robroy:
So…has anybody noticed the slogans on the bridges on the M6■■
No, I haven’t been below 38 for 5 months. 
cooper1203:
back to the origonal post i came back from wales to kent today … m54 m6 toll m42 m40 m25 m26 m20… i did most of it in the inside lane unless overtaking or if the inside lane became the sliproadat 65 -70 but the majority of people were in lanes 2 and 3 going at the same speed as me or slower up each others rears brakeing and accelerating constantly. Absoloutly pathetic
It’s the perfect storm caused by at the front of the line who are either incapable of driving at 70 mph + to complete an overtake when they’ve started it or frightened of being nicked by an unmarked law car or a camera if they do.
If not it’s what happens when traffic amounts make the extra lanes all about capacity not overtaking.Which is the principle of smart motorways let alone the idea of the same speed limit in lane 3 as lane 1.
If you want unlimited autobahn driving habits then you need an unlimited autobahn type speed regime.Not that of an LA freeway.
The norm on the A13 travelling Eastbound in the morning. Cars join, immediately swing to lane 2, then drive at varying speeds never overtaking anything. I’m normally on there for 5 miles and witness it every day.
LazyDriver:
The norm on the A13 travelling Eastbound in the morning. Cars join, immediately swing to lane 2, then drive at varying speeds never overtaking anything. I’m normally on there for 5 miles and witness it every day.
Almost motorway standard three lanes limited to 50 mph enforced by average speed cameras.Not wanting to get stuck in potential queues in lane 1 at entry and exit slips, or behind trucks who’s drivers find it a challenge to drive at even 50 mph, might have something to do with it.
goo.gl/maps/WZwLNv9uH6cpr34k9
cooper1203:
Sand Fisher:
No it just needs a great big sign on all slip roads saying ‘Give way to traffic already on the motorway’. Not hard but most drivers today are stupid and dont get it. Sometimes wish I had bull bars all the way round so I could just smash the selfish [zb] out the way.friend of mine has always sworn blind that if he ever wins the lottey or some money on the horses he would buy an old transit put a couple of v8’s in the back and fill the engine compartment with concreat and reinforcing rods then let them try and cut him up and pull out infront of him etc.
Love it. To me driving is just an extension of your feet (or wheels if a wheelchair user). Now you wouldn’t just push out in front of someone in the supermarket so why do it in a car/truck.
The key thing is the danger of it all.
ROG:
Pass safely on the nearside = sorted
This is what I do, carefully because if its a nervous driver you don’t want to frighten the driver.
elsa Lad:
ROG:
Pass safely on the nearside = sortedThis is what I do, carefully because if its a nervous driver you don’t want to frighten the driver.
Sometimes might do it as a last resort but in the knowledge that if they do decide to move over to lane 1 at that point all bets are off.Bearing in mind the massive crash for cash scam industry out there and the Highway Code 163 clearly states ‘only’ overtake on the left if the vehicle ahead is signalling a right turn, which obviously isn’t going to happen on a motorway etc.
If you deduct those overtaking traffic far ahead of them but have to stay within the speed limit or get pinged by a camera so it takes time and the crash for cash scammers that only leaves a very small percentage of idiots.
Carryfast:
elsa Lad:
ROG:
Pass safely on the nearside = sortedThis is what I do, carefully because if its a nervous driver you don’t want to frighten the driver.
Sometimes might do it as a last resort but in the knowledge that if they do decide to move over to lane 1 at that point all bets are off.Bearing in mind the massive crash for cash scam industry out there and the Highway Code 163 clearly states ‘only’ overtake on the left if the vehicle ahead is signalling a right turn, which obviously isn’t going to happen on a motorway etc.
If you deduct those overtaking traffic far ahead of them but have to stay within the speed limit or get pinged by a camera so it takes time and the crash for cash scammers that only leaves a very small percentage of idiots.
You can filter past on the inside lane if that lane is moving faster.
You can’t change lanes deliberately to do so [emoji6]
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Carryfast:
Sometimes might do it as a last resort but in the knowledge that if they do decide to move over to lane 1 at that point all bets are off.
I don’t care…
Which lane anyone driving what ever it is, chooses to pass me in, I really don’t. Roadwork sections, dual carriageways, motorways and busy towns, I couldn’t care less.
“Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
If someone is hogging the centre lane, the road will likely be congested*. If you overtake on the left, then the traffic on the left is obviously moving faster than on the right. Especially if someone else does the same.
Whether that argument would work with only a center lane hog and you on an emptyish road? I certainly don`t know?
*Is there a definition of congested? Won`t a lane hog cause congestion?
Franglais:
“Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”If someone is hogging the centre lane, the road will likely be congested*. If you overtake on the left, then the traffic on the left is obviously moving faster than on the right. Especially if someone else does the same.
Whether that argument would work with only a center lane hog and you on an emptyish road? I certainly don`t know?*Is there a definition of congested? Won`t a lane hog cause congestion?
I doubt if a 56 mph + sideswipe collision, while undertaking someone, will fit the definition of traffic moving ‘moving in adjacent lanes at similar speeds’.
Even worse if it results in an injury which is what the crash for cash scammers are obviously hoping for let alone fatality and obviously likely in a truck v car type incident.
The law will apply rules 268 and 163 by default and all bets are off regarding any defence based on ‘congestion’ at that type of speed.
Carryfast:
Franglais:
“Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”If someone is hogging the centre lane, the road will likely be congested*. If you overtake on the left, then the traffic on the left is obviously moving faster than on the right. Especially if someone else does the same.
Whether that argument would work with only a center lane hog and you on an emptyish road? I certainly don`t know?*Is there a definition of congested? Won`t a lane hog cause congestion?
I doubt if a 56 mph + sideswipe collision, while undertaking someone, will fit the definition of traffic moving ‘moving in adjacent lanes at similar speeds’.
Even worse if it results in an injury which is what the crash for cash scammers are obviously hoping for let alone fatality and obviously likely in a truck v car type incident.
The law will apply rules 268 and 163 by default and all bets are off regarding any defence based on ‘congestion’ at that type of speed.
If the goon was doing 50 in the middle lane, the truck cant overtake on a 3 lane motorway, so can only undertake. If said berk was just to sit there it could be argued they were driving without due care and attention (for the 44ton arctic some 20 metres behind) and any other lorry for that matter.
Just want to see the day when it flashes up on the gantry VA18 GHJ (or whatever reg) move over to the left you daft buggar!
Carryfast:
Franglais:
“Rule 268
Do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”If someone is hogging the centre lane, the road will likely be congested*. If you overtake on the left, then the traffic on the left is obviously moving faster than on the right. Especially if someone else does the same.
Whether that argument would work with only a center lane hog and you on an emptyish road? I certainly don`t know?*Is there a definition of congested? Won`t a lane hog cause congestion?
I doubt if a 56 mph + sideswipe collision, while undertaking someone, will fit the definition of traffic moving ‘moving in adjacent lanes at similar speeds’.
Even worse if it results in an injury which is what the crash for cash scammers are obviously hoping for let alone fatality and obviously likely in a truck v car type incident.
The law will apply rules 268 and 163 by default and all bets are off regarding any defence based on ‘congestion’ at that type of speed.
Nope.
As pointed out above if a truck can safely pass on the inside without changing lane, then it shows that the car is effectively causing congestion in the middle lane. A car has the option of moving to lane 3 to overtake…but legally if he’s moving at a constant speed faster than the car in the middle lane there is no requirement to do so.
If he sideswipes you as you do so, then it’s his fault since he’s changing lanes. A truck doing the same at least has a blindspot justification. A car doing it and not seeing a truck is plainly careless driving
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Monkey241:
Carryfast:
I doubt if a 56 mph + sideswipe collision, while undertaking someone, will fit the definition of traffic moving ‘moving in adjacent lanes at similar speeds’.
Even worse if it results in an injury which is what the crash for cash scammers are obviously hoping for let alone fatality and obviously likely in a truck v car type incident.
The law will apply rules 268 and 163 by default and all bets are off regarding any defence based on ‘congestion’ at that type of speed.Nope.
As pointed out above if a truck can safely pass on the inside without changing lane, then it shows that the car is effectively causing congestion in the middle lane. A car has the option of moving to lane 3 to overtake…but legally if he’s moving at a constant speed faster than the car in the middle lane there is no requirement to do so.
If he sideswipes you as you do so, then it’s his fault since he’s changing lanes
The definition of ‘adjacent lanes of traffic’ and ‘congestion’ clearly doesn’t fit that description.
The scenario you describe could equally apply on an otherwise totally deserted motorway at 2 or 3 am and in my experience sometimes did.The alarm bells usually rang at that point and undertaking was the last thing I’d ever choose to resort to.
Just as I knew that their next move would probably be a deliberate sharp brake test if I moved out behind them into lane 2.
Never underestimate the possibility/probability of either crash for cash scammer or a suicidal nutter wanting to involve you in his problem in that situation.
As equally often proven by them then deciding to go flying off up the road to find another mug after realising that I wasn’t going to bite with an undertake or a move to lane 2 either way.
Legally you’re incorrect.
Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk
Monkey241:
Legally you’re incorrect.
Define ‘traffic’ and ‘congestion’ and ‘adjacent lanes’ and define what situations rules 268 and 163 ‘would’ then apply to motorway use where those specific definitions cease to apply.
As I said meeting a car sitting in lane 2 of an otherwise deserted motorway and running at less than 50 mph did happen sometimes.
How does that fit the definition of ‘congestion’ and ‘traffic’ running at similar speeds in adjacent lanes.