Motorway lane discipline
Discussion
From another thread:
"I do love the "i will drive on the outside lane no matter what" drivers.
As long as im looking out for plod, when im on the m4 from Bristol to Reading I can usually do most of the journey at 80MPH in the inside lane coz everyone else is in the outside lane, which according to them is faster even if its slower......
Odd logic really."
I've always taken the view that those who rant about "undertakers" like this are ranting about the wrong person - if everybody were driving according to the way we teach 'em in this country (ie. keep left, then it quite simply wouldn't be possible to undertake.
I had much the same thing coming down the M4 last night from Hayes to Swindon - the outside land was chock-a-block with intermittent braking, a few "middle lane owners club" members were where you'd expect the bas
rds to be, and I had the "slow" lane to myself 
I don't partcularly like doing it, but I live in the hope that a few of 'em might not think:
"He shouldn't do that the basrd" but;
"He shouldn't have been able to do that - I'm restricting the free passage of traffic on the motorway by driving like this and I should pull over."
On a related issue, when traffic speed are slow due to sheer weight of traffic, I frequently find that the "slow" lane is the fastest moving of the three - I'm sure there's somebody out there who has studied traffic flow and driver behaviour who could give a better answer, but I presume its because those in middle and outside lanes are more likely to be trying to go faster and consequently braking too hard when they come up behind the vehicle in front. Meanwhile, all the "plodders" in the slow lane are doing their 45-50 in convoy and have no reason to brake.
Any more thoughts, anybody?
Edited to say: No spell checker yet then Ted??!!??
>>> Edited by rs1952 on Sunday 17th November 10:53
"I do love the "i will drive on the outside lane no matter what" drivers.
As long as im looking out for plod, when im on the m4 from Bristol to Reading I can usually do most of the journey at 80MPH in the inside lane coz everyone else is in the outside lane, which according to them is faster even if its slower......
Odd logic really."
I've always taken the view that those who rant about "undertakers" like this are ranting about the wrong person - if everybody were driving according to the way we teach 'em in this country (ie. keep left, then it quite simply wouldn't be possible to undertake.
I had much the same thing coming down the M4 last night from Hayes to Swindon - the outside land was chock-a-block with intermittent braking, a few "middle lane owners club" members were where you'd expect the bas
rds to be, and I had the "slow" lane to myself I don't partcularly like doing it, but I live in the hope that a few of 'em might not think:
"He shouldn't do that the bas
rd" but; "He shouldn't have been able to do that - I'm restricting the free passage of traffic on the motorway by driving like this and I should pull over."
On a related issue, when traffic speed are slow due to sheer weight of traffic, I frequently find that the "slow" lane is the fastest moving of the three - I'm sure there's somebody out there who has studied traffic flow and driver behaviour who could give a better answer, but I presume its because those in middle and outside lanes are more likely to be trying to go faster and consequently braking too hard when they come up behind the vehicle in front. Meanwhile, all the "plodders" in the slow lane are doing their 45-50 in convoy and have no reason to brake.
Any more thoughts, anybody?
Edited to say: No spell checker yet then Ted??!!??
>>> Edited by rs1952 on Sunday 17th November 10:53
R's sitting in the middle lane going nowhere. ARSE!dangerous, I drive on the M25 every day - the RHL is still the quickest by car.. taken as an average. All you need to do is stop people "undertaking" by careful ovservation, then flooring it when it looks like they are going to nip in front!! very childish, but unfortunately what needs to be done. 
hertsbiker said: dangerous, I drive on the M25 every day - the RHL is still the quickest by car.. taken as an average. All you need to do is stop people "undertaking" by careful ovservation, then flooring it when it looks like they are going to nip in front!! very childish, but unfortunately what needs to be done.
I can see where your comming from ... your not one of those Vectra drivers that tries to kill me doing that once a fortnight are you ?
I suppose since I do drive a V70, people think im gonna be slow ....
hertsbiker said: dangerous, I drive on the M25 every day - the RHL is still the quickest by car.. taken as an average. All you need to do is stop people "undertaking" by careful ovservation, then flooring it when it looks like they are going to nip in front!! very childish, but unfortunately what needs to be done.
This came as something of a surprise, because I find from other postings on this forum that we normally think along the same lines. A couple of questions and and an example:
1. The M25 is a slightly different matter - from my experience of it, the normal "rules of the road" don't apply - indeed, the road signs give advice regarding avoiding changing lanes - I can see the logic in that case; too many conflicting traffic movements could easily cause chaos and the potential for more accidents.
The conditions on the M25 most of the time , however, are not repeated on the M4 at off-peak periods - not a lot of traffic, most of it in the outside lane, some of it in the middle lane, none in the "slow." No advice to "avoid changing lanes" and, indeed, no reason not to migrate to the slow lane - why do you think that these idiots should remain where they are, effectively, impeding the flow of traffic?
2. Why do you feel the need to prevent "undertaking." Has it crossed your mind that you shouldn't be in a position on the road where it is possible to do it in the first place? If there is an empty lane to your left, why aren't you driving in it?
Example:
What do you think about the following scenario, that I observed the week before last:
I was driving (not on a motorway) towards the traffic lights at the Cross Keys junction at Corsham (main A4, Chippenham-Bath):
a) A "boy racer" overtook me within 100yds of the lights- a suspect overtaking move in my opinion but, presumably, he was in a hurry. He didn't - quite - "cut me up," so I let the matter rest.
b) There was a taxi in front of him (and me). Traffic lights at danger, "boy racer" takes the inside lane (marked for traffic filtering left)
c) "Boy racer" goes straight on, trying to get in frontof the taxi. The taxi moves slightly to the left in an attempt to thwart "boy racers" progress. "Boy racer" is then up on the pavement, overtakes the taxi, then drops anchor. All three of us are doing about 10 mph until the lad hits a 90 degree turn in front of the taxi, stops, gets out, and walks towards the taxi to "have a few words" with the driver. I overtake the pair of 'em and let 'em get on with their "dissention."
Who was at fault?
1) The boy racer who was being a prat?
2) The taxi driver who thought he/she was better placed to enforce the highway code than plod?
3) The pair of them for both driving like fuc
ing idiots? My vote goes with (3). Where does your vote go, and where does it leave the argument in your post??!!
In the circumstance as described then 3 it is. However, if safe I would not make it easy for a d**khead to cut in. Happened the other morning on the way to work. Following a tram along a narrowish road, third in the line of cars behind the tram. Tram pulls away from a stop and a DH a few cars behind thinks its a good idea to shoot up the inside and attempt to cut in before the row of parked cars. No pedestrians around so I do not leave enough room for him to pull in in front of me, neither did white vn man behind me. DH has to rejoin in same place he started from. DH tried it again later on where tram stop is in middle of road, island for passengers with the road going around the island. DH decides to overtake tram on wrong side, trhough tram lane only area. Again I do not let him cut me up, neither does white van man. The DH pulls up alongside me at some traffic lights urther on and winds his window down and starts slagging me off. I release seat belt, open my door and start to get out. REsult DH winds up window, shuts up and ignores me. WVM behind laughing his head off at DH. I am not exactly big and DH was a 50-ish bloke on his own.
Was I wrong? BTW I would not have touched him, I just present an image tougher than I really am
Was I wrong? BTW I would not have touched him, I just present an image tougher than I really am
The M25 is a very strange road indeed. I'd like to say that I moved back to the left most lane every time, but I don't. I tend to keep a very sensible distance to the car in front (about 1.5 seconds), and *hate* people jumping in front. Diesel power lets me cruise nicely without needing to use the brakes much, and I let people in when they give enough indication. Changing lane for the sake of it can be counterproductive - unless the inside lane is empty, in which case I can be tempted to swap to that. The middle lane is dangerous, as you get people swapping into it from both sides.
Ok, not ideal... but I have done 12,000 miles in 6 months on the M25, and this is the least stressful method of commuting.
Now if you want to talk FUN, then I go by bike.. And no lane is sacred.
C
Ok, not ideal... but I have done 12,000 miles in 6 months on the M25, and this is the least stressful method of commuting.
Now if you want to talk FUN, then I go by bike.. And no lane is sacred.
C
rs1952, the answer to your original question is that it's because there are usually more cars in lane 3, queuing to overtake those in lane 2. When braking occurs across all lanes, that means more cars having to brake, forming a longer line of cars, which itself is extended by the gaps that inevitably open up when the cars start moving again (the 'concertina effect').
This means that, on a motorway, vehicles in lane 1 are usually the ones that make fastest progress when a jam starts. Once you've been in one for a while, though, the lanes often move at similar speeds because drivers have had time to adjust to the jam and redistribute themselves across the lanes.
Of course, the situation you describe is caused by the fact that a typical motorway scene involves, in the same stretch, perhaps 4 vehicles in lane 1, 3 in lane 2 (or vice versa) and 15 in lane 3. All 4 in lane 1 are in the right place. 1 of the ones in lane 2 may be but the other two are being lazy and should have pulled into lane 1. 4 or 5 of those in lane 3 may well be in the lane they ought to be in if we all drove well; only 1 or 2 probably shouldn't be there at all and are the sort who leave 500 yard gaps in front of them with a queue of cars behind; the other 8-10 drivers are in the right place given the circumstances but would probably be in lane 2 (or even 1) much of the time if it weren't for the lazy, selfish dastards hogging lane 2.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I simply cannot understand why the government doesn't invest a small amount of money in public service announcements designed to encourage driving in the furthest left lane possible unless overtaking. It would save the economy a massive amount of lost time and money.
Or is it simply that the government is so obsessed with forcing drivers off the roads by creating congestion and with reducing speeds rather than increasing safety, that it sees such numpty behaviour as a good thing?
This means that, on a motorway, vehicles in lane 1 are usually the ones that make fastest progress when a jam starts. Once you've been in one for a while, though, the lanes often move at similar speeds because drivers have had time to adjust to the jam and redistribute themselves across the lanes.
Of course, the situation you describe is caused by the fact that a typical motorway scene involves, in the same stretch, perhaps 4 vehicles in lane 1, 3 in lane 2 (or vice versa) and 15 in lane 3. All 4 in lane 1 are in the right place. 1 of the ones in lane 2 may be but the other two are being lazy and should have pulled into lane 1. 4 or 5 of those in lane 3 may well be in the lane they ought to be in if we all drove well; only 1 or 2 probably shouldn't be there at all and are the sort who leave 500 yard gaps in front of them with a queue of cars behind; the other 8-10 drivers are in the right place given the circumstances but would probably be in lane 2 (or even 1) much of the time if it weren't for the lazy, selfish dastards hogging lane 2.
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I simply cannot understand why the government doesn't invest a small amount of money in public service announcements designed to encourage driving in the furthest left lane possible unless overtaking. It would save the economy a massive amount of lost time and money.
Or is it simply that the government is so obsessed with forcing drivers off the roads by creating congestion and with reducing speeds rather than increasing safety, that it sees such numpty behaviour as a good thing?
hertsbiker said: dangerous, I drive on the M25 every day - the RHL is still the quickest by car.. taken as an average. All you need to do is stop people "undertaking" by careful ovservation, then flooring it when it looks like they are going to nip in front!! very childish, but unfortunately what needs to be done.
So if the guy has the opportunity to "undertake you and nip in front" dont you think you should have moved over to the middle lane , or are you the numbty in front.
You see thats half the problem people seem more intrested in obstructing other`s progress than just getting on with it ............
Hertsbiker...why the need to prevent someone 'undertaking'?? If the lane to your left is empty, you (and the numpties in front of you) should be in it. Me, I say that if I can be doing 70 in lane 1 or 2 and STILL overtake traffic that's in lane 2 or 3 respectively, then we MUST be in queuing traffic and the queue I'm in is travelling faster than the queue to my right; therefore it's not 'undertaking', it's filtering, and thus perfectly legal.
Hertsbiker, I'm afraid that driving like you describe is the preserve of the bad driver.
You admit yourself you shouldn't be doing it, yet still do, so perhaps it's time for you to take some advanced driving lessons?
Very often, when I'm piling up the left lane at 80-90 there'sll be someone sitting in he fast lane who takes offence, and tries to cut me up. Why? I am not going to slow them down by what I'm doing!
If you don't want to take the advanced driving lessons, then perhaps buy a faster car. That way, you won't be so frustrated, and might drive in a more considerate manner.
(You could buy a fast bike while you're at it too!)
You admit yourself you shouldn't be doing it, yet still do, so perhaps it's time for you to take some advanced driving lessons?
Very often, when I'm piling up the left lane at 80-90 there'sll be someone sitting in he fast lane who takes offence, and tries to cut me up. Why? I am not going to slow them down by what I'm doing!
If you don't want to take the advanced driving lessons, then perhaps buy a faster car. That way, you won't be so frustrated, and might drive in a more considerate manner.
(You could buy a fast bike while you're at it too!)
I can see where Carl is coming from with this. It comes down to the great British institution of the queue. On your typical busy motorway there are vehicles in the lane 1 doing around 70, being overtaken by vehicles in lane 2 doing around 80. There is a queue of people wnating to travel faster than either group. They sit in lane 3 and queue to go past, at a rate determined by the pace of the slowest, and the need to leave a reasonable gap.
Undertaking the queue in lane 3, using lane 2, is not likely to endear you to anyone.
You might argue there was a case for vehicles to use all available lanes in such a situation, and merge in turn at the point where the queue in lane 3 passes the queue in lane 2. Do you really think this is safer than getting in lane 3 earlier and queuing? The flow of traffic in lane 3 will still be restricted to that of the slowest and no more traffic will pass than if it had queued, so where is the advantage? Of course, when the traffic in lane 3 has passed the obstruction in lane 2, it should pull over.
>> Edited by MEMSDesign on Monday 18th November 10:36
Undertaking the queue in lane 3, using lane 2, is not likely to endear you to anyone.
You might argue there was a case for vehicles to use all available lanes in such a situation, and merge in turn at the point where the queue in lane 3 passes the queue in lane 2. Do you really think this is safer than getting in lane 3 earlier and queuing? The flow of traffic in lane 3 will still be restricted to that of the slowest and no more traffic will pass than if it had queued, so where is the advantage? Of course, when the traffic in lane 3 has passed the obstruction in lane 2, it should pull over.
>> Edited by MEMSDesign on Monday 18th November 10:36
But sometimes you have to laugh: the M1 on Saturday, pissing rain and a Honda Civic sitting in lane three with the two inside nearside lanes completely empty.
I keep my distance, give it a flash of the headlamps and a wink of the indicator, and it finally moves across. Naturally, it's an old granny, sitting within licking distance of her steering wheel. So what does grandad in the passenger seat do? Starts waving his fist at me.
Those Keep Left signs are becoming a requirement.
Oh, and as for the chat about queueing and undertaking: you have to be a pretty poor driver to undertake someone who's queueing properly and observing braking distances – otherwise you'd be fully aware of what he was doing, and not cause him to brake by cutting in front.
I keep my distance, give it a flash of the headlamps and a wink of the indicator, and it finally moves across. Naturally, it's an old granny, sitting within licking distance of her steering wheel. So what does grandad in the passenger seat do? Starts waving his fist at me.
Those Keep Left signs are becoming a requirement.
Oh, and as for the chat about queueing and undertaking: you have to be a pretty poor driver to undertake someone who's queueing properly and observing braking distances – otherwise you'd be fully aware of what he was doing, and not cause him to brake by cutting in front.
You see thats half the problem people seem more intrested in obstructing other`s progress than just getting on with it ............
Its not obstructing other's progress - its stopping them jumping the queue. We ALL want to get we're we are going faster, not just the arrogant people who think they have the right to be in front of everyone else.
I don't let people in either - if nothing else it encourages them to do it again.
spnracing said:
You see thats half the problem people seem more intrested in obstructing other`s progress than just getting on with it ............
Its not obstructing other's progress - its stopping them jumping the queue. We ALL want to get we're we are going faster, not just the arrogant people who think they have the right to be in front of everyone else.
I don't let people in either - if nothing else it encourages them to do it again.
Yeah and i bet you are in the wrong lane as well, you all complain of people hogging the outside lane , and you are also guilty of it
The point is, though, that it is often NOT queue jumping. You get some tit sitting in the outside lane, with a line behind him. I approach the line in either inside or middle lane (depending on whether I'm overtaking), pass it, and am on my way merrily, not having held anyone up at all.
>> Edited by northernboy on Monday 18th November 10:08
>> Edited by northernboy on Monday 18th November 10:08
Yeah and i bet you are in the wrong lane as well, you all complain of people hogging the outside lane , and you are also guilty of it
Bollocks.
If theres a queue of cars in the inside lane and a second queue overtaking them in the middle lane, then I queue in the outside lane to get past them all.
If you try and drive up the gaps on the inside and cut in front of me I won't have it.
It's the lane hogs and self appointed police that are encouraging me back into something fast.
In the Seat, I am at the mercy of people who take offence at my sensible activity of sitting in the inside lane.
If I had a few hundred more horsepower, in a car that looked the same, I could be around them before they managed their cutting up.
>> Edited by northernboy on Monday 18th November 10:31
In the Seat, I am at the mercy of people who take offence at my sensible activity of sitting in the inside lane.
If I had a few hundred more horsepower, in a car that looked the same, I could be around them before they managed their cutting up.
>> Edited by northernboy on Monday 18th November 10:31
Overtaking on the inside and then pulling out into lane three is usually bloody stupid. If I'm in a queue of faster moving traffic in lane 3, funnily enough I leave a gap of a second or two btwn me and the bloke in front. The gap is not there for some prat to cut into. If you're going to overtake on the inside, which I do too from time to time, do it in such a way that you don't cut people up.
I get the impression that lane discipline is much better on dual carriageways than on three lane motorways. Might explain why French motorway driving seems so much easier than UK. Anyway, we've got three lanes so I guessn the answer is TV adverts ridiculing sh1t driving technique.
I get the impression that lane discipline is much better on dual carriageways than on three lane motorways. Might explain why French motorway driving seems so much easier than UK. Anyway, we've got three lanes so I guessn the answer is TV adverts ridiculing sh1t driving technique.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff