Overtaking a blue light travelling below the posted speed li
Discussion
Joining the M25 near the Dartford crossing there are two slip roads (different roads joining) I noticed an Ambulance with blues on I was in no hurry doing 50/60MPH so the Ambulance passed me before entering the main carriageway the Ambulance then moved directly to the outside lane where it continued at 55/60MPH causing tailbacks in all but lane one. Are the drivers trained to do this to keep the road congestion free ahead so as not to impede their progress if the road becomes congested? or should they travel in a lane appropriate for their progress and would it be a problem to overtake on the right if this were the case?. No one “undertook” but it must’ve been very tempting to do so
I've been in similar circumstances where I've caught up blue light vehicles and I want to be going quicker. Personally I think it's just common courtesy to wait patiently behind them at a generous distance, I dare say they are on more important business than I am and I dont want to disrupt that in any way.
Pothole said:
La Liga said:
Not sure about the L3, but it's obviously wise to not go in front of them, regardless of lane.
Forgive me, but I'm struggling with the obvious. Do expand, old chap.donkmeister said:
A former paramedic told me that sometimes they have to drive slowly and surely due to the nature of the injury, where it is more important to minimise the shocks and rocking and rolling than it is to get to the hospital as quickly as possible. Spinal injuries were a common reason.
I'd have thought driving in the outside lane and forcing other traffic to move would be preferable to moving from lane to lane in this sort of situation. warch said:
donkmeister said:
A former paramedic told me that sometimes they have to drive slowly and surely due to the nature of the injury, where it is more important to minimise the shocks and rocking and rolling than it is to get to the hospital as quickly as possible. Spinal injuries were a common reason.
I'd have thought driving in the outside lane and forcing other traffic to move would be preferable to moving from lane to lane in this sort of situation. Greendubber said:
I cant think of any need for them to be sitting in L3 well below the limit on an otherwise perfectly flowing motorway.
Spinal injury or similar. L3 is generally smoother and so lower risk to the casualty.I was at West Midland control room at many moons ago and watched this happening on the main screen. They put a traffic car behind with a keep left message on the rear screen.
Starfighter said:
Greendubber said:
I cant think of any need for them to be sitting in L3 well below the limit on an otherwise perfectly flowing motorway.
Spinal injury or similar. L3 is generally smoother and so lower risk to the casualty.I was at West Midland control room at many moons ago and watched this happening on the main screen. They put a traffic car behind with a keep left message on the rear screen.
)La Liga said:
Pothole said:
La Liga said:
Not sure about the L3, but it's obviously wise to not go in front of them, regardless of lane.
Forgive me, but I'm struggling with the obvious. Do expand, old chap.A few years back I had a situation on the M1 where I was travelling along at 70~80mph, when I noticed slower traffic starting to build up in lanes 1 & 2. I moved to lane 3, and commenced to overtake them all, as lane 3 was clear of any traffic.
As I moved past the lines of traffic, I spotted that there was an ambulance sat in lane 2, with its blue lights on, travelling at @ 50~55mph, and hardly any traffic ahead of it.
I continued past the ambulance, and carried on with my journey at 70~80mph, leaving the ambulance and queuing traffic far behind, wondering where the logic was in people refusing to overtake the slow moving ambulance, but instead, sitting behind it, slowly creating a tailback.
A year or so later, I was talking to an ambulance driver who was a friend of a friend, and asked them if I was wrong to overtake the ambulance in question. They said that, so long as I wasn't impeding the progress of the ambulance in any way, it wasn't a problem at all.
I asked why the ambulance would be travelling that slowly on a motorway with its blue lights on, and they said it could be for any number of reasons, such as a patient who couldn't be bumped around too much, due to a spinal injury or such like, they may have been carrying out a resus in the back at the time, it may have been a non emergency patient transfer, or it could be that the casualty has died in the back of the ambulance on the way to the hospital, and the driver simply hasn't switched off the blue lights.
Had the ambulance been in lane 3 doing 50~55mph, would I have undertaken it? - With the road ahead of the ambulance as clear as it was that day, probably yes, on the basis that the queue of traffic I was in, was going faster than the queue of traffic that the ambulance was creating was going, but I would have given the ambulance as wide a berth as possible.
At the end of the day, rightly or wrongly, I'm not going to sit at 50~55mph, looking at an empty motorway ahead, simply because an ambulance won't go any faster.
As I moved past the lines of traffic, I spotted that there was an ambulance sat in lane 2, with its blue lights on, travelling at @ 50~55mph, and hardly any traffic ahead of it.
I continued past the ambulance, and carried on with my journey at 70~80mph, leaving the ambulance and queuing traffic far behind, wondering where the logic was in people refusing to overtake the slow moving ambulance, but instead, sitting behind it, slowly creating a tailback.
A year or so later, I was talking to an ambulance driver who was a friend of a friend, and asked them if I was wrong to overtake the ambulance in question. They said that, so long as I wasn't impeding the progress of the ambulance in any way, it wasn't a problem at all.
I asked why the ambulance would be travelling that slowly on a motorway with its blue lights on, and they said it could be for any number of reasons, such as a patient who couldn't be bumped around too much, due to a spinal injury or such like, they may have been carrying out a resus in the back at the time, it may have been a non emergency patient transfer, or it could be that the casualty has died in the back of the ambulance on the way to the hospital, and the driver simply hasn't switched off the blue lights.
Had the ambulance been in lane 3 doing 50~55mph, would I have undertaken it? - With the road ahead of the ambulance as clear as it was that day, probably yes, on the basis that the queue of traffic I was in, was going faster than the queue of traffic that the ambulance was creating was going, but I would have given the ambulance as wide a berth as possible.
At the end of the day, rightly or wrongly, I'm not going to sit at 50~55mph, looking at an empty motorway ahead, simply because an ambulance won't go any faster.
Last week I was working near Stoke Mandeville hospital, I followed an ambulance for a couple of miles, mostly at below 20mph, before it turned in to the hospital, I've never seen such careful smooth driving, the driver must be a regular there as he missed every single pothole. I had a couple of opportunities to pass but didn't as I had a pretty good idea why it was making such steady progress.
Pica-Pica said:
La Liga said:
Not sure about the L3, but it's obviously wise to not go in front of them, regardless of lane.
Just drive appropriate to the conditions, and one condition is the ambulance needs a steady-paced progress. I see no issue in undertaking in lane 1.
All you're potentially doing is holding up the ambulance further along. Just slow down, you'll still get there..
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff