to tarvel at the speed limit, unless there is a minimum speed limit imposed.
Other than that you shouldn't unnecessarily hold up others. You should allow them to pass when safe to do so, if you are driving a slow vehicle.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd October 16:40

I presume that "making undue progrees" on your test would not result in a fail then?, it did in my day.

[Ross_T_Boss]

It's such a frustration to see people scared to breathe on the throttle... I took my test 4 years ago and remember being told several times to accelerate up to 'traffic speed' with bit more urgency. Regularly it seems to take about 30s for cars to get from about 25-30 to 50-60... I'm patient but get frustrated too. Generally I think I'm a safe driver but will admit I occasionally take risks that I'd frown upon to get past these goons.

What with the w@nkers that put their brights on to show their 'disapproval' when you pass them as well? Usually the same idiots that will also try and speed up to close a gap if they think you want to pull in front before passing the next-in-line...

Cheers
Ross

(rant: had one on the A33 this morn, car + lorry @ 30, went past car and decided to stop short of passing the lorry at the same time as i saw headlights rounding the bend ahead - he saw my plan to abort, put beams on pushed the gap from about 2-6 car length to about 2. Wish I'd had an "f--- off" neon sign in the back. /rant)

[GreenV8S]

Ross_T_Boss said:

pushed the gap from about 2-6 car length to about 2.

Does that mean you aren't sure if the initial gap was 2 lengths or 6?

[Ross_T_Boss]

Um, no. That was me making a typo... it may have been early morning, but my judgement wasn't that bad!! Meant to say I'd have estimated it about 5-6 car lengths.

[waremark]

Ross_T_Boss said:

What with the w@nkers that put their brights on to show their 'disapproval' when you pass them as well? Usually the same idiots that will also try and speed up to close a gap if they think you want to pull in front before passing the next-in-line...

I overtake regularly and hardly ever experience this sort of thing. Do you think you are pushing the limits a bit? For example, overtaking into the sort of gap which will make the overtaken vehicle brake to recover a safe gap in front, or overtaking where there is a constant stream of traffic and having another car in front will just make all those behind slow down a bit? Or overtaking where others do not think it is safe? If so, it would explain why the people you overtake are not happy about it.

[Ross_T_Boss]

I'm quite judgemental of my own driving. I'll certainly put my hand up to making a few moves that have made me think "that was stupid" afterwards (nothing that's resulted in an accident or anything even close, to put it in perspective) and I wouldn't rant about a show of dispproval from one of those cicumstances :-) But I draw the line at driving how others perceive I should rather than what I know to be within the limits of myself, my car and the road conditions. I guess I disapprove of others reacting in an agressive way to another's driving because they wont/cant make the same maneuvre. I also think it's damn right idiotic to full-beam someone as they pass regardless of how unsafe you think it is.

You said you "hardly ever" get a reaction to passing - I assume from this you occasionally receive similar reactions? I certainly didn't say I get this reaction regularly, but it happens from time to time. I recently spent a week driving in France and the driving attitude was generally a massive improvement. If I saw someone that in my opinion was making a dangerous overtake, and they decided they wanted to pull into a gap in front of me, the last thing I'd ever do is floor it to narrow the gap in retaliation!

[gridgway]

in defense of people not making good progress, it is actually a real pain to work out the speed limit at any one time. It used to be very simple. Now it's just very hard work. Maybe for the advanced driver who has practised obervation it's ok. My observation is ok, better than av, but not perfect. I reckon that on a reasonable long journey, I'll lose track of the speed limit at some point, maybe several.

I think many people dawdle in the middle as a) they don't know the speed limit, and b) have no reason to disbelieve the message about speed killing.

Mind you it's not new...I grew up nr bournemouth, that's the epicentre of dawdling holiday-makers and wrinklies!

Maybe the response in the Advanced Driving section is that getting annoyed shows a poor attitude to driving. If it is not safe to overtake, then driving safely behind without getting annoyed and being aware of the possibility of other (lesser) drivers behind getting annoyed and exhibiting poor judgement is the correct course of action.

Graham

[gridgway]

PS it annoys me too!

[covert ops]

[quote=Ross_T_Boss]I'm quite judgemental of my own driving. I'll certainly put my hand up to making a few moves that have made me think "that was stupid" afterwards (nothing that's resulted in an accident or anything even close, to put it in perspective) and I wouldn't rant about a show of dispproval from one of those cicumstances :-) But I draw the line at driving how others perceive I should rather than what I know to be within the limits of myself, my car and the road conditions. I guess I disapprove of others reacting in an agressive way to another's driving because they wont/cant make the same maneuvre. I also think it's damn right idiotic to full-beam someone as they pass regardless of how unsafe you think it is.

Very true Ross T Boss

I'm always getting flashed by others...mainly I believe because of their nerves/their perception of safety/their lack of ability to replicate the same!!

I admit I'm usually the coolest cucumber in the pack but recently I've been tested.

Speaking of people not keeping to the NSL, the other night on the M40 I joined just past uxbridge and traffic was quite slow. (nothing unusual) but after a couple of miles I could see that the road was clear ahead. Strange I thought must be the plod. Well when I finally reached the front of the traffic...there he was in a nissan micra doing maybe 50 in lane 3 TOTALLY OBLIVIOUS to the mayhem behind him. The good law abiding citizens didn't have the heart to undertake this chap so incredibly everybody was trying to get past in lane 4!!!!!(I actually feel quite bad about this bit) I pulled in behind him and gave him 20 seconds of full beam and a beep of the horn. INCREDIBLY HE LOOKED IN HIS REAR VIEW MIRROR and pulled over in to lane 2. I settled back into my usual driving style and continued home...4 cars coming past me gave me the thumbs up/thanks and i felt he was if a bit crudely.... educated.

Gridgway unless you are elderly and with failing eyesight I fail to see how you can not know what the limits are. Also 99% of the time if there is a scamera everyone in front would have slowed down anyway. Basically I just dont understand how anybody cant know the limit. I excuse the elderly/frail and failing vision!!

Andy

Edited by covert ops on Monday 16th October 16:01

[J1mmyD]

vonhosen said:

cj_eds said:

vonhosen said:

There is nothing to say that you have to tarvel at the speed limit, unless there is a minimum speed limit imposed.
Other than that you shouldn't unnecessarily hold up others. You should allow them to pass when safe to do so, if you are driving a slow vehicle.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd October 16:40

I thought you could get done for "obstructing the queens highway" but to do so you had to be creating a real obstruction - not just dawdling along at 40?

YOu won't get done for obsruction where moving, you could get done for incosiderate driving if you were really slow & didn't (when safe) allow others to pass.

There was a successful prosecution brought approximately 4 years ago for a driver travelling at 18mph on an NSL single carriageway. Prosecution was for dangerous driving. It was only heard in the Mag's Ct, so it forms no precedent but does serve as an example the type of speed that would be needed to get a successful prosecution. (Just to add, this chap was also in his 90's, unsure of his status wrt eyesight and hearing etc.).

[vonhosen]

J1mmyD said:

vonhosen said:

cj_eds said:

vonhosen said:

There is nothing to say that you have to tarvel at the speed limit, unless there is a minimum speed limit imposed.
Other than that you shouldn't unnecessarily hold up others. You should allow them to pass when safe to do so, if you are driving a slow vehicle.

Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 3rd October 16:40

I thought you could get done for "obstructing the queens highway" but to do so you had to be creating a real obstruction - not just dawdling along at 40?

YOu won't get done for obsruction where moving, you could get done for incosiderate driving if you were really slow & didn't (when safe) allow others to pass.

There was a successful prosecution brought approximately 4 years ago for a driver travelling at 18mph on an NSL single carriageway. Prosecution was for dangerous driving. It was only heard in the Mag's Ct, so it forms no precedent but does serve as an example the type of speed that would be needed to get a successful prosecution. (Just to add, this chap was also in his 90's, unsure of his status wrt eyesight and hearing etc.).

Have you got a link or details of it, because I find it very hard to believe that anyone would be convicted of dangerous driving for that. Inconsiderate, yes quite possibly, but dangerous ?????

[J1mmyD]

No such thing as a link ... it was a minor case, unreported and pretty much unremarked. The only reason I remember it is because I was talking at length about it was a colleague at the time.

I agree that DD seems a little over the top, but there were multiple near hits behind this vehicle coupled with the fact that one of the tailing vehicles was an unmarked police car.