[Closed] POLICE, ANPR,and speed checks, whats the problem,with some motorists

Oh, sure. You'd be amazed how many people don't see them. I'm surprised that's even debatable on a cycling forum.

Having skimmed the thread, a few points:

Speeding is not rigorously enforced in the UK and speed cameras are not hidden. Police 'speed traps' are quite rare outside of 30mph limits.

With some discretion, care and observation cars can be driven at brisk, reasonable speed without incident or anti-social behaviour. Overtaking safely is entirely possible.

Drivers [b]should[/b] be aware of their surroundings; including speed limits, conditions, road signs, other road users etc. and base their behaviour upon them. eg. If you are in a 40mph limit and there are pseed camera signs, it shouldn't be too surprising if you see a speed camera....

People do drive along at 40mph (often accompanied by unnecessary braking) in 60mph limits with long queues behind them. Their may well be a general fear of overtaking and their is a very British 'queueing culture'. I have no issue with people overtaking columns of traffic where safe and with visibility. It is much, much easier on a motorbike though.

(the 'queueing culture' also results in merging and jostling at the "800yds" signs before roadworks on dual-carriageways, with much harrumphing and fist-shaking at people who prefer to sensibly merge-in-turn)

A lot of speed limits have been reduced in recent years, which can be frustrating.

Personally, I'm a fan of discretion. As a 'younger man', I did drive a bit 'fast & furious' at times and gained (some expensive and some lucky) experience. I now drive in a more considered/considerate way, but do like to maintain a reasonable pace, with more smoothness.

ps. French/Italian cars may appear to have a lot of dents and possibly do, but there is a seemingly British attitude towards repairing even very minor bodywork damage, possibly linked to the fact that people like to change cars often, rather than when they 'wear out'.

Their may well be a general fear of overtaking and their is a very British 'queueing culture'

(the 'queueing culture' also results in merging and jostling at the "800yds" signs before roadworks on dual-carriageways, with much harrumphing and fist-shaking at people who prefer to sensibly merge-in-turn)

Yeah...this is utter madness - I've seen this a few times with vans deliberately moving to block motorists moving down the clear lane to reach the merge-in-turn bit - It's as if they want to cause as much traffic chaos to as many motorists as possible.

I've seen this a few times with vans deliberately moving to block motorists moving down the clear lane to reach the merge-in-turn bit - It's as if they want to cause as much traffic chaos to as many motorists as possible.

Or maybe they want to cause as much traffic chaos to as few motorists as possible, by preventing selfish drivers delaying as many people as possible. I mean it's not as if the vans are preventing other drivers from using the clear lane - they're just preventing them from whizzing past all the other people who've been waiting longer. The sensible solution if you get blocked in such a way is to carry on behind them and merge in turn when you get to the narrowing. In fact if you look at it objectively, the vans doing this are actually helping to set up the 2 lines of traffic moving at the same speed which you're after.

Unless of course you're not happy with waiting to merge in turn behind the car who was at the back of the queue in the left lane when you got there, and think you're more important than all the people who got to the back of the queue before you?

I fail to see how haphazardly merging into one lane a mile before a lane closure making a needlessly long queue is in any way preferable to two lanes merging at one single point alternately like teeth in a zip.

Lane blocking is just petty. "I've sat here pointlessly for ten minutes, so everyone else will have to as well."

Cougar - Member
I fail to see how haphazardly merging into one lane a mile before a lane closure making a needlessly long queue is in any way preferable to two lanes merging at one single point alternately like teeth in a zip.

Lane blocking is just petty. "I've sat here pointlessly for ten minutes, so everyone else will have to as well."

Absolutely. Driving to Dover last Summer down the dual carriageway we hit a lane closure and queuing traffic some ten miles out. As we 'slowly' traveled up the [clear] outside lane about half a mile from the merge a car pulled out and blocked our path, bloody sat there all the way to the merge then pulled in. WTF!!!

I quietly invented some choice swear words... 👿

Speed can be dangerous, you'll get no argument from me there. But most problems I see on the road are from ignorant or just plan bad drivers. The "I'm driving within the limit so don't need to look where or what I'm doing" brigade are the most dangerous of the lot.

Driving down dual carriageways at 50mph then pulling out last minute right in front of a car travelling at 70mph to over take a lorry. Then take five minutes to pass the lorry causing a tailback, then not pulling in because there's another car half a mile ahead and they might need to pull out again... shoot the bloody lot of them and give me a fast driver who actually drives considerately and is aware of what's going on around them.

Rant over...

As we 'slowly' traveled up the [clear] outside lane about half a mile from the merge a car pulled out and blocked our path, bloody sat there all the way to the merge then pulled in. WTF!!!

So you did the zip and merge at the obstruction in exactly the same way as they do on the continent - with both lanes moving at the same speed until the merge. I don't see what the problem is.

Presumably "slowly" was actually fast relative to the other lane? Do the advocates of "overtaking" the left lane in this way really not understand why other people might have a problem with that sort of behaviour?

One of the 'benefits' of having a quick car (TT) is being able to safely overtake slow drivers (slow = driving well below the speed limit, in near perfect weather conditions.)

I have lost count the number of times I have seen drivers overtake at a slow speed (maybe 5mph more than the car they are overtaking). They are on the opposite side of the road far too long!!

Overtaking should be over and done with in a matter of seconds.

If there is a lane closure 800yds away, why are many people merging in a jostling manner where there is no lane closure?

Because British drivers don't generally merge-in-turn at the obstruction, there is a time advantage for those who do.

If everybody did perform and allow others to do a system of sensible merge-in-turn, then there wouldn't be a clear right hand lane for non-sheep-people to drive down....

A former (German) colleague of mine found it very strange. He said that in Germany people would be getting angry about people not merging-in-turn like a zip.

Then again, Johnny Foreigner really don't know how to queue.

One of the 'benefits' of having a quick car (TT) is being able to safely overtake slow drivers

You don't need a quick car to overtake efficiently, just a bit of forward planning.

Our mobile [s]cash machine[/s] camera van doesn't do people who are overtaking, even if they might be going a bit over the limit.

A couple of nights ago, I was out for a few drinks with some friends at a local pub and had a few too many beers and some rather nice red wine.

Knowing full well I may have been slightly over the limit, I did something I've never done before: I took a bus home. As it happens, I passed a police check point but as it was a bus, they waved it past.

I arrived home safely without incident, which was a real surprise; as I have never driven a bus before and I am not really sure where I got it from.

*applauds*

Good safety advice there from jota.

I met some chaps who did the same thing one night. Apart from the arriving home safely without incident bit. Although that portacabin in the bus depot had always been a bit of an eyesore.

[b]@ Cougar[/b]

Slower car = *much* more road needed to safely overtake.

You can plan all you want, but you may have to sit behind a slow driver for 10 miles before you have enough room to accelerate your 1.0L Fiesta around the car in front!

More road required = more time on the wrong side of the road = higher chance of a crash (logically)

Drop back, plan ahead, start the manoeuvre well in advance, by the time you've reached the vehicle in front you're going almost fast enough to overtake and still accelerating. If the opportunity you've aimed for doesn't open, you can just brake and try again in a bit. Easy money.

The reason no-one can overtake anything in this country is cos as soon as they encounter a slow driver they crawl right up their arse. So a) they can't see a bloody thing and b) when they do finally decide to try and overtake after wobbling towards the white lines for a millennia, they're speed-matched when they pull out and have no chance.

Driving without reasonable consideration - Section 3 RTA 1988

I agree with gingerss point, and it identifies this as a rt offence.

Cougar drives like me, no faffing!

lol at jota.will remember that one..

Or maybe they want to cause as much traffic chaos to as few motorists as possible, by preventing selfish drivers delaying as many people as possible. I mean it's not as if the vans are preventing other drivers from using the clear lane - they're just preventing them from whizzing past all the other people who've been waiting longer. The sensible solution if you get blocked in such a way is to carry on behind them and merge in turn when you get to the narrowing. In fact if you look at it objectively, the vans doing this are actually helping to set up the 2 lines of traffic moving at the same speed which you're after.

Unless of course you're not happy with waiting to merge in turn behind the car who was at the back of the queue in the left lane when you got there, and think you're more important than all the people who got to the back of the queue before you?

Half of them are waiting longer than they should have been as they merged too soon....by doing so they would have moved the filter/merge point up the chain of traffic and caused unstable braking waves, which would of it's own accord caused even more braking in the traffic chain, and congestion. If however...everybody had held their lanes and driven to the obstruction then merged at the obstruction everyone would have got through faster.

Half of them are waiting longer than they should have been as they merged too soon....by doing so they would have moved the filter/merge point up the chain of traffic and caused unstable braking waves, which would of it's own accord caused even more braking in the traffic chain, and congestion. If however...everybody had held their lanes and driven to the obstruction then merged at the obstruction everyone would have got through faster.

So the vans blocking the second lane are helping by encouraging such behaviour?

Though your point does not compute, as the limiting factor is clearly the speed which the traffic gets through the obstruction. "unstable braking waves" make no difference when everybody eventually ends up in a queue in a single lane. There really is no advantage to being in two lines which which are half the length, but which move at half the speed a single line would.

[b]@ Cougar[/b] You're assuming empty roads with very long straights, which is fairly rare in this country....

95% of the time, you won't be able to 'drop back' [several car lengths], as your poor little underpowered engine won't be able to accelerate fast enough to catch up with the car in front (let alone overtake safely) before your window of opportunity runs out...

By driving closer (yet still a safe distance..) behind the target, all you need to do it drop down a gear (or two, depending on speed/engine power), and accelerate around them. Whole operation only takes 2-3 seconds, before you're back on your own side of the road...

When I had my trusty 1.3L Fiesta, I never overtook people (apart from tractors, cyclists, and other very slow traffic), as the poor engine wasn't powerful enough...

aracer - Member
There really is no advantage to being in two lines which which are half the length, but which move at half the speed a single line would.

There really is no advantage to being in two lines which which are half the length, but which move at half the speed a single line would.

There is if it stops the queued traffic causing an obstruction.

You often get drivers using this petty technique on the A46 at the junction for the M4. It causes the traffic to back-up down the road, round the roundabout and onto the slip road.

Oh, and if drivers in the left lane actually let others filter in sensibly (i.e. every-other car) then traffic flows smoother for all.

There really is no advantage to being in two lines which which are half the length, but which move at half the speed a single line would.

There is, when the single lane queue, that is twice as long as it needs to be due to dullards merging too soon, blocks slip roads or junctions that cause a knock on effect to other roads.

Self-righteous road users: How about instead of broadcasting your piss-poor driving skills/petty "thus is an outrage" attitude to all and sundry, read sections 134 and 288 of the Highway Code. I'm pretty sure they recommend merging in turn rather than queuing for bloody miles.

There really is no advantage to being in two lines which which are half the length, but which move at half the speed a single line would.

@ Cougar You're assuming empty roads with very long straights, which is fairly rare in this country....

And you're assuming not? You're also assuming it's an unfamiliar road. But either way, I tend not to overtake on corners irrespective the power of the vehicle; if you don't have any straights, or corners you can look through (eg, no walls blocking your view downstream), then you don't have any safe overtaking opportunities.

When I had my trusty 1.3L Fiesta, I never overtook people (apart from tractors, cyclists, and other very slow traffic), as the poor engine wasn't powerful enough...

Seeing as you advocate driving closer (really, WTF?) then that doesn't surprise me. Strangely though, when I had a 1.1L Fiesta, I didn't have any problems overtaking once I'd worked out how to do it. I got quite adept at it, it just takes a bit more thought and effort than just point and squirt on the loud pedal in a car with a bigger engine.

These days I've got a bit more grunt at my disposal so I can mostly get by with just dropping a cog and booting it; it's lazy but it's easy.

This happened to me on the A65 on Sunday. Car approaching flashed twice at me and the car in front (both doing 60ish in a 60 zone). I was puzzled why until I saw the police car which was completely not hidden in a lay-by on a straight stretch of road, presumably to deter the Sunday bikers from silliness. Anyone driving so fast that couldn't slow down and was still be speeding from the point they spotted the PC to reaching the trap would deserve to be banned in my book for "failing to spot the police".

I take plenty of opportunities. As I said, I live in Wales, overtaking is something you do constantly. What I don't like is waiting patiently for my chance and then someone else taking it away from me. Like I say that is indefensible. I don't care how fast your **** car is, you wait your bloody turn

Ohh, get her! 😉

And actually no, I won't wait for you if I can get past whilst you're still thinking about it! 🙂 In many/most overtakes the speed/power of the car has little to do with being able to make a clean overtake. Confidence, experience, and skill count for lots more. I know people that simply won't overtake, ever. They just don't do it (Not concerned with the reasons why)
I do NOT make risky overtakes, not ever. It's just not worth it, but I know what's possible, and I know (Having never had even a mildly quick car) how to make the best of what I've got avaiable to me. I've seen it many many times, so many it's boring now: Someone at the front of a queue you KNOW wants to pass, but you can tell they haven't got a cat in hells chance of pulling it off (Variety of reasons) and the cars behind also have the same chance.
And I'll just sit and relax and wait and hang waaaay back, then hoof it past 2,3,4 cars all in one go, quick-ish, clean, clinical. I'll do it in palces where 98% of people wouldn't even think it's possible sometimes: Inside of a bend, through a series of bends, off a roundabout that "looks blind" (I'm thinking of one specific one here) but actually is as clear as a bell if you look up the road as you ENTER the roundabout, rather than just looking at the car in front.

We regualrly make a 50 mile journey to the MiL's house, and a good part of that is on the A32, which is a lovely twisty A road, and sometimes its like shooting fish in a barrel. But you've gotta be on the ball! Sometimes I'm trundling along talking to Mrs PP than I spot an overtake I should have seen 20 seconds before, and it's too late by then, because I've not planned it! Blast and damnation!

If there's no chance, no space, then so be it, I'll dawdle along and listen to the radio, but I ain't sitting waiting for some berk just because [5 year old] It's MY turn! MY TURN![/5 year old] Sometimes daddy's got to show you how it's done, sonny... 😉

95% of the time, you won't be able to 'drop back' [several car lengths], as your poor little underpowered engine won't be able to accelerate fast enough to catch up with the car in front (let alone overtake safely) before your window of opportunity runs out...

By driving closer (yet still a safe distance..) behind the target, all you need to do it drop down a gear (or two, depending on speed/engine power), and accelerate around them. Whole operation only takes 2-3 seconds, before you're back on your own side of the road...

WRONG!!!!!!!

That's on of the CAT IN HELLS chance reasons I was talking about above. A slower car need MORE space, not less. You need to be able to SEE and see WAAAAAY in front, then plan. This can mean dropping back as you approach a corner then accelerating up to and round it, so you're at overtaking distance and speed as you hit the start of the straight, but not so close as to have to brake if there a) Is no straight or b) The straight has cars on it coming t'other way! Then if you decide to go (Snappy decision! Gotta be 100% sure!) you can a) Get past with loads of room to spare b) not have to cane 7 bells of living crap out of your car. c) Ovartake 2+ vehicles instead of one..... 😉

It takes time to build up the speed in a slower car, so you have to start earlier, see, so if you do that, you need less opportunity to pass! That's logic, Jim!

This is what I've been taught. This works. 🙂

If you've got a shitload of power you can just pop out and have a quick look without speeding up, then give it the beans if it's clear. Bish bash bosh, no planning required.

In our slowish 1.6 Focus esate, that's how I do it all the time. If I'm on the bike, the second option is avaialbe too. 🙂

I think you might be getting the wrong end of the stick - slow cars *do* need more room to 'get up to speed'. You wouldn't be close behind them in a slow car.... making overtaking more difficult to 'plan'

If you know the road, then you may be able to 'prepare' for overtaking on the long straight the other end of the approaching corner.

I'm fortunately in the bracket of people who drives a powerful car, making overtaking considerably easier...

Well said Mr PP. What is it with overtaking on bends as well? If you can see enough road who cares if it's on a bend or straight, as long as it's safe?

I think a multi car overtake might actually be safer, one manoeuvre instead of several. Quick, clean and decisive.

I'm always a bit wary doing it on the inside of bends. There are a few drivers who like to cut the corner even when they are doing 40mph round a bend that can easily be taken at 60mph without cutting the corner.

You are putting a bit too much trust in other drivers when you overtake them on the inside of a bend.

I've done it a couple of times but you need to observe their driving a little bit first.

If you know the road, then you may be able to 'prepare' for overtaking on the long straight the other end of the approaching corner.

Planning - It's got bugger all to do with knowing the road. In fact, on a road you don't know, you need to plan MORE, (amongst other things)
If you assume that there's an overtaking opportunity around the next (Or the nexr, or then next...) bend then you can plan for it. But you plan to be able to abort too.
If you KNOW the road, you'll know which bends aren't worth planning for, yes? So less planning required! TAAA-DAAAAAAAAA!!!! 🙂

I'm always a bit wary doing it on the inside of bends.

Oh yeah, for sure. But if you're right next to them before/as they turn in, there's sod all they can do about it!

I know a little complex of bends on the way Back from Reading. It's a sweeping, flat, open right followed by a tighter (And poorly surfaced) left. I catch and overtake just before/on the right hander, and STAY on the wrong side, which smooths out the left hander as you turn through a wider arc, enabling more corner speed to be carried, and giving a better view down the road into the bargain! Everyone's a winnahhh!
It's rare I can get it in the car (Traffic) but less so on the bike (Less space needed) and I'm generally hitting the tighter left hander comfortably 10-20 mph over the 60 limit in the car, this being a bend that 50%+ of cars slow down for. It's quite astonishing how quickly everyone seems to travel backwards in your mirrors here, oddly... 🙂

PP is talking sense. My advanced motorbike instructor is always banging on about it. Problem with me is I get fed up closing gaps to an overtaking position on the off chance and am content to follow if someone is going above 50 in a 60 zone, this annoys the hell out of my Fireblade riding instructor. Not sure I agree with PP speeding up bit as such, you speed up to close to an overtaking position NOT to start the overtaking early as that can lead to really problems.

where's that then? I regularly overtake on bends on my bike coming back from Eversley into Reading.

Self-righteous road users: How about instead of broadcasting your piss-poor driving skills/petty "thus is an outrage" attitude to all and sundry, read sections 134 and 288 of the Highway Code. I'm pretty sure they recommend merging in turn rather than queuing for bloody miles.

I fail to see anything there recommending using the empty lane to overtake the queue, which is presumably what those complaining about vans blocking the lane want to do. In fact it says:
"do not switch lanes to overtake queuing traffic"

If that were true all the roadworks (assuming that's the reason for the single lane) could be twice as long and that would have no effect on traffic flow.

It wouldn't. It would slow everybody down a bit more being constrained by a speed limit a bit longer, but no effect on traffic flow - why do you think otherwise?

Of course when I was referring to there being no disadvantage to a single line, I should have clarified as long as it doesn't back up to a junction - sorry. The most recent time I came across such a restriction, the previous junction of any kind was over 2 miles from the back of the queue, and the previous junction likely to be significantly impacted by it about 10 miles.

You wouldn't be close behind them in a slow car.

I wouldn't be close behind someone irrespective of how powerful my car was or wasn't.

I fail to see anything there recommending using the empty lane to overtake the queue

That's just it. You're not overtaking the queue, [i]you're in the second lane of a two-lane queue.[/i] If no-one else is using it, more fool them.

When you're in the supermarket, do you go to the nearly empty queue, or the one next to it with six people waiting so you don't 'jump the queue?' Or, do you join the long queue and then straddle your trolley across the adjacent empty one so that no-one else can use it?

Of course you don't. So why do it in a car?

As PeterPoddy says, looking well ahead of you and looking at what hazards (and opportunities) and cross-views are coming up in the distance, allowing you to plan your approach makes a big difference to cross-country and motorway driving.

A [b]huge[/b] proportion of drivers do not look beyond what is going on immediately in front of them, with a very narrow field-of-view, and often follow the vehicle in front far too closely, rather than hanging back and weighing-up the situation.

You do not need a 'fast' car to get from point to point smoothly, briskly, efficiently(maintaining momentum) and safely. A 'fast' car doesn't make a good driver and beyond point-and-squirt, most people, including myself (without going mad on straight bits), probably wouldn't be much quicker point-to-point in the real world. A motorbike can, of course, be very effective in traffic, due to the narrow width and effortless acceleration.

The argument about whether you should be accelerating or travelling more quickly than the 'overtakee' before pulling out comes down to the situation and to the vehicle. A 'fast' car or bike can indeed allow some more opportunities to overtake. Pulling out for 'a look' before increasing the speed to pass, due to the rapid acceleration available (on a bike you are often easing off the throttle well before pulling back in). A slower vehicle would often require a longer space ahead of the 'overtakee', but these situations don't arise too often.

You're not overtaking the queue, you're in the second lane of a two-lane queue.

If you go at the same speed as the queue in the left lane - which is what happens when the van blocks the right hand lane - then yes. Otherwise you're jumping the queue. You keep advocating something and then complaining when you're forced to do what you're advocating.

When you're in the supermarket, do you go to the nearly empty queue, or the one next to it with six people waiting so you don't 'jump the queue?'

Except it's not a supermarket with multiple checkout queues. In the analogy you're suggesting, there are two checkouts with one queue for each. In which case somebody joining the shorter queue doesn't disadvantage somebody in the longer one. In the case of roadworks there is only one checkout - you're suggesting that if there is space to walk past the queue for a single checkout it's quite legitimate to walk to the front of the existing queue to use that checkout.

You don't do that in the supermarket, so why do it on the road?

I fail to see anything there recommending using the empty lane to overtake the queue, which is presumably what those complaining about vans blocking the lane want to do.

This might help with your confusion as to the correct way to drive.

[url= http://www.doncaster.gov.uk/Images/Merge%20in%20Turn%20leaflet_tcm2-75821.pdf ]The Proper Way To Drive in Roadworks[/url]

indeed aracer - its a two lane queue to a single lane exit and you should queue in both lanes merging in tern at the restriction