Lane Discipline

Topics relating to Advanced Driving in cars
User avatar
Horse
Posts: 1620
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby Horse » Thu Dec 22, 2016 7:51 am

martine wrote:
Horse wrote:Exactly. You're then getting into the nitty gritty of what is acceptable Vs worthy of prosecution - how close for how long?


Well yes but not insurmountable...it happens with speed offences - they have a 'tolerance' for prosecution after all e.g 10% + 2.

For tailgating I'd have though anything less than a 1 second following gap would be worthy of "falling below the standard expected of a competent driver". You get the gist and I believe it would be do-able.


Is the police-style overtaking preparation close 'contact' following position likely to fall foul of that sub-1s measure?

How have you arrived at 1s, why not use the 2s rule?

FWIW, IIIRC, a minimum of 15s close following was suggested some time ago as a suitable duration. There's a hitch there, of course: sub-1s at 50mph = measurement systems to be at one distance for 15s duration, but travel through at 100mph and they need to be twice the distance apart.
My own views. For better or worse :)

User avatar
akirk
Posts: 1352
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 6:58 pm
Location: Cotswolds

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby akirk » Thu Dec 22, 2016 8:14 am

martine wrote:
Horse wrote:Exactly. You're then getting into the nitty gritty of what is acceptable Vs worthy of prosecution - how close for how long?


Well yes but not insurmountable...it happens with speed offences - they have a 'tolerance' for prosecution after all e.g 10% + 2.

For tailgating I'd have though anything less than a 1 second following gap would be worthy of "falling below the standard expected of a competent driver". You get the gist and I believe it would be do-able both technically and legally.

I believe encouraging more drivers to open up a safe gap consistently would have wonderful effects on safety, stress, congestion and traffic flow.



ooh we could have great fun with this...
- you are sitting the requisite 1 / 1.2 seconds behind me
- first camera, I slam on my brakes
- second camera, I slam on my brakes
- you get booked!

the point of the gap, e.g. 1 second etc. is to give the contingency time in case I slam on my brakes - under this system you now need to double your contingency - one set in case I stop suddenly, the second set so that you still then have the contingency (that you no longer need) for the camera...

Tailgaters have never bothered me - the closer they get to me, the more I drop back to give both gaps in front of me so that if there is an issue I can stop more slowly and compensate, I will also drop back to provide a bigger gap and then accelerate into the middle of that space - do it a few times and many of them get the message... however they would rarely be tailgating because I am holding them up and when the traffic opens up it is amazing how often they then don't keep up :)

Alasdair

martine
Posts: 651
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:26 am

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby martine » Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:31 am

Horse wrote:Is the police-style overtaking preparation close 'contact' following position likely to fall foul of that sub-1s measure?

No - we're talking motorways aren't we?

How have you arrived at 1s, why not use the 2s rule?

Oh completely arbitrarily...it's just an illustration that it could be done (like the 10% + 2). If the recommended gap is 2s then someone leaving less than 1s for a distance meets the careless rule in my view.
Martin - Bristol IAM: IMI National Observer and Group Secretary, DSA: ADI, Fleet, RoSPA (Dip)

Matt1962
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 9:36 am

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby Matt1962 » Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:45 am

akirk wrote:The thing is that often this may not be drivers hogging those lanes - it only needs a few slower vehicles each overtaking and using all three lanes in the distance and those waiting to overtake may rapidly form this pattern...

No issue with using Lane 1 but what do you plan to do when you get to that blockage of three slow vehicles overtake...? If you move out to pass, the. You have been undertaking the other cars and I think it is not appropriate - in that scenario I might move into a left lane and keep pace with the slower outer lanes of traffic - not undertaking and not adding to the tail back... generally when there is a chance to overtake the other cars that have since joined the outside lanes will recognise that you were there and let you out...

The Highway Code section is really there for continuous traffic in all three lanes e.g. rush hour, to allow for that flow dynamic - I don't believe it is there for traffic that is flowing more normally...

Alasdair


Is 'waiting to overtake' a valid position in this scenario? I would say that drivers finding themselves in this situation should be looking to change lanes to put themselves back into a non overtaking position. This would not always be possible, but would in my original example.
For the three vehicle blockage, I would just sit tight in lane 1 until things sorted themselves out and then take the first opportunity to overtake. I wouldn't worry too much about the overtake/undertake pecking order.
Funnily enough I generally find that after 'keeping up with traffic' to the point of meeting a slower vehicle :) I don't have many problems getting out to overtake. Maybe this is down to lack of obvious aggression in undertaking?

martine
Posts: 651
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:26 am

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby martine » Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:59 am

akirk wrote:ooh we could have great fun with this...
- you are sitting the requisite 1 / 1.2 seconds behind me
- first camera, I slam on my brakes
- second camera, I slam on my brakes
- you get booked!

the point of the gap, e.g. 1 second etc. is to give the contingency time in case I slam on my brakes - under this system you now need to double your contingency - one set in case I stop suddenly, the second set so that you still then have the contingency (that you no longer need) for the camera...

If someone 'slams on their brakes' for no apparent reason I wouldn't want to remain anywhere near them! Again this scenario is unlikely and could easily be monitored using said cameras...the lead car would be open to prosecution.

I still think this is do-able and I believe would have a very positive effect.
Martin - Bristol IAM: IMI National Observer and Group Secretary, DSA: ADI, Fleet, RoSPA (Dip)

Astraist
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby Astraist » Thu Dec 22, 2016 10:07 am

Horse wrote:
martine wrote:For tailgating I'd have though anything less than a 1 second following gap would be worthy of "falling below the standard expected of a competent driver". You get the gist and I believe it would be do-able.


Is the police-style overtaking preparation close 'contact' following position likely to fall foul of that sub-1s measure?

How have you arrived at 1s, why not use the 2s rule?


Well, one second is a reasonable reaction time so there is logic there. However, I'd say anything under 1.5-ish should be the prosecutable minimum.

Of course one should be two seconds behind the vehicle in front, and in times even more, but those things fluctuate so I think aiming for 1.5 miminum is reasonable.

As for overtaking, if this police/advanced overtaking style goes under 1.5 seconds (and from what I gather, it does) than it should be revised.

waremark
Posts: 483
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:23 am

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby waremark » Thu Dec 22, 2016 11:13 am

The German figures given are less than 1 s - 25 m at 100 kph.

Rolyan
Posts: 568
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 5:45 pm

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby Rolyan » Thu Dec 22, 2016 1:00 pm

Astraist wrote:
Horse wrote:
martine wrote:For tailgating I'd have though anything less than a 1 second following gap would be worthy of "falling below the standard expected of a competent driver". You get the gist and I believe it would be do-able.


Is the police-style overtaking preparation close 'contact' following position likely to fall foul of that sub-1s measure?

How have you arrived at 1s, why not use the 2s rule?


Well, one second is a reasonable reaction time so there is logic there. However, I'd say anything under 1.5-ish should be the prosecutable minimum.

Of course one should be two seconds behind the vehicle in front, and in times even more, but those things fluctuate so I think aiming for 1.5 miminum is reasonable.

As for overtaking, if this police/advanced overtaking style goes under 1.5 seconds (and from what I gather, it does) than it should be revised.

Not necessarily, both classic and momentum are safe if applied correctly.

The main thing to remember is to Just factorise the difference of the two energies in the banana

martine
Posts: 651
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 8:26 am

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby martine » Thu Dec 22, 2016 1:09 pm

...Just factorise the difference of the two energies in the banana...


There's a phrase I never thought I'd read. :lol: :geek:
Martin - Bristol IAM: IMI National Observer and Group Secretary, DSA: ADI, Fleet, RoSPA (Dip)

Astraist
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: Lane Discipline

Postby Astraist » Thu Dec 22, 2016 1:44 pm

Rolyan wrote:Not necessarily, both classic and momentum are safe if applied correctly.


That's sort of my approach.

I keep two seconds away from the lead vehicle and start to move to the offside in a long, flat diagonal, and start the overtake at the moment where I have a clear view, but no earlier than when the nose of my car is at least oriented away from the back of the lead vehicle.

This could mean commencing the overtake as early as while still being on the (broken) white line, or waiting as late as touching the offside hard-shoulder line. I keep two seconds away anyway.


Return to “Advanced Driving - Cars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest