Roundabouts - Giving Way ot the Right

[RegMolehusband]

(I hate not being able to edit typos in the title!)

Having been driving for 36 years and the equivalent of 60 times safely around the world I tend to think I know it all. However can somebody please clarify the roundabout give way rule for me?

The Highway Code says give priority to traffic approaching from your right, unless directed otherwise by signs, road markings or traffic lights.

So does that simply mean give way to cars on the right that are already on the roundabout? That's the way I've always interpreted it.

So say I'm approaching a smallish roundabout at the 6:00 position and as I'm about to enter it somebody else approaches from 3:00 rather assertively and a little too quickly (but I'm easily going to be on the roundabout first) - who should stand on the brakes? I have to say I practice the "I'm on the roundabout pal - tough" approach.

Ta

"Reg"

Edited by RegMolehusband on Monday 28th January 21:26

[Munter]

I think your in the wrong there. If you both enter at the same time there will be no collision and no cause to give way. Otherwise give way to the vehicle that will approach your entrance to the roundabout from the right.

[GaryHetherington]

If someone is on the roundabout they have priority. Otherwise it is give way to the right. I wouldn't suggest a race to get onto the roundabout first though.

[flemke]

On a big RAB with a good deal of space between approaches, it shouldn't be a problem.
Aren't smaller RABs the tricky ones, in this context?

ISTM that if there is any room at all for doubt, the car on the left is obliged to wait for the car from the right to go first. Only if the driver on the left is certain that he would both clear the car on the right and also that by doing so that he would not cause the car on the right to alter its speed or path, or suggest to a competent driver that such might be necessary, should the left driver go first.

[RegMolehusband]

Yes Flemke I'm referring to the smaller roundabouts and yours is probably the right answer. It just galls me a bit that I have to give way to somebody approaching too fast that is treating it more like a T junction than a roundabout.

[flemke]

RegMolehusband said:

Yes Flemke I'm referring to the smaller roundabouts and yours is probably the right answer. It just galls me a bit that I have to give way to somebody approaching too fast that is treating it more like a T junction than a roundabout.

RMH,

I may well have it wrong, but if the driver from the right manifestly has no need to slow for a vehicle from his right, then I think he is entitled to carry on through the RAB at a speed that would be appropriate if there were no other vehicles within a mile. That is, for him it is a T-junction.
I don't think that the vehicle on the left is at liberty to delay the progress of the one on the right.

[hugoagogo]

flemke said:

On a big RAB with a good deal of space between approaches, it shouldn't be a problem.
Aren't smaller RABs the tricky ones, in this context?

ISTM that if there is any room at all for doubt, the car on the left is obliged to wait for the car from the right to go first. Only if the driver on the left is certain that he would both clear the car on the right and also that by doing so that he would not cause the car on the right to alter its speed or path, or suggest to a competent driver that such might be necessary, should the left driver go first.

i impacted a missan micra whilst riding a VFR400 (threw my pillion right over her roof! nobody hurt unbelievably) in just this way. approaching the rab, micra pulled out from my left just as i was about to enter/go straight through. silly mistake on my part that could have ended up al lot nastier, but i thought it was legally her fault

i was done for careless, local mags basically said "you must have been going too fast or she'd (yes, of course it was a she) have seen you"
another woman about 200yds away backed up her tale "he just came out of nowhere!"
ers

TPO insurance and a dead bike

ho hum, we live and learn, i'm not bitter, much

[sultanbrown]

RegMolehusband said:

Yes Flemke I'm referring to the smaller roundabouts and yours is probably the right answer. It just galls me a bit that I have to give way to somebody approaching too fast that is treating it more like a T junction than a roundabout.

Better to be slightly irritated with a straight car than smugly correct with a bent one.

[Who me ?]

RegMolehusband said:

Yes Flemke I'm referring to the smaller roundabouts and yours is probably the right answer. It just galls me a bit that I have to give way to somebody approaching too fast that is treating it more like a T junction than a roundabout.

Suspect that this is a form of Russian roulette by this type of driver - can he force right of way by acting aggressively . Sometimes pays to appear to call their bluff (with foot poised over brake pedal) . Another sign of the breakdown of driving standards,I'm afraid.

[vonhosen]

Mini Roundabout


a) A vehicle entering the junction must give priority to vehicles coming from the right at the transverse road marking shown in diagram 1003.3 associated with the sign or, if the marking is not for the time being visible, at the junction; and

(b) a vehicle proceeding through the junction must keep to the left of the white circle at the centre of the marking shown in diagram 1003.4, unless the size of the vehicle or the layout of the junction makes it impracticable to do so; and

(c) no vehicle shall proceed past the marking shown in diagram 1003.4 in a manner or at a time likely -

(i) to endanger any person, or

(ii) to cause the driver of another vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

[WildCat]

Sister-in-law - the one who work in Altrincham sometime travel back through what she call the "rural scenics". She says there ist one mini-roundabout on her way back on A6144 whereby she notices that on-coming traffic do not often indicate they intend to turn right - und that this has caused collisions in the past there as drivers think they go straight on from the road position und enter the roundabout into path of the right turner.

Which driver would be liable in such a situation und which one would you be collaring here?

It a tight right turn - from the photo I saw when she asked for thoughts as to why a potential black spot. I think she take a photo the last time it happened und she held up.

There ist another which Mad Doc post up on safepeed site for discussion. Several accidents occur und locals claim traffic lights would be better than the mini-roundabout. The council plan to put another big sign there instead

[7db]

This whole "to the right" thing is a bit of a confusion.

You are pulling onto a major road (albeit a circular one) across a give way line. (Often not actually a GW, but a roundabout entry line, although there are some with GW triangles).

The law simply asks you not to endanger anyone on the roundabout (ie cause them to change speed or course -- more than they are doing already to get round).

If someone were going round the roundabout the wrong way, then you should yield to the left. (and I'd stay well out of their way too).

[dilbert]

Probably not the Highway code;

If they drive their front into the side of you and they are on your right, it's their fault.
If you drive your front into the side of them, and you are on their left, it's your fault.

If in doubt give way to the right. If you want to get anywhere, show them the whites of your eyeballs!


Whilst this works on a mini roundabout, you'd be pretty brave to try it at a tee junction!

Edited by dilbert on Tuesday 29th January 00:39

[flemke]

dilbert said:

Probably not the Highway code;

If they drive their front into the side of you and they are on your right, it's their fault...

Why would that be?
The driver on the right, in approaching and entering the RAB, is justified in expecting you on his left either to hold station if you have stopped or, if you are approaching the RAB, to brake sufficiently to give way to him. If instead you set off or carry on into his path without regard to him, it is quite possible that his front could hit your side. In that case, however, it would be your fault for having failed to give way to him.

He has priority but, even if he did not have it, if the two of you made contact either into your side or into his, by definition he will have been farther into the RAB than you were when you collided.

[dilbert]

flemke said:

dilbert said:

Probably not the Highway code;

If they drive their front into the side of you and they are on your right, it's their fault...

Why would that be?
The driver on the right, in approaching and entering the RAB, is justified in expecting you on his left either to hold station if you have stopped or, if you are approaching the RAB, to brake sufficiently to give way to him. If instead you set off or carry on into his path without regard to him, it is quite possible that his front could hit your side. In that case, however, it would be your fault for having failed to give way to him.

He has priority but, even if he did not have it, if the two of you made contact either into your side or into his, by definition he will have been farther into the RAB than you were when you collided.

I hear what you're saying, but you can't guess what he other guy drives like! You have to take that on spec.

If you see the RAB coming, see the other guy approaching slowly, and brake right down to the point you could stop should he decide to do something, you've carved off two thirds of your speed, and could already be five car lengths beyond the roundabout.

Thats the point where you stop completely and wait patiently for the guy to the right to make his move.

As you sit there you think to yourself that you were going straight on, so there was no need for any indicator, and wonder why (with your indicator off throughout) the guy opposite has stopped to give way to you, when he had no indication that you would cross his path.

In fact it would seem that the guy to the right is waiting for the guy opposite. STALEMATE!

Sod it, I'll just pull away anyhow.

Double sod it, the guy to the right has slammed straight into the side of me!

The only way someone is going to hit me in the side, is because either the throttle got stuck buried in the floor, and the clutch cable snapped, or they were trying to ram me.

The shorter the period for which you are on the roundabout, the less decisioneering there needs to be. Occasionaly I meet my match, and lock the wheels up.

This is the benefit of mainly using a car worth less than £200. No bugger is brave enough to give you grief. When I used to drive a more expensive car regularly, I had to be pretty careful, but there were different advantages.

[Parrot of Doom]

A roundabout is just a circular bit of road.

Treat each junction on it as you would any other junction.

Thats it.

[dilbert]

Parrot of Doom said:

A roundabout is just a circular bit of road.

Treat each junction on it as you would any other junction.

Thats it.

Does that mean it's wrong to measure the altitude achieved from the central omnidirectional launch ramp?

[flemke]

dilbert said:

flemke said:

dilbert said:

Probably not the Highway code;

If they drive their front into the side of you and they are on your right, it's their fault...

Why would that be?
The driver on the right, in approaching and entering the RAB, is justified in expecting you on his left either to hold station if you have stopped or, if you are approaching the RAB, to brake sufficiently to give way to him. If instead you set off or carry on into his path without regard to him, it is quite possible that his front could hit your side. In that case, however, it would be your fault for having failed to give way to him.

He has priority but, even if he did not have it, if the two of you made contact either into your side or into his, by definition he will have been farther into the RAB than you were when you collided.

I hear what you're saying, but you can't guess what he other guy drives like! You have to take that on spec.

If you see the RAB coming, see the other guy approaching slowly, and brake right down to the point you could stop should he decide to do something, you've carved off two thirds of your speed, and could already be five car lengths beyond the roundabout.

Thats the point where you stop completely and wait patiently for the guy to the right to make his move.

As you sit there you think to yourself that you were going straight on, so there was no need for any indicator, and wonder why (with your indicator off throughout) the guy opposite has stopped to give way to you, when he had no indication that you would cross his path.

In fact it would seem that the guy to the right is waiting for the guy opposite. STALEMATE!

Sod it, I'll just pull away anyhow.

Double sod it, the guy to the right has slammed straight into the side of me!

The only way someone is going to hit me in the side, is because either the throttle got stuck buried in the floor, and the clutch cable snapped, or they were trying to ram me.

The shorter the period for which you are on the roundabout, the less decisioneering there needs to be. Occasionaly I meet my match, and lock the wheels up.

This is the benefit of mainly using a car worth less than £200. No bugger is brave enough to give you grief. When I used to drive a more expensive car regularly, I had to be pretty careful, but there were different advantages.

There are numerous scenarios. The basic point is that the car on the left has got to give way to the car on the right, not only to the extent that there is no collision, but also to the extent that the car on the right is not bothered, does not have to alter his speed for your sake (different from altering his speed for the road layout or to check to his right), nor to alter his path.
If you can do that effctively (remembering that you also need to be sure that there is no one on your left who may be about to do something stupid), then carry on.
It is not, however, a game of chicken, nor a game of Whoever-gets-to-the-give-way-line-first-has-priority, although I'm sure you have seen, as I have done, an increasing number of moron drivers who wrongly believe the contrary.

Cheers.

[dilbert]

flemke said:

dilbert said:

flemke said:

dilbert said:

Probably not the Highway code;

If they drive their front into the side of you and they are on your right, it's their fault...

Why would that be?
The driver on the right, in approaching and entering the RAB, is justified in expecting you on his left either to hold station if you have stopped or, if you are approaching the RAB, to brake sufficiently to give way to him. If instead you set off or carry on into his path without regard to him, it is quite possible that his front could hit your side. In that case, however, it would be your fault for having failed to give way to him.

He has priority but, even if he did not have it, if the two of you made contact either into your side or into his, by definition he will have been farther into the RAB than you were when you collided.

I hear what you're saying, but you can't guess what he other guy drives like! You have to take that on spec.

If you see the RAB coming, see the other guy approaching slowly, and brake right down to the point you could stop should he decide to do something, you've carved off two thirds of your speed, and could already be five car lengths beyond the roundabout.

Thats the point where you stop completely and wait patiently for the guy to the right to make his move.

As you sit there you think to yourself that you were going straight on, so there was no need for any indicator, and wonder why (with your indicator off throughout) the guy opposite has stopped to give way to you, when he had no indication that you would cross his path.

In fact it would seem that the guy to the right is waiting for the guy opposite. STALEMATE!

Sod it, I'll just pull away anyhow.

Double sod it, the guy to the right has slammed straight into the side of me!

The only way someone is going to hit me in the side, is because either the throttle got stuck buried in the floor, and the clutch cable snapped, or they were trying to ram me.

The shorter the period for which you are on the roundabout, the less decisioneering there needs to be. Occasionaly I meet my match, and lock the wheels up.

This is the benefit of mainly using a car worth less than £200. No bugger is brave enough to give you grief. When I used to drive a more expensive car regularly, I had to be pretty careful, but there were different advantages.

There are numerous scenarios. The basic point is that the car on the left has got to give way to the car on the right, not only to the extent that there is no collision, but also to the extent that the car on the right is not bothered, does not have to alter his speed for your sake (different from altering his speed for the road layout or to check to his right), nor to alter his path.
If you can do that effctively (remembering that you also need to be sure that there is no one on your left who may be about to do something stupid), then carry on.
It is not, however, a game of chicken, nor a game of Whoever-gets-to-the-give-way-line-first-has-priority, although I'm sure you have seen, as I have done, an increasing number of moron drivers who wrongly believe the contrary.

Cheers.

I see the state of play being as follows, the more grief you give, the more you get.

However, you have to accept the precedent of the madman in a £200 pound heap. Simply put, he less to loose than you do. Feel aggrieved, that you spent so much money on your car, and you are still at the bottom of the heap. Feel sad that the world is such an unequal place.

Argue with it on the road at your peril.

Watch them bite the dust though, when the road opens up.

Edited by dilbert on Tuesday 29th January 03:03