I still get overtaken when I’m next in line to overtake and clearly moving out to look down the road. I also get overtaken when I’m two or three back, and am intending to overtake.

Then maybe you should MTFU, hurry up and just get on with it – otherwise don’t complain when someone else takes the oppertunity that was staring you clearly in the face for a few seconds. If you’re intent on an overtake then clearly you’re taking far too long to decide if people further behind you in the ‘queue’ as you put it are already overtaking before you’ve had the chance to think about it. The problem it would seem is you not being clear in your communication or slow to make an assessment of the situation, not the other drivers.

A friend of mine would always hesitate at the bar when it came to chatting up the ladies. He would chat to them, buy them drinks but never really make a clear move. Normally some other bloke would steam in there from under his nose, make a move and he went home empty handed again. My mate was always annoyed, but the reality was that he didn’t own the girl or the right to make the first move just because he spoke to her first. Same with driving – just being stuck first behind a truck doesn’t give you automatic first rights to overtake. That’s why it says in the highway code to always check behind you before starting an overtake – just in case someone else is also overtaking. It’s not rude – it’s expected and part of normal driving.

Thanks for the highway code spam, but it’s not really relevant.

WTF – are you serious? Perhaps you should educate the 30 million other drivers to your ‘alternative highway code’ then so that they know what to expect before incurring your road rage out on the road.

For your information, when a duel carridgeway merges into one lane then the highway code says to use both lanes fully then merge in turn at the obstruction. This is to make the traffic flow as smooth as possible.

It doesn’t say everyone must queue in the left lane causing obstructions on the slip roads. With your logic I bet you’re the kind of driver who thinks it’s your moral obligation to sit straddling both lanes to prevent people from sneaking round on the right? If you are then you need to get real – not only are you ignoring the highway code but you’re acting like a selfish spoilt child.

molgrips – Member

It’s a flow of traffic, not a queue. You don’t have a spot.

Disagree.

Why would it not be a queue? If we’re all waiting to overtake, and have been sat there for 10 mins, why should you get to go first when you’ve only just arrived?

Molegrips, have you read the highway code regarding, overtaking? I suggest you do and maybe you won’t get so frustrated in the future. Here it is below for reference. Nothing about having to wait in a ‘check out style queue’ as you put it. These are the official rules – not some self made moral guide that you insist on adhering to.

138. Before overtaking you should make sure

• the road is sufficiently clear ahead
• the vehicle behind is not beginning to overtake you
• there is a suitable gap in front of the vehicle you plan to overtake.

139. Overtake only when it is safe to do so. You should

• not get too close to the vehicle you intend to overtake
use your mirrors, signal when it is safe to do so, take a quick sideways glance into the blind spot area and then start to move out
• not assume that you can simply follow a vehicle ahead which is overtaking; there may only be enough room for one vehicle move quickly past the vehicle you are overtaking, once you have started to overtake. Allow plenty of room. Move back to the left as soon as you can but do not cut in
• take extra care at night and in poor visibility when it is harder to judge speed and distance
• give way to oncoming vehicles before passing parked vehicles or other obstructions on your side of the road
• only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
• stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left
• give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would a car when overtaking (see Rules 188, 189 and 191.

140. Large vehicles. Overtaking these is more difficult. You should

• drop back to increase your ability to see ahead. Getting too close to large vehicles will obscure your view of the road ahead and there may be another slow moving vehicle in front
• make sure that you have enough room to complete your overtaking manoeuvre before committing yourself. It takes longer to pass a large vehicle. If in doubt do not overtake
• not assume you can follow a vehicle ahead which is overtaking a long vehicle. If a problem develops, they may abort overtaking and pull back in.

141. You MUST NOT overtake

• if you would have to cross or straddle double white lines with a solid line nearest to you (but see Rule 108)
• if you would have to enter an area designed to divide traffic, if it is surrounded by a solid white line
• the nearest vehicle to a pedestrian crossing, especially when it has stopped to let pedestrians cross
• if you would have to enter a lane reserved for buses, trams or cycles during its hours of operation
• after a ‘No Overtaking’ sign and until you pass a sign cancelling the restriction.

142. DO NOT overtake if there is any doubt, or where you cannot see far enough ahead to be sure it is safe. For example, when you are approaching

• a corner or bend
• a hump bridge
• the brow of a hill.

143. DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example

• approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
• where the road narrows
• when approaching a school crossing patrol
• between the kerb and a bus or tram when it is at a stop
• where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works
• when you would force another vehicle to swerve or slow down
• at a level crossing
• when a vehicle is indicating right, even if you believe the signal should have been cancelled. Do not take a risk; wait for the signal to be cancelled.

144. Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you.

145. Do not hold up a long queue of traffic, especially if you are driving a large or slow moving vehicle. Check your mirrors frequently, and if necessary, pull in where it is safe and let traffic pass.

Molegrips, sorry but from your post you seem like someone who drives too close to the obstruction in front and then when a gap appears, far too hesitant to take the opportunity. Perhaps try and position yourself better. There’s no harm if it’s clear indicating when you see a gap, pulling over to the opposite carriageway so that you can have a proper look and then going for the overtake if it’s safe to do so. Drivers behind would clearly see your intention then and you wouldn’t have the problems you do.

2. Proves my point re number 1. Person overtaking you obviously has better anticipation and road reading than you.

Often the case – many people seem to drive right up the arse of the truck that they are trying to overtake meaning that their visibility is practically zero. If they dropped back a bit then they would get a much better view of the road ahead and be able to see a passing oppertunity before (as molegrips put it) – someone else gets in there from behind and overtakes first. Perhaps that person behind had better visibility.

When you see an oppertunity to go and it’s safe you take it – not dither around wondering if the person first in the queue is going to finally pluck up the courage to go or not. 99% of the time the person at the front of the queue does not go.

Also having a fast car opens up many more safe overtaking opportunities so I can often go when others can’t or won’t. Don’t see why this should be a problem for anyone? It’s hardly queue jumping.

There’s no rules that says the person directly behind the truck must go first for the overtake. It’s no wonder if people actually believe this that they get their piss boiled so easily.

This mentality that someone who overtakes a queue of traffic in stages is a queue jumper is a load of rubbish. 99% of the time on any NSL road there’s a lorry doing 40 and a queue of traffic sat behind who would never have the confidence to overtake in a million years. So they just sit there at 40 behind the truck and grumble and flash their headlights at anyone who dares to safely have a go.

Sometimes it’s not safe to overtake the whole line of traffic but it is completely safe to do it in 2 or 3 stages. What’s people’s problem with this provided it’s done safely – I don’t understand? Do they just expect everyone else to sit behind them whilst they fail to take advantage of overtaking opportunity after overtaking opportunity? Maybe their just annoyed at their own missed opportunity or their own inadaquacy as a driver? Perhaps more training would help them make progress safely?

I overtake like this on a regular basis because otherwise I’d be sat behind a slow moving vehicle like a lemming too, but then having a car with over 350 horsepower helps a lot. It’s amazing how quickly you can pass stuff making overtaking quite fun, and if you can’t have fun then what else left is there in life? Making full use of the performance available also means much less time exposed to danger on the wrong side of the road so safer for everyone all round.

Binners, I’m sorry about your business but any business is going to suffer some some setbacks – pretty big in your case but this isn’t typical from those I speak to. Yes there are some dodgy bast**ds around but again there are plenty of decent people too.

I know some people who have started some very successful businesses over the last few years – in the middle of a recession, with very little in the way of cash to fund the startup. So I would argue that this can be the perfect time to start, particularly in these cash strapped times businesses that can undercut and offer better service than a much larger competitor.

anagallis_arvensis – Member

So we have two examplrs Lord Sugar and a bloke in Rochdale I suppose any examples of people who havent become rich are just workshy?

Nope, not everyone wants to become rich but my point is that if you’re not happy on minimum wage then it’s up to you to do something about it rather than just whinge and bitch on here. If you throw in the towel and blame bad luck, your troubled upbringing, someone else or ‘the system’ then you’re never going to achieve what you want. There are opportunities out there for everyone if you’re prepared to look and work hard enough.

ernie_lynch – Member

But he was still GIVEN the opportunity, this bit was not of his own making.

Stop nitpicking by introducing facts into the argument.

Or being “pedantic” as rebel12 likes to call it.

Changed my mind – I think you are being pathetic, not pedantic.

You can only make a success of the opportunities that present themselves. Not everyone is lucky enough to have the opportunities.

Stop being pedantic – honestly you negative doomster types could make any reason for not achieving what you think is rightfully yours without having to make the necessary sacrifices.

This guy got his opportunity from being unemployed, and for practically working for free for several months. If you think that’s luck then you need your head examining.

The jobcentre and various training organisations place thousands of people into this type of scheme every week yet many who get placed don’t get anywhere because they don’t like the pay, can’t be arsed to turn up to work on time or work hard when you get there. By your definition I suppose you would define that as ‘Bad Luck’?

anagallis_arvensis – Member

Everybody does have a chance, and I buy a lottery ticket based on chance but my chance is very small. Some people have very small chances in life others very big. The example of one person beating the odds is the same if its a lottery winner or Lord Sugar, fairly meaningless.

Get real, Lord Sugar was a famous example not the norm.

The norm might be considered a chap I know who failed completely at school, lived in a really bad estate in Rochdale, left with no qualifications. Jobcentre found him a job as a trainee carpenter on almost zero pay whilst training. Found he liked it and worked very hard for the next few years. Whilst working on various shopfits he thought ‘I could do this’.

Left, bought a cheap van and took on contract work. Contracts grew through him working hard and delivering a good and reliable job. Now he has 30 others working for him and yes he’s probably a millionaire I’d say – drives an Aston anyway. His company is now one of my firm’s suppliers.

So the chance is there for everyone – just depends how hard you’re prepared to work, not luck.

I’m just trying to stress how ridiculous the notion is that we live in some kind of meritocracy, where everyone has an equal chance to succeed.

I didn’t say that everyone had an equal chance – but everybody does have a chance and despite some frankly horrendous upbringings there are some real success stories out there.

Yes Binners I agree it’s a shame that a lot of politicians have large inherited wealth but that’s who we’re stuck with for the moment. Shockingly it’s just the same whether Conservative, Labour or Lib Dem.

Anyway here’s food for thought though: Just Googled this – I’m not a Mail Reader BTW

binners – Member

Think you will find that most successful business people are successful not because of luck but because they have the desire to work hard, work smart, well past the 9-5 and because they don’t expect to be spoon fed stuff on a plate.

So what your saying is that everyone who isn’t successful is basically a layabout, and its all their own fault? For their failure to grasp one of the plentiful opportunities for self-advancement in our utopian meritocracy?

No I’m not saying that, just that for most people in the UK the opportunities are there if you really want it. If you don’t then fine but please don’t whinge at those who have taken these opportunties, provide jobs for others (regardless whether minimum wage or not), and now as a result earn more than you do.

Many people if you ask them would want to be rich – some choose to work hard and take risks to get there, some choose to work hard but are content to work for someone else – making their company owners rich, a few are born with it, others want to be rich but decide to play the lottery and watch daytime telly instead.

Different courses for different horses, and before you ask, no I am not IDS or rich – but I don’t resent those that have achieved this through hard work if that’s what they want.

Push the rich on the subject and they will reply with the old line that’s its all there for the taking, just got to work for it.

But it is though isn’t it? Okay might be a lot more difficult if you’re from a poorer background but still more than possible.

A Famous Example

Think you will find that most successful business people are successful not because of luck but because they have the desire to work hard, work smart, well past the 9-5 and because they don’t expect to be spoon fed stuff on a plate.

What’s the answer? Force companies to spend a min portion of profit on salaries?

. . . no just plain old Communism, or so it would seem for some on here 🙄

Maybe we should just be grateful that we have a minimum wage in the UK, however low it may be. 90% of the world’s population does not have this luxury.

Funny how you only ever hear of folk who dont earnt the minimum wage [ and never had I assume] suggesting it is too high…like they would work for that rate.

I used to work for that – and a lot, lot less before the minimum wage was even introduced. Cr*p jobs yes but they provided good experience and experience to go on and do other things.

the rich get richer and the poor pay the piper – same old Tories

Well if you can’t beat them join them – start a business, take some more training, start to earn more rather than just whinging at he status quo. Tories may not be doing a great job at the moment but Labour or the other shower don’t really offer a credible alternative do they?

A 1988 copy of ‘Escort’ with readers wives!

However, on occasion I’ve entered an establishment in North Wales, seen the locals chatting merrily in English, then switch seamlessly to Welsh when they realise I’m there.

This is quite common. Most Welsh speakers speak a mixture of Welsh and English at most times, often switching between the two seamlessly and fluently. If it’s happened to you then it’s probably pure co-incidence, manifested in your mind because you’ve already heard all the urban myth’s. Walk into any local village pub anywhere in the UK as an outsider and you’ll likely get some unusual stares. People are interested, that’s all. Have you never sat in a pub or cafe yourself and people watched? Sometimes if you smile and say hello then you will realise that 99.9% of people are very friendly. Anyway if people start speaking Welsh then so what. If you feel that’s a threat then it’s your paranoia that is the problem, not them. Perhaps try and learn a few words of Welsh yourself and I’m sure the locals will appreciate it, or at the very least they’ll have a laugh over your bad pronounciation.

The best fun I had driving recently was a 1.2 3 cylinder Corsa in Ireland.

It handled well but was incredibly underpowered. However it sounded like a racing car heard from a great distance when you thrashed it. So I had great fun on country roads flogging the nuts off it doing about 45mph

Christ on a stick – just noticed this and had to respond before I go. So it’s okay to flog the nuts of a car driving close to it’s limits so long as you don’t go over the speed limit and it’s in Ireland? Well done Molegrips, that’s the most stinking case of total and utter hypocrisy I’ve ever heard. Hats off to you!

Anyway must dash – Adios Amigo’s 🙂

dazh – Member

It kind of means a combination of the direction in which your car is traveling in relation to the ground, and the angle at which the car is actually facing compared to your direction of travel.

What’s the IAM recommended method for controlling roll and yaw?

Probably similar to the STW method for controlling Trolls.

Anyway have to go into a meeting now. Talk amongst yourselves . . .

It regains control of your attitude?

Aeronautical term, comes from years of glider flying – sorry, should have been clearer.

It kind of means a combination of the direction in which your car is traveling in relation to the ground, and the angle at which the car is actually facing compared to your direction of travel.

Made the meeting – now early thanks to some seriously excessive speed and dutch courage. Phew!

bearnecessities – Member

Rebel12, thought I recognised your ‘name’

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/buying-a-car-not-from-the-registered-keeper

Imo, a secondhand RS4 says a lot

Come on what does that say Bear – spit it out please?

xiphon – Member

There are other benefits

Like?

Of course if it turns out rebel is talking bobbins again then by all means let rip

Anyway just to add, a manual handbrake can sometimes be used to regain control of steering and attitude in an inadvertant slide.

ABS can actually lengthen stopping distances in the snow by not allowing a wedge of snow to be built up infront of the wheels. Careful use of a manual handbrake can be used overcome ABS, building some useful wedges of snow ahead of the rear wheels and stopping in a shorter distance.

Any more questions????

Auto-hold is a separate system to the electronic handbrake actually, on my Passat.

Oh well if you drive a Passat I can understand why you don’t like driving. Possible the dullest car on the planet – the automobile equivalent of porridge. Get yourself a good car – you might start to enjoy it.

Excuse my non IAM qualified ignorance, but what extra control does a manual handbrake give? I only use mine when I’m already stationary, and it has two states: on or off.

It allows you to handbrake turn and drive like a f**king loonatic. There are other benefits but this is the answer you wanted to hear isn’t it?

Must go now, I’m late for a meeting after sinking one too many pints at lunchtime and will now have to speed recklessly and without a care for my own or anyone else’s safety to make it in time. Enjoy having fun with your cupholder 😆

b) you should not be using the handbrake whilst driving in winter

WFT! ????? 😆

Electric handbrakes are pathetic – technology for technologies sake.

Not entirely. Not only do I have more space in my centre console, but it also does safety related things like if I am in drive and I open the door, it puts the handbrake on. My wife’s aunt saw an old woman being dragged down the road and ultimately crushed to death because she’d gone to get out of the car when it was still in drive.

And that’s where the difference lies Molegrips. You would prefer to have the space inside the car for an extra cupholder. I would prefer the extra control that a manual handbrakes gives in severe winter conditions or in an emergency.

I suppose it’s a bit like comparing someone who rides a normal bike with someone who’s happy with an electrically assisted bike. Neither is right or wrong, and they both serve a purpose – it’s just that I’m someone who would prefer to pedal.

As a side note, a work mate’s electric handbrake didn’t work fully and after leaving it her Landrover rolled backwards outside her house, crushing the bumper and bonnet of the car behind. Technology isn’t infallible just the same was as humans are not either. Lucky there had not been a child in the way on that occasion.

I think that the old woman in your post deserves a Darwin award perhaps?

dazh – Member

I thought they were supportive of it? After all, most of us just want our motorway journeys over with unless we are on holiday or something.

Dunno. I’m happy to be corrected. I’d be interested to know the position of the likes of rebel12 and sbob on this though. There’s huge potential for technology to make driving both safer and faster but it would mean drivers abdicating control to computers which I assume many wouldn’t be happy to do.

I enjoy driving (even on a motorway) so I can’t say I’d be overly keen for such a thing.

Self park, auto this and auto that is pure laziness and it means that the a driver may never need to learn proper car control. Electric handbrakes are pathetic – technology for technologies sake. Soon we might all end up sat vegetating in a box 24/7 surrounded by screens and technology doing everything for us. That’s no life so far as I’m concerned.

Some level of risk is good – it helps us learn things and develop as humans. If we remove risk and skill from everything we do then life would be pretty sterile and pretty dull. Maybe that’s the way some people want to go perhaps?

Having said that then I think though that this technology is inevitable eventually and so I’d probably have no choice but to adapt. You never know it could be nice to go out for a few pints after a long ride, press the ‘HOME’ button on the car and then sleep things off before you get home. That’s not a bad compromise I suppose?

ahwiles – Member

rebel12 – Member

It’s completely selfish to drive at say 40 in a 60 limit when conditions would easily allow 60+

(‘morning all )

why?

didn’t your advanced training teach you to expect to get stuck behind horses/milk floats/bikes/trucks/cattle/classic cars/cars running a space-saver/etc. and not to get stressed out when you do?

Yes but those vehicles can’t go any faster can they so that’s fine. A modern car on the otherhand can easily achieve NSL in clear conditions. Totally different.

xiphon – Member

Rebel12 » It’s completely selfish to drive at say 40 in a 60 limit when conditions would easily allow 60+

And equally it might be considered selfish (in a dangerous way) to drive 60 PLUS in a 60 limit.

Why is it selfish? So long as it’s safe to do so and I’m considerate of other road users it’s not selfish at all.

Anyway I think this thread has gone on long enough. It’s almost impossible to try and educate those that do not want to learn.

chvck – Member

I just want to pick up on the speed limit being a target not a limit, that’s wrong. In the driving test you are supposed to drive near the limit but that doesn’t make it not a limit. Go do the test and drive just over the limit most of the time, you’d fail because it’s a limit not a target.

In good conditions you could view the speed limit as a target speed. It’s essential that people get a move on if they can so that the traffic actually flows. Plenty of people fail their driving tests for not driving at speeds approaching the speed limit when conditions allow.

It’s completely selfish to drive at say 40 in a 60 limit when conditions would easily allow 60+ Either pull over and let people pass, or go and get some more training to make you a confident driver. Sadly these people often seem just as oblivious to the large queue that’s built up behind them as they do to their own driving shortcomings.

molgrips – Member

So therefore if when that limit was imposed a risk assessment was done and they arrived at the conclusion that 70 was a good limit. If that same risk assessment was done today i am sure the figure would be either much higher or the risk much lower.

Cars were worse back then, but there was far less traffic on the roads. Consensus seems to be that the increase in car safety is balanced out by the number of cars. Not to mention the number of people who are now capable of blasting through the speed limit with a twitch of the right foot.

Correct, the figure should now be higher. The average stopping distance of a car from 70mph in the mid 60’s when the 70mph limit was introduced was 75m. Today it’s around 37m – less than half the distance.

Cars are also so much safer – hell very few people even wore seat belts in the 60’s. There is more traffic on the roads but the road surfaces, conditions, signage and everything else is so much better than it was back then. So is the level of driver training – a driving test in the 60’s was a very basic affair.

I’d say that the ideal speed limit on the motorway should be around the 90mph mark at quiet times of the day, reverting to less if its busy or the conditions are bad (controlled by signs on overhead gantry’s), with a minimum speed limit of around 55mph in place at all times. Most people already seem to do between 80-90 anyway and yet motorways are still by a long way our safest roads mile for mile.

Been to Blaenau plenty of times, stayed (once) about 5 years ago – can’t remember the name of the B&B.

Honestly can’t see what anyone’s problem is with the place. Yes its grey, industrial, rains quite a bit and is a poor community but it’s also got a unique character that’s unlike anywhere else in the world and you’re just as likely to get your bike pinched or get into a fight in any of the UK’s major cities if that’s what you’re after.

The pubs are very Welsh, people speak Welsh – it’s their first language for many (and they also speak it at home too). I find if you’re friendly and chat to people like anywhere else then people tend to be friendly back.

I quite like the place to be honest, it’s got a certain gritty character you won’t find anywhere else and it’s right in the middle of some fantastic riding, walking and industrial history.

I’m amazed how there’s only a few people on this thread who have actually admitted to speeding? Guess there’s either a lot of people hiding something on here or maybe STW really is the holy grail of slow and steady motoring.

scotroutes – Member

rebel12 » KSI – Killed or Seriously Injured – sorry beat me to it

You weren’t fast enough

Now there’s a first 😉

KSI – Killed or Seriously Injured – sorry beat me to it 🙂

scotroutes – Member

ahwiles » rebel12 – Member
There’s not one person commenting on this forum that’s never driven over the speed limit…
just a thought, who here would accept a GPS tracker/cameras/accelerometers/whatever in their car for a reduction in their insurance premiums?
what discount would you accept?
me: yes, 10%
you:…?

me:yes, 0%
Make them compulsory fitment to all vehicles. Accidents would reduce in both number and severity and ALL our insurance premiums would decrease.

Absolutely no chance, over my dead body. Full no claims, IAM discount, no points so insurance cheap.

I doubt whether this would help much. The only thing that’s going to reduce accidents further from where we are at the moment is a combination of better driver education, and more police on the road checking for drink driving, tailgating and general poor driving.

Do you realise that 1 in 6 deaths on UK roads last year was attributable to someone being drunk behind the wheel. If the police focused their efforts here rather than the ‘Money Spinner’ that is speeding then I’m sure we’d all be much safer.

deadlydarcy – Member

There’s not one person commenting on this forum that’s never driven over the speed limit including you.

But not all of them to save time.

No some of them by mistake because they just don’t realise. How good is that for observation?

At least when I speed it’s intentional and I make sure I’m aware exactly what I’m doing and whether it’s appropriate for the conditions. I really worry for those people whose zero awareness allow then to stray over the limit by mistake, a lapse of concentration, because they are texting/phoning or because they are not even aware what the limit actually is!

My view is if you think saving time on your journey by speeding is ok then you are a selfish prick

You’re a selfish pr**k – there you go.

There’s not one person commenting on this forum that’s never driven over the speed limit including you.

molgrips – Member

Think you could do that Lifer?

I do that sort of thing all the time!

Of course you do molegrips 🙄

Lifer – Member

rebel12 – Member
My fast road instructor offered a running commentary on all hazards, seen and as yet unseen whilst traveling at between 60-90 on a NSL single carrigeway. He was even able to pick up small details in the road surface and what they and verges at that speed. I felt far safer travelling at that sort of speed with him than many other drivers I’ve had the misfortune of traveling with at well below the speed limit.

What small details was he able to pick up on at 40 metres per second?

Changes in road surface, camber and likely grip level, potholes and water hazards, damp leaves or oil/petrol ahead, metal gratings (much lower grip in wet), trees and lamposts in the distance indicating bends, changes in the central line spacing (elongated dividing lines) to indicate danger or a junction or bend ahead, Distant churches indicating a settlement ahead, Hash markings and junction assessment, mud on the road indicating that there could be tractors around, positioning the vehicle correctly at all times, zones of invisibilty ahead, reactions of oncoming drivers and forward planning, speed limits and road width, potential traffic hazards ahead and behind, animal hazards at sides of road, likely pedestrian behaviour – particularly children, undergrowth and hedges restricting visibility but giving a clue to what lies ahead, planning and likely actions for visible traffic waiting to join the carrigeway, machinery in fields indicating possible farm activity, livestock grouped together near a fence indicating a possible crossing or farmer parked up, weather, sunshine and its effects on visibility to you and others and possible wind effects on exposed sections of carrigeway, I could go on but I think that’s enough to give a snapshot. Demonstrated all whilst exhibiting exceptional car control at various speeds.

Think you could do that Lifer? Still think you don’t need to take any further training?

I can’t do all of this all of the time yet but I’m working on it and with practise hope to get there. It’s a complete headf**k at first but will become second nature so I’m told.

Driving fast on road is as much about observation, planning and anticipation as good car control. The key is to know when to slow down just as much as when you can safely go fast.

The roads are used by a wide variaty of drivers who drive with a differing skill set .It is remarkably poor driving to assume that because you have some skill this will enable you to anticipate all eventualities and respond in time to any event and it is therefor ok to exceed the speed limit.

Err not really – that’s exactly what advanced driving and advance observation teaches you. There really shouldn’t be many surprises if you observe and plan properly. Don’t get that from ‘school of life’ I’m afraid.

My fast road instructor offered a running commentary on all hazards, seen and as yet unseen whilst traveling at between 60-90 on a NSL single carrigeway. He was even able to pick up small details in the road surface and what they and verges at that speed. I felt far safer travelling at that sort of speed with him than many other drivers I’ve had the misfortune of traveling with at well below the speed limit.

I do love the i’m an advanced driver so the law does not apply to me line of argument

I’ve not said this. I’ve said that as I frequently drive above the speed limit, I though that some extra training (including IAM) would be beneficial and make me much safer doing this. A big difference and I do appreciate that this is technically outside of the law.

dazh – Member

The cameras on our local 50mph DC are a PITA frankly with the oh so predictable usual cruising speed of 60-80mph, slam on for the camera, accelerate hard back to original speed and repeat for the next 2 sets from a significant proportion of road users.

A superb example of where average speed cameras would be beneficial?

Or perhaps a superb example of where drivers quite happily and safely do 60-80mph day after day without incident yet the local safety camera partnership felt the need to top up the coffers in the misguided name of ‘speed kills’? Shame so many clueless people buy in to this.