See for yourself!
Discussion
If you managed to read some of the 'Overtaking' thread you will know that there has been 2 views to the debate...
One view says that:- if there are any junctions or driveways anywhere along the overtaking zone then you should NEVER overtake and that the responsibility should someone pullout in to the road without checking is shared by him and you [the overtaker] This view was proposed by 'vonhosen' and supported widely.
The other view is that:- it is OK to overtake providing that you are sure it is clear and so long as you took all caution then if someone should 'jump' the junction there is no culpability on you the overtaker and the sole failur is that of the juction jumper. This view was propsed by me and also supported widely.
The OP was at first unsure but by page 10 had basically come down on the latter argument but feared that the former might be the one the Courts and the police would follow.
Then followed a bit of 'baiting' and 'knockabout'.
Then Reg [Advanced Driver of this Ilk] chipped in [apparently] on the side of vonhosen.
Such support would be quite damning you would think...
The problem is that Regs videos show him doing exactly the opposite, he drives as per the latter argument, he checks and passes openings [even unsighted ones] with aplomb.
I think Reg is actually a very good driver and read his threads in Advanced and with only a couple of comments think him to be a good example of a good driver.
I append these links for you to check out for yourselves and decide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvrhb1mDkYs
2:11 in stop it... then go on to 7:03 oh dear!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4OZwy6Piao
1:32 in stop it...
Thank you for reading.
One view says that:- if there are any junctions or driveways anywhere along the overtaking zone then you should NEVER overtake and that the responsibility should someone pullout in to the road without checking is shared by him and you [the overtaker] This view was proposed by 'vonhosen' and supported widely.
The other view is that:- it is OK to overtake providing that you are sure it is clear and so long as you took all caution then if someone should 'jump' the junction there is no culpability on you the overtaker and the sole failur is that of the juction jumper. This view was propsed by me and also supported widely.
The OP was at first unsure but by page 10 had basically come down on the latter argument but feared that the former might be the one the Courts and the police would follow.
Then followed a bit of 'baiting' and 'knockabout'.
Then Reg [Advanced Driver of this Ilk] chipped in [apparently] on the side of vonhosen.
Such support would be quite damning you would think...
The problem is that Regs videos show him doing exactly the opposite, he drives as per the latter argument, he checks and passes openings [even unsighted ones] with aplomb.
I think Reg is actually a very good driver and read his threads in Advanced and with only a couple of comments think him to be a good example of a good driver.
I append these links for you to check out for yourselves and decide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvrhb1mDkYs
2:11 in stop it... then go on to 7:03 oh dear!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4OZwy6Piao
1:32 in stop it...
Thank you for reading.
Edited by Brother Mycroft on Saturday 27th October 01:37
This guy drives like me.
Only watched first video, nothing wrong with the overtakes you mention, especially the 7 minute one where visibility over the crest is excellent to view the opening on the left ahead.
Didn't like the overtake of the cement truck much because it was so large and created a bit of a blind spot to the nearside ahead of truck. Didn't like the penultimate overtake, if something had been stationary in the pit of the blind dip it could have made for a tricky situation and quick evasive action!
Only watched first video, nothing wrong with the overtakes you mention, especially the 7 minute one where visibility over the crest is excellent to view the opening on the left ahead.
Didn't like the overtake of the cement truck much because it was so large and created a bit of a blind spot to the nearside ahead of truck. Didn't like the penultimate overtake, if something had been stationary in the pit of the blind dip it could have made for a tricky situation and quick evasive action!
Brother Mycroft said:
The other view is that:- it is OK to overtake providing that you are sure it is clear and so long as you took all caution then if someone should 'jump' the junction there is no culpability on you the overtaker and the sole failur is that of the juction jumper. This view was propsed by me and also supported widely.
This is contradictory.If you are sure it is clear, then what is it that is 'jumping' the junction? It cannot come from thin air, you should have anticipated and allowed for it. You weren't very sure after all were you?
You're performing an action on the road that is not expected by the average driver, so should you overtake and they're coming up to the junction looking right and turning left.
It's all your fault if they crash into you, they're not expecting you to be on the wrong side of the road.
You still haven't answered Reg's question as well, so here it is again
Is it this advice that you are suggesting is wrong, or something else that I've missed?
It's all your fault if they crash into you, they're not expecting you to be on the wrong side of the road.
You still haven't answered Reg's question as well, so here it is again
R U Local said:
Brother Mycroft said:
This is where Mr. Vonhosens and others words here corrupt good driving and the expectations we make on others driving.
It is the very worst sort of advice, his words and others change the rules that allow us to be certain that the message is loud and clear.
I haven't read the whole thread (and I can't be arsed to do so), but from reading the last couple of pages, VH's advice seems to be that you shouldn't overtake if there is a junction or entrance to the right from which a vehicle could emerge.It is the very worst sort of advice, his words and others change the rules that allow us to be certain that the message is loud and clear.
Is it this advice that you are suggesting is wrong, or something else that I've missed?
deeps said:
Brother Mycroft said:
The other view is that:- it is OK to overtake providing that you are sure it is clear and so long as you took all caution then if someone should 'jump' the junction there is no culpability on you the overtaker and the sole failur is that of the juction jumper. This view was propsed by me and also supported widely.
This is contradictory.If you are sure it is clear, then what is it that is 'jumping' the junction? It cannot come from thin air, you should have anticipated and allowed for it. You weren't very sure after all were you?
The video is Regs [RULocal] he posted it as an example of good driving there is nothing wrong with what he did.
However his fellow BiB on here [vonhosen] states quite clearly that if overtaking you pass any juntion on the way [on either side of the road] that you are a "numpty" and that you are driving in a reckless fashion.
But RULocal supports vonhosens view... so we have RULocal saying one thing but doing another [and telling us all it is good driving] and his fellow BIB 'scalding' the rest of us for doing just as RULocal is shown doing.
I just pointed out this bit of hypocrisy in the big 'Overtaking' thread but only encountered embarrassed evasion from the pair.
Laird said:
Yup, have to agree on that evidence, side roads everywhere
The shot at 2:10 shows that the junction/driveways almost form a "crossroads" and I would have thought given vonhosens standpoint Reg should be locked up for that.Reg drove with all due care and attention, he made a good fist of it and in my books the ovetake is quite OK.
Vonhosen became incandescent when I suggested doing exactly that type of manoevre.
Yet, Reg came into that thread supporting von... that is hypocrisy, plain and simple.
Regs question...
"I haven't read the whole thread (and I can't be arsed to do so), but from reading the last couple of pages, VH's advice seems to be that you shouldn't overtake if there is a junction or entrance to the right from which a vehicle could emerge.
Is it this advice that you are suggesting is wrong, or something else that I've missed?"
My answer which runs throughout that entiire thread...
Yes, his advice is just that 'advice' but it is safe to overtake just as you do Reg at 2:11 in your overtaking video where you do that with no less than 3 junctions in the manoeuvre.
"I haven't read the whole thread (and I can't be arsed to do so), but from reading the last couple of pages, VH's advice seems to be that you shouldn't overtake if there is a junction or entrance to the right from which a vehicle could emerge.
Is it this advice that you are suggesting is wrong, or something else that I've missed?"
My answer which runs throughout that entiire thread...
Yes, his advice is just that 'advice' but it is safe to overtake just as you do Reg at 2:11 in your overtaking video where you do that with no less than 3 junctions in the manoeuvre.
Edited by Brother Mycroft on Saturday 27th October 10:40
]
Gorvid said:
The Question said:
You shouldn't overtake if there is a junction or entrance to the right from which a vehicle could emerge.
Is this right or wrong?
Is this right or wrong?
New Highway Code... Rule 167 say
Rule167 said:
DO NOT overtake when you can come into conflict with other road users.
- approaching a junction on either side of the road
- where road narrows
- between kerb und bus or tram when they stopped there
- when you cause another road user to swerve to avoid or slow down
- when you are behind a cyclist und you want to turn left
- when someone inidicating right und you think he should have cancelled his indicator. Wait till they cancel.
(I got a bit cross with some idiot on M6 who did this. I decided to overtake und then try to communicate the indicator thing. It eventually sink in after another half mile - approaching a junction on either side of the road
- where road narrows
- between kerb und bus or tram when they stopped there
- when you cause another road user to swerve to avoid or slow down
- when you are behind a cyclist und you want to turn left
- when someone inidicating right und you think he should have cancelled his indicator. Wait till they cancel.
)I am sure lieber von will tell me off for entering L2 to overtake him all the same because of this rule 
It simple.
It still being COAST aware all the time
Similar advice given in the German Highway Code. I think the French one give a very good essay on how to overtake.. but they left out the bit about junctions ... but then there ist the "priorite a droite"
... Edited by WildCat on Saturday 27th October 11:27
The question is not whether there are junctions on either the left or right, but whether you can see them to be clear and eliminate risk of a vehicle emerging.
The camera view is a fixed view and only represents "some" of what the driver can see. Your eyes are better than a camera and you can move your head so Reg would always have a far better view than the camera showed. Unfortunately YouTube doesn't support Reg-eye view just yet.
As an aside any Advanced driver can tell you the things to be aware of are:
Junction to the right, vehicle in junction turning left but only looking to their right and pulls out into the path of an overtaker - hence don't do it where this might happen. (see it all the time both as a motorist and pedestrian).
Junctions to the left, following slow vehicle e.g. tractor, vehicle in junction wants to turn right, decides to go as can be out and on way well before tractor arrives,
only to meet overtaker who started to overtake tractor at same time - hence don't do it where this might happen.
In both cases if visibility into the junction is good you can see that these situations will not arise so the overtake is on.
The camera view is a fixed view and only represents "some" of what the driver can see. Your eyes are better than a camera and you can move your head so Reg would always have a far better view than the camera showed. Unfortunately YouTube doesn't support Reg-eye view just yet.
As an aside any Advanced driver can tell you the things to be aware of are:
Junction to the right, vehicle in junction turning left but only looking to their right and pulls out into the path of an overtaker - hence don't do it where this might happen. (see it all the time both as a motorist and pedestrian).
Junctions to the left, following slow vehicle e.g. tractor, vehicle in junction wants to turn right, decides to go as can be out and on way well before tractor arrives,
only to meet overtaker who started to overtake tractor at same time - hence don't do it where this might happen.
In both cases if visibility into the junction is good you can see that these situations will not arise so the overtake is on.
Edited by over_the_hill on Saturday 27th October 11:42
Gorvid said:
??
I paste up from above Gorvid said:
The Question said:
You shouldn't overtake if there is a junction or entrance to the right from which a vehicle could emerge.
Is this right or wrong?
Are you incapable of just answering?????
Is it right?
Is it wrong?
One word will do. [As if you could limit yourself to one word ]
There no SHOULD about it, Rule in the New Highway Code .. 167 on page 57 You shouldn't overtake if there is a junction or entrance to the right from which a vehicle could emerge.
Is this right or wrong?
Are you incapable of just answering?????
Is it right?
Is it wrong?
One word will do. [As if you could limit yourself to one word ]
has in C A P I T A L L E T T E R.. ( I spell it out in full
) DO NOT... overtake if there a junction on either side of road - presumably because a car could emerge from there.
It does not say MUST NOT. It say DO NOT with a qualifying "if you MIGHT come into conflict with another road user.
Thus . if there ist collision.. und you claim person pulling out cause this. The insurers could use this rule to go for 50/50 perhaps.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff