Why can nobody overtake?

[king arthur]

I think it's because they are so unaware of their surroundings that the shock of seeing you pass them on the wrong side of the road wakes them up from their little daydream and therefore you deserve everything they can throw at you. Full beam, angry fists, etc.

[tobytronicstereophonic]

When I first moved to NE Scotland, the amount of fatal accidents was surreal. Small villages would have a road death every couple of months. Part of the problem was young drivers in fast cars, driving silly 100mph+ on rural roads.
The first time we drove the 35 miles to Aberdeen, there was just a slight dusting of snow. On the way home, the wind whipped the snow up from the Grampians and suddenly we were driving level with the tops of dry-stone walls. The cars not already stuck were still overtaking on roads with less snow and ice. When we caught up with them, they were invariably upside-down in a ditch. Even one police car.
Eventually, we were the only car still moving. I wasn't even trying especially hard not to get stuck. It seemed inevitable. The reason we trundled on? We were in a Skoda Estelle 120. The car's accelerator cable was trapped and only allowed about 20% throttle movement at the carburettor.
However, after seven hours' driving, not having a clue where I was going, I ended up at precisely the same turn-off I'd taken, hoping to avoid getting stuck.
If you aren't proficient emough to overtake, pull in whenever you can. Folk are struggling to make a living and you are stopping them. Also, always leave enough space so's the car passing you can fit in between yourself and tractor. Flash your left indicator to show when the road ahead is clear. And chuck open bottles of wee at sporty lycra clad cyclists, at any BMW convertible less than ten years old with the top down and all cars with a camouflage-themed wrap.
My only other advice is: never use your teeth as tools. Oh, and don't drink petrol at any time and don't drik Gin at 9:57 am.

[DKS]

Overtook a dawdling new Beetle today. There's a lead up to a good overtake on a 60 limit road just after a right turn on to it, so there's a chance to study the driving of the car in front well before the opportunity and I've been driving this route for over 25 years. I go for quite a leisurely overtake, not aggressive or noisy (car is 100% standard).
Still get the coffee beans as I pull back in.
Of course they caught me up when I got stuck behind the person in front turning right a few minutes later, but for me it's the fun of the exercise and also demonstrating overtaking is okay, legal and that the 60 limit roads can be driven faster than 42mph.
Doesn't bother me especially other than it's saddening that people have to react negatively because of their perception of me acting illegally or dangerously.

[bigothunter]

king arthur said:

I think it's because they are so unaware of their surroundings that the shock of seeing you pass them on the wrong side of the road wakes them up from their little daydream and therefore you deserve everything they can throw at you. Full beam, angry fists, etc.

So many drive in detached 'pedestrian' mode. Never look more than a few metres ahead and only react to what's immediately happening. Observation and planning are for the birds.

That's why motoring must be restricted and cossetted to make us all safe...

[Pan Pan Pan]

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits, when road and weather conditions allow it, they should perhaps consider, whether they are suited to driving a vehicle on public roads.

[bigothunter]

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits, when road and weather conditions allow it, they should perhaps consider, whether they are suited to driving a vehicle on public roads.

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits when road and weather conditions allow, speed limits must be reduced further to accommodate them.

You really need to catch up with modern think

[Pan Pan Pan]

bigothunter said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits, when road and weather conditions allow it, they should perhaps consider, whether they are suited to driving a vehicle on public roads.

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits when road and weather conditions allow, speed limits must be reduced further to accommodate them.

You really need to catch up with modern think

What you seem to be advocating is a race to the bottom.
If people are not able to do the things they were trained for, and believe that it is OK to let their standards fall to a very low common denominator, (in the case of driving, typically as soon as they have passed their driving test) they should perhaps consider whether they are suited to driving a motor vehicle on public roads.

This principle can also be applied to airline pilots, surgeons, medical staff, nuclear power plant operators, in fact ANY activity where a certain level of competency is required to engage in the particular activity it in the first place, and which for safety reasons, should be maintained at an appropriate level, and not be dumbed down to accommodate people who should not be doing it owing to laziness, and or incompetence.

[Castrol for a knave]

Evil.soup said:

kiethton said:

We used to drive to Croatia/Brac fairly regularly and some of the best overtaking spots were when the road followed an inlet/bay - full view own to the right corner at the bottom of the bay and back out the other side. Example of the road just outside Bol below

Bet that is fun!

Lovely

One great road for tight corners, esses and sighted sweeping bends is the one that drops from Les Saisses to Megeve, Great fun with full clear sight, overtaking on the inside of a bend and off to the next.

[bigothunter]

Pan Pan Pan said:

bigothunter said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits, when road and weather conditions allow it, they should perhaps consider, whether they are suited to driving a vehicle on public roads.

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits when road and weather conditions allow, speed limits must be reduced further to accommodate them.

You really need to catch up with modern think

What you seem to be advocating is a race to the bottom.
If people are not able to do the things they were trained for, and believe that it is OK to let their standards fall to a very low common denominator, (in the case of driving, typically as soon as they have passed their driving test) they should perhaps consider whether they are suited to driving a motor vehicle on public roads.

This principle can also be applied to airline pilots, surgeons, medical staff, nuclear power plant operators, in fact ANY activity where a certain level of competency is required to engage in the particular activity it in the first place, and which for safety reasons, should be maintained at an appropriate level, and not be dumbed down to accommodate people who should not be doing it owing to laziness, and or incompetence.

There's a gulf between professional responsibility and the level expected of regular civilians in their daily lives.

Motoring has become a race to the bottom. Years ago we strove for positive measures which improved driving standards. There was even advice on not bulking drivers who wanted to overtake. Remember those public information films?

That's all gone now, replaced by pandering to the least capable - it's the modern way. Matters have become so ludicrous that they've turned from frustrating to farcical. I've capitulated - time for a good laugh instead

Full autonomous cars could be the way out of this mess, although they bring their own problems...

[king arthur]

bigothunter said:

Full autonomous cars could be the way out of this mess, although they bring their own problems...

"My self driving car seems to be broken, it won't stay in the middle lane..."

[swisstoni]

king arthur said:

bigothunter said:

Full autonomous cars could be the way out of this mess, although they bring their own problems...

"My self driving car seems to be broken, it won't stay in the middle lane..."

I have a feeling self driving cars will be extremely risk averse.
On the upside, if they are any good, they’ll at least be achieving the speed limit for the road, meaning that dawdlers could be a thing of the past.

[hothatch1.6]

Is pulling in to let faster traffic past taught these days? I passed my test 10 years ago and coming from driving agri machinery taught to pull in if you were holding people up.

Seems to be hit and miss, some people try to pull over to let you past which is often more dangerous than just carrying on and allowing faster car to wait until a safe spot to overtake. Some people do it well and allow faster traffic past safely.

[cerb4.5lee]

I had an X5 M50d come absolutely flying past me and the bus that was in front of me earlier, and it was nice to see someone tanking it. I was in the M4 and I was very tempted to follow him, but I didn't...I must be getting old!

[Pan Pan Pan]

bigothunter said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

bigothunter said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits, when road and weather conditions allow it, they should perhaps consider, whether they are suited to driving a vehicle on public roads.

If people are not able to drive at the low set statutory limits when road and weather conditions allow, speed limits must be reduced further to accommodate them.

You really need to catch up with modern think

What you seem to be advocating is a race to the bottom.
If people are not able to do the things they were trained for, and believe that it is OK to let their standards fall to a very low common denominator, (in the case of driving, typically as soon as they have passed their driving test) they should perhaps consider whether they are suited to driving a motor vehicle on public roads.

This principle can also be applied to airline pilots, surgeons, medical staff, nuclear power plant operators, in fact ANY activity where a certain level of competency is required to engage in the particular activity it in the first place, and which for safety reasons, should be maintained at an appropriate level, and not be dumbed down to accommodate people who should not be doing it owing to laziness, and or incompetence.

There's a gulf between professional responsibility and the level expected of regular civilians in their daily lives.

Motoring has become a race to the bottom. Years ago we strove for positive measures which improved driving standards. There was even advice on not bulking drivers who wanted to overtake. Remember those public information films?

That's all gone now, replaced by pandering to the least capa teh skill of a professional driver and a `regular' driverble - it's the modern way. Matters have become so ludicrous that they've turned from frustrating to farcical. I've capitulated - time for a good laugh instead

Full autonomous cars could be the way out of this mess, although they bring their own problems...

If people were advocating that all (regular?) drivers need to display a standard of driving skill, equivalent to that of a professional driver, in order to pass the driving test, then yes, it could be said that there is a gulf between the standards of the two, only they dont.
It wouldn't be so bad if driving a car was so very difficult, but it is not.
The premise is entirely simple. In order to be able to legally drive a motor vehicle on public roads, a person must display the prescribed standard of competence needed to pass the driving test. If they cannot do that, they should not legally be allowed on public roads.
The statutory limits represent the maximum speed a driver is allowed to attain on each section of public roads. Consequently provided road and weather condition permit it, there is NO legal reason why a person should not drive ate the posted limits. Those limits are set by the various authorities to allow the widest range of drivers to be able to drive at them.
It is simple. if for any reason (Health, eyesight, illness, drug or alcohol issues, unsound vehicle ) a driver is not able to drive at the posted limits, when road and weather conditions allow. for safety reasons they should consider whether they should be driving on those roads.

[911hope]

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people were advocating that all (regular?) drivers need to display a standard of driving skill, equivalent to that of a professional driver, in order to pass the driving test, then yes, it could be said that there is a gulf between the standards of the two, only they dont.
It wouldn't be so bad if driving a car was so very difficult, but it is not.
The premise is entirely simple. In order to be able to legally drive a motor vehicle on public roads, a person must display the prescribed standard of competence needed to pass the driving test. If they cannot do that, they should not legally be allowed on public roads.
The statutory limits represent the maximum speed a driver is allowed to attain on each section of public roads. Consequently provided road and weather condition permit it, there is NO legal reason why a person should not drive ate the posted limits. Those limits are set by the various authorities to allow the widest range of drivers to be able to drive at them.
It is simple. if for any reason (Health, eyesight, illness, drug or alcohol issues, unsound vehicle ) a driver is not able to drive at the posted limits, when road and weather conditions allow. for safety reasons they should consider whether they should be driving on those roads.

The misconception that posted limits represent the safe driving speed needs to be challenged.

There is a significant proportion of the NSL roads, which would be clearly unsafe at 60mph in any circumstances (any driver, any car, any time). single track, tight bends, blind bends, dodgy surfaces, other road users etc etc etc.

Even lower speed limits (eg. 30mph) don't guarantee safety. Obviously.

[havoc]

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people were advocating that all (regular?) drivers need to display a standard of driving skill, equivalent to that of a professional driver, in order to pass the driving test, then yes, it could be said that there is a gulf between the standards of the two, only they dont.

How would you define a 'professional' driver?

Historically that would be in line with the definition of professional - one who earns a living from an activity (e.g. professional athletes/sportspeople vs amateurs).

...but that then brings in taxi drivers, delivery van drivers, bus/coach drivers as well as HGV drivers. Of whom, in my experience only the latter consistently display above-average behaviours on the road. Bus and coach drivers appear to have massive chips on their shoulders, taxi drivers (outside of black cabs in London) are a joke, and delivery van drivers are usually under so much pressure to hit targets they're amongst the most impatient and pushy (Audi drivers naturally excepted! out there)

[Pan Pan Pan]

911hope said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people were advocating that all (regular?) drivers need to display a standard of driving skill, equivalent to that of a professional driver, in order to pass the driving test, then yes, it could be said that there is a gulf between the standards of the two, only they dont.
It wouldn't be so bad if driving a car was so very difficult, but it is not.
The premise is entirely simple. In order to be able to legally drive a motor vehicle on public roads, a person must display the prescribed standard of competence needed to pass the driving test. If they cannot do that, they should not legally be allowed on public roads.
The statutory limits represent the maximum speed a driver is allowed to attain on each section of public roads. Consequently provided road and weather condition permit it, there is NO legal reason why a person should not drive ate the posted limits. Those limits are set by the various authorities to allow the widest range of drivers to be able to drive at them.
It is simple. if for any reason (Health, eyesight, illness, drug or alcohol issues, unsound vehicle ) a driver is not able to drive at the posted limits, when road and weather conditions allow. for safety reasons they should consider whether they should be driving on those roads.

The misconception that posted limits represent the safe driving speed needs to be challenged.

There is a significant proportion of the NSL roads, which would be clearly unsafe at 60mph in any circumstances (any driver, any car, any time). single track, tight bends, blind bends, dodgy surfaces, other road users etc etc etc.

Even lower speed limits (eg. 30mph) don't guarantee safety. Obviously.

The posted limits only represent the maximum speed that a driver is `legally' able to travel at, on a particular section of road.
Consequently we get some roads / dual carriageways with 30,40 or 50 mph speed limits applied to wide, straight well it dual carriageways., On the other hand we get narrow, twisty, single track roads, with blind bends where the NSL (60mph) is applied.
This must mean that drivers are expected to be able to use a degree of caution, common sense, and judgement when using such roads.
There is also the colossal myth, that if a car is travelling slowly, it is travelling `safely'.
I dont want to be hit by a car travelling at ANY speed, and if anyone thinks that getting hit by a car travelling at 20 mph is not going to hurt then they are deranged.
If however, we insist on mixing lightweight, soft, squishy, slow things on the same piece of real estate, that we also use the heavy, hard, unyielding, fast things, it follows that ALL must abide by the rules applied to roads as much as possible.
Doing this can NEVER be made completely safe (Human nature / failings) so we must all aim for the best compromise that we possibly can in this matter.

[Pan Pan Pan]

havoc said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

If people were advocating that all (regular?) drivers need to display a standard of driving skill, equivalent to that of a professional driver, in order to pass the driving test, then yes, it could be said that there is a gulf between the standards of the two, only they dont.

How would you define a 'professional' driver?

Historically that would be in line with the definition of professional - one who earns a living from an activity (e.g. professional athletes/sportspeople vs amateurs).

...but that then brings in taxi drivers, delivery van drivers, bus/coach drivers as well as HGV drivers. Of whom, in my experience only the latter consistently display above-average behaviours on the road. Bus and coach drivers appear to have massive chips on their shoulders, taxi drivers (outside of black cabs in London) are a joke, and delivery van drivers are usually under so much pressure to hit targets they're amongst the most impatient and pushy (Audi drivers naturally excepted! out there)

I hear what you say about `professional' drivers. I have sometimes (in my minds eye) wanted to say to a so called `professional' driver what do you do for a living? because one thing is for sure, YOU are NOT a professional driver.
I have even seen a driving instructor in his instructor marked car, driving like an absolute t*t, no signals, lousy positioning. dawdling one minute, then massively exceeding the posted limit the next.
the sad thing is if people just tried to keep to the posted limits, good cross country progress can be made without needing to exceed the posted limits.
Technically we should ALL try to drive as professionally as possible for as much of the time as possible, but the truth of the situation is that some (Perhaps too many) are just too thick, lazy, ,arrogant, ignorant, selfish, and uncaring about anyone except themselves, to be able to do so.

Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Saturday 18th March 11:44

[havoc]

Pan Pan Pan said:

Technically we should ALL try to drive as professionally as possible for as much of the time as possible, but the truth of the situation is that some (Perhaps too many) are just too thick, lazy, ,arrogant, ignorant, selfish, and uncaring about anyone except themselves, to be able to do so.

I think it's not just the messages from the government (although they hurt, ever since "Speed kills"), I think it's:-
- Modern cars - so much more cocooned from the rest of the world, particularly since aircon and soundproofing, so much easier to drive 'casually' (ultra-light PAS, good autoboxes, all the various assist functions), and so much more difficult to see out of / see the corners of. My first car (1978 Polo) had no driver aids at all, and you had to pay attention, and frequently drove with the window down, so you were always aware of what was going on around you. Second car (1987 Orion) wasn't that difficult, albeit was more comfortable and quicker.
- Modern lifestyles - the 'always on / always available' approach, particularly mobile phones. And the apparent need to multi-task all the time, usually involving a mobile phone. If driving no longer NEEDS* your whole attention and both hands, then people get bored...especially if they haven't posted on TikTok in the last 10 minutes.


* Still deserves it.

[911hope]

havoc said:

I think it's not just the messages from the government (although they hurt, ever since "Speed kills"), I think it's:-
- Modern cars - so much more cocooned from the rest of the world, particularly since aircon and soundproofing, so much easier to drive 'casually' (ultra-light PAS, good autoboxes, all the various assist functions), and so much more difficult to see out of / see the corners of. My first car (1978 Polo) had no driver aids at all, and you had to pay attention, and frequently drove with the window down, so you were always aware of what was going on around you. Second car (1987 Orion) wasn't that difficult, albeit was more comfortable and quicker.
- Modern lifestyles - the 'always on / always available' approach, particularly mobile phones. And the apparent need to multi-task all the time, usually involving a mobile phone. If driving no longer NEEDS* your whole attention and both hands, then people get bored...especially if they haven't posted on TikTok in the last 10 minutes.


* Still deserves it.

HOWEVER..... There is now so much more road traffic than in 1978 and a great deal fewer road deaths.

What is the difference? Cars are much safer.