Is it time to ban overtaking?
Discussion
With our UK roads getting busier all the time, it's time to start the process to ban overtaking.... and I mean on roads where there is only 1 lane in your direction. Multiple lane roads would not need the ban. Overtaking a non-motor vehicle (like a pedal cycle) would also be an exception to the ban.
Maybe four or five decades ago things were very different: there was much less traffic; there were far fewer fixed hazards (e.g. junctions, entrances etc); there were plenty of opportunities for a safe overtake; there was a wide difference in cars' power and capabilities, meaning that the less powerful cars took ages to get up to a decent speed; speed limits were generally higher, for longer stretches (and some will remember “no limit” A-roads, and later it was 70mph on A-roads, before it became 60).
Things have changed. There is much more traffic. There are frequent fixed hazards. Speed limits are lower, and even basic cars can now happily get up to a decent cruising speed near the limit (where safe). There are far fewer opportunities for safe overtakes, so few in fact that the benefit from executing the manoeuvre (or even allowing it) is minimal. Have you ever worked out how much time you save by doing 60mph instead of say 40mph? It's not a lot. Even if you manage to maintain a full 60 for 5 miles continuously, that's only two-and-a-half minutes off your journey. Doing 60 instead of 50 saves only 1 minute in 5 miles. And for these examples you would need to see a clear 500 yards ahead of you to start the overtake of the car doing 40 (see diagram) without compromising safety in the areas of the inter-car gap or speed limit, even in dry weather. If you're behind a car doing 50 then you need to see a clear 1200 yards ahead. By “clear” I mean no oncoming traffic, no junctions, no “SLOW” in the road, etc. That's almost impossible these days.
The latest IAM magazine has an article on overtaking, and cautions as follows:-
“It's often difficult to overtake without breaking the law.... Is it safe? Is it legal? Is it of any benefit? If the answer to any of those is 'no' then don't do it.... If you're in a 60mph speed limit, behind a car doing 55mph, how will you create a sufficient speed differential to overtake safely? But do you really need to? Is the risk worth it?”
It's obvious to most of us that many drivers do not possess the skills to conduct a safe overtake, yet they still try. I suggest it's not worth letting them try; and given those “safe/legal/benefit” considerations, it's not worth letting anyone try. If you find yourself closing up on a slower car, you need to ask why it's going slowly – there may be a valid reason for it, yet many drivers seem to just assume it's a slow-coach driver. Even if it is – what really is the problem in just staying behind it? You won't lose that much time – it may seem like you will, but try computing some figures. Have a bit more patience.
Well, there's the idea, and yes I'm expecting one or two dissenters, even on PH.
(!) But think of this: it will happen. Four or five decades ago it was unthinkable that we would have an “indoor-non-smoking” rule across the whole country; if the government had imposed it back then, it would have been ignored, and impossible to enforce. But opinion changed. It will change with “no-overtaking” too.
Maybe four or five decades ago things were very different: there was much less traffic; there were far fewer fixed hazards (e.g. junctions, entrances etc); there were plenty of opportunities for a safe overtake; there was a wide difference in cars' power and capabilities, meaning that the less powerful cars took ages to get up to a decent speed; speed limits were generally higher, for longer stretches (and some will remember “no limit” A-roads, and later it was 70mph on A-roads, before it became 60).
Things have changed. There is much more traffic. There are frequent fixed hazards. Speed limits are lower, and even basic cars can now happily get up to a decent cruising speed near the limit (where safe). There are far fewer opportunities for safe overtakes, so few in fact that the benefit from executing the manoeuvre (or even allowing it) is minimal. Have you ever worked out how much time you save by doing 60mph instead of say 40mph? It's not a lot. Even if you manage to maintain a full 60 for 5 miles continuously, that's only two-and-a-half minutes off your journey. Doing 60 instead of 50 saves only 1 minute in 5 miles. And for these examples you would need to see a clear 500 yards ahead of you to start the overtake of the car doing 40 (see diagram) without compromising safety in the areas of the inter-car gap or speed limit, even in dry weather. If you're behind a car doing 50 then you need to see a clear 1200 yards ahead. By “clear” I mean no oncoming traffic, no junctions, no “SLOW” in the road, etc. That's almost impossible these days.
The latest IAM magazine has an article on overtaking, and cautions as follows:-
“It's often difficult to overtake without breaking the law.... Is it safe? Is it legal? Is it of any benefit? If the answer to any of those is 'no' then don't do it.... If you're in a 60mph speed limit, behind a car doing 55mph, how will you create a sufficient speed differential to overtake safely? But do you really need to? Is the risk worth it?”
It's obvious to most of us that many drivers do not possess the skills to conduct a safe overtake, yet they still try. I suggest it's not worth letting them try; and given those “safe/legal/benefit” considerations, it's not worth letting anyone try. If you find yourself closing up on a slower car, you need to ask why it's going slowly – there may be a valid reason for it, yet many drivers seem to just assume it's a slow-coach driver. Even if it is – what really is the problem in just staying behind it? You won't lose that much time – it may seem like you will, but try computing some figures. Have a bit more patience.
Well, there's the idea, and yes I'm expecting one or two dissenters, even on PH.
(!) But think of this: it will happen. Four or five decades ago it was unthinkable that we would have an “indoor-non-smoking” rule across the whole country; if the government had imposed it back then, it would have been ignored, and impossible to enforce. But opinion changed. It will change with “no-overtaking” too.[quote=Mr Tidy]
I came home from Cheshire last week, just over 200 miles. So at 40mph it would have taken 5 hours. But I averaged about 60mph so was home in just over 3 hours.
/quote]
Mr Tidy, Was that 200 miles really all on single lane roads?
I'm not suggesting you should do 40 in a 70 limit if you can do 70!
How much would you have really lost if you just didn't overtake the 40mph people in a 60 limit?
I came home from Cheshire last week, just over 200 miles. So at 40mph it would have taken 5 hours. But I averaged about 60mph so was home in just over 3 hours.
/quote]
Mr Tidy, Was that 200 miles really all on single lane roads?
I'm not suggesting you should do 40 in a 70 limit if you can do 70!
How much would you have really lost if you just didn't overtake the 40mph people in a 60 limit?
Matthen said:
SidewaysSi said:
Mike335i said:
limpsfield said:
Anyone who goes to the trouble of specifying their Toyota avensis is an auto in their profile is a bit odd in my book, OP
Anyone who chooses a Toyota Avensis Automatic is odd in my book. They are not exactly desirable hahaSo probably far more desirable than you think.
Perhaps that is why the OP wants overtaking banned.
.. but I do use the manual override a lot anyway.lord trumpton said:
I can envisage the whole scenario...
OP is sat at home with his t shirt tucked into his trousers and his underpants on his head enthusiastically reading his latest copy of his IAM magazine.
Outside, parked on the block paved drive is his recently washed Toyota Avensis automatic in a drab beige colour; adorned with AA badge and IAM window sticker. The interior sports a blanket on the back seat for his Yorkshire terrier named treacle or similar and the parcel shelf has a few cushions and an umbrella perched on top.
Enthused and motivated by the overtaking article in his pristine copy of the magazine; our OP sets about campaigning to ban overtaking.
OP is sat at home with his t shirt tucked into his trousers and his underpants on his head enthusiastically reading his latest copy of his IAM magazine.
Outside, parked on the block paved drive is his recently washed Toyota Avensis automatic in a drab beige colour; adorned with AA badge and IAM window sticker. The interior sports a blanket on the back seat for his Yorkshire terrier named treacle or similar and the parcel shelf has a few cushions and an umbrella perched on top.
Enthused and motivated by the overtaking article in his pristine copy of the magazine; our OP sets about campaigning to ban overtaking.
For the avoidance of doubt, yes I'm at home, dress code nothing like your description, dipping in to mag occasionally.
Drive isn't block paved, my car isn't beige, no blanket, no dog, no cushions ... umbrella in the boot!
ILoveMondeo said:
I don't really know much about the IAM, but are they in fact just a bunch of miserable old anoraks with not interest in the pleasure of driving what-so-ever but more concerned about being "correct" to the letter of the law/highway code?
No, how wrong could you be!!!!!!!!!!!It's all about safety, whilst still making progress. Recently though the IAM has listened to the "eco" message and you don't have to boot it quite so much now. Example: When I took my test you had to accelerate a decent bit when you moved in to a NSL from a 30 or a 40. Now you don't, you can plan more, i.e. if that NSL stretch isn't very long then what's the point in using the extra fuel to save a few seconds?
There's a road I use often which does exactly that, it's NSL for about 1 mile before a necessary slow down for a roundabout leading on to the dual carriageway, so no point at all in doing 60 or going for an overtake. If I get a chance I'll download it from the dash cam and you can see what you'd do there.
Cold said:
Yipper said:
Banning overtaking would save 100-300 lives per year in the UK, so it is not an entirely silly question.
In India, some claim 50,000 people a year die from reckless overtaking.
Banning overtaking worldwide would save 1-2 million lives per decade.
86.42% of statistics are made up by the person stating them. In India, some claim 50,000 people a year die from reckless overtaking.
Banning overtaking worldwide would save 1-2 million lives per decade.
http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/ddc/c...
sim16v said:
Can't be bothered to read all the replies, but I had a quick look at what the OP drives.
A Toyota Avensis Auto.
If I had to endure one of those, I'd think my driving was over as well.
Just make sure you have more power than you really need, always makes overtaking fun!
Can I just point out that the Avensis auto has a faster 0-60 than a 318i SE, and is only just behind a 320i SE.A Toyota Avensis Auto.
If I had to endure one of those, I'd think my driving was over as well.
Just make sure you have more power than you really need, always makes overtaking fun!
... and I also drive my other half's car and my daughter's car sometimes.
Mr Tidy said:
M4cruiser said:
Mr Tidy said:
I came home from Cheshire last week, just over 200 miles. So at 40mph it would have taken 5 hours. But I averaged about 60mph so was home in just over 3 hours.
Mr Tidy, Was that 200 miles really all on single lane roads?I'm not suggesting you should do 40 in a 70 limit if you can do 70!
How much would you have really lost if you just didn't overtake the 40mph people in a 60 limit?
What has single lane roads got to do with it? Or have you revised your thread heading?!
Based on that I should have sat behind anyone doing 50 mph (or less) on the M6, M42, M5, M40,etc. I mean, we can't overtake can we?
What a T*at! Note that "dual carriageways" or "motorways" have nothing to do with it, the essential part is " 1 lane " .. and there are some multiple carriageway roads with only 1 lane.
Chromegrill said:
Ban overtaking? A step too far. But seriously, how often does the average motorist need to overtake? Twenty years ago many of the lorries on the road were a good deal less powerful than they are now and I'd have to overtake or face long delays. But as pointed out above, often even "slower" vehicles be they cars or lorries are now going much closer to the speed limit and I don't need to overtake nearly so often. That even of itself makes overtaking more dangerous - partly because I have to drive parallel to the vehicle I'm overtaking for longer as the difference in speed is less, and partly because the less often I overtake, the less confident and well practiced I am when I do overtake. And I'm sure that some of the people who end up in hospital having wrapped their car around a tree or an oncoming vehicle swore blind before their life changing accident that they were safer than average drivers. After all, most people think they are safer than average.
Thank you Chromegrill. Quite a sensible contribution! Yes the distance on the "wrong side" of the road does increase a lot, e.g. to overtake at 60 a car/lorry doing 50 you need at least 611 yards on the wrong side (up from 247 for overtaking someone doing 40) - unless you compromise on speed limit and/or gap, as hinted at by others.akirk said:
if you are happy with people overtaking on a dual carriageway, then the only negative about overtaking on a single carriageway is that people don't do it well - so teach them to overtake, don't ban what you don't understand / know how to do...
The difference is the risk/benefit balance. On a multiple lane dual carriageway (/motorway) the risk is less (because you're not on the "wrong" side of the road) and also the benefit is greater because you're more likely to maintain the 60 or 70 for a longer period once past (no side junctions, double lines, traffic lights etc).On a single lane (/carriageway) the risk is higher (you're on the wrong side) and the benefit is less - because you will soon be baulked again, e.g. by a junction, a parked car or whatever.
That's why I'm "happy" as you put is with people overtaking on a multiple lane road. Not so much a dual carriageway thing but a lane thing.
AMGJocky said:
Patrick Bateman said:
How has this s
t shower of a thread got to this length?
Because PHt shower of a thread got to this length?To the others, well, your just retorting with your post full of swear words (and not much else) isn't the best way to make your side of the argument.. I'm not saying I'm the best driver, or best mathematician, and I never said I had the fastest car on here ... !!! ... so you are of course free to point out any errors in my logic.
But I rarely overtake - not because I can't, but because of this:- I like to do 60 in a 60 limit where safe, but when I come up behind a slower vehicle I don't immediately try to go past, I take a few moments to consider - "Is it worth it?" and more often than not I think ahead and find there will be a junction, or a village, or something else in the next mile or two ahead, and so that maximum theoretical saving of "two and a half minutes in five miles" will never happen, I stay behind, save the fuel and wear and tear, and quite often the problem disappears anyway (e.g. the slow one turns off).
I do agree however that much of this takes place in the more crowded South (e.g. Birmingham - Bristol - Bracknell). You will have gathered that much of my normal longer journey driving is on the M4 / A34 / M3 areas, and the A / B roads in between. I did a long Scotland trip last summer, including the A9 between Edinburgh and Inverness, for which there's no point overtaking on the single lane bits with the average speed cameras because a two-lane bit appears from time to time.
This is an example of what I've been going on about. Audi exceeds the speed limit by about 50%, but given the road network ahead he gains very little by taking that risk and burning the extra fuel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DkyzwWPIiA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DkyzwWPIiA
Strudul said:
Have you considered that some people don't overtake to save time or fuel?
Personally I just enjoy overtaking and much prefer driving with nobody in front of me dictating my speed.
Have you considered that the public roads are for transport, and if you want to have fun playing with other people's safety then you should go to a track at weekends or something! On the roads you are mixing with all sorts of drivers, from expert to completely incompetent.Personally I just enjoy overtaking and much prefer driving with nobody in front of me dictating my speed.
Looking at the "collisions" on video (including the "Car Crash Britain" programme on digital TV) it's clear that many crashes occur when one driver who is doing a "violation" meets another driver who is incompetent. This could so easily have happened in the Audi clip if the Fiesta behind the camera car decided to start an overtake without checking if an Audi was coming past.
havoc said:
One interesting observation - they go into a 30-limit and it appears that the speed of the dashcam-car didn't really reduce.
So either he was doing c.30 in a (purported*) 40, or he continued doing 40 in the 30! Can we have a show of hands as to what sort of driving we think is more dangerous?!?
* Freeze it just after the frame-rate accelerates - hard to be sure but looks like the repeater-pole on the left below the triangle says "50" - dashcam man may well be a liar!
40 is the maximum anyone is allowed to do along there. On that stretch there are plenty of hazards, i.e. something like: a sign for a double bend, a sign for a junction, the word "SLOW" painted in the road twice, signs for sharp deviation, and many farm entrances. You wouldn't expect a continuous 40 surely? Less than 40 is appropriate.So either he was doing c.30 in a (purported*) 40, or he continued doing 40 in the 30! Can we have a show of hands as to what sort of driving we think is more dangerous?!?
* Freeze it just after the frame-rate accelerates - hard to be sure but looks like the repeater-pole on the left below the triangle says "50" - dashcam man may well be a liar!
Johnnytheboy said:
g7jhp said:
b) User name M4Cruiser - hope that's the inside lane and not the middle
Have a look at his posting history - IIRC he's quite the MLM...The road on the film is a cross country route to the main arterial roads, where I was happy to cruise along once I'd reached them.
Yes, as someone said above, the Audi man probably knew the road better than me, he seems to live locally, so shall I go and change the signs to "40 except for those that know the road".
S. Gonzales Esq. said:
What I'd really like is for dashcam guy to upload a compilation of all the times he's been overtaken and never seen the overtaker again...
.
Ok then, here's one. Let's see how many people think this Yaris's overtake was safe and legal. (It was illegal and unsafe.) .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QseMDIMoQkE
The visibility to the right is poor, and there was something coming, and I think it slowed when it saw the Yaris.
Edited by M4cruiser on Wednesday 19th July 19:20
Edited by M4cruiser on Wednesday 19th July 19:57
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff